CVSA Enforcement Bulletin 2026-02 and Canadian Hours of Service
Finally in 2026 a regulator put something in writing.
An interpretation of ELD violations found roadside and how they are dealt with. The CVSA just released Enforcement Bulletin 2026-02 and I cannot stress how important this is for carriers facing ELD penalties or punitive audit enforcement for ELD internal carrier monitoring.
Up until last week if a carrier had an ELD violation and wanted to plead not guilty and go to court there was no public-facing information explaining what an ELD violation actually was. There has never been an interpretation guide for ELD violations published for industry. Most carriers simply pay the ticket.
How are you supposed to defend yourself when there is no public information explaining what ELD data actually constitutes a violation? Now carriers finally have something to build a case on.
Most ELD violations are dealt with in traffic court. That means it is the driver or the carrier explaining the validity of the violation to a judge who likely has no commercial vehicle training and little familiarity with ELD systems.
The majority of people in the industry do not understand the minutia of ELD data and how it relates to regulation. They know they cannot easily explain why a violation is not a violation to a judge.
The enforcement officer, meanwhile, carries built-in credibility. Judges reasonably assume that if an officer issued a ticket, it must be correct.
Now with Enforcement Bulletin 2026-02 industry finally has something tangible from a regulatory body.
Enforcement Guidance from 2026-02
Inspectors should rely on the driver interview and make every effort to support the OOS violation through motor carrier contacts and the collection of supporting documentation. The goal is to only place drivers OOS who pose an imminent hazard.
For standard false RODS, where it is possible for the inspector to determine when the falsification occurred, and the driver is not over hours at the time of inspection, these false RODS should be cited under § 395.8(e)(1): No driver or motor carrier may make a false report in connection with a duty status., and the driver should be allowed to proceed.
In Canada the comparative violation is:
SOR 2005-313 86(2): No motor carrier shall request, require or allow any person to enter, and no person shall enter, inaccurate information in a record of duty status or falsify, mutilate, obscure, alter, delete, destroy or deface the records or supporting documents.
If the driver is over the HOS limits at the time of inspection, the driver should be cited under § 395.8(e)(1) and placed OOS until such time as eligibility to drive is re-established.
For drivers whose RODS have been reengineered, reprogrammed or tampered with and the ELD does not accurately record or retain required data, and it is not possible for the inspector to determine when driving occurred, the inspector should cite a § 395.8(e)(2): No driver or motor carrier may disable, deactivate, disengage, jam, or otherwise block or degrade a signal transmission or reception, or reengineer, reprogram, or otherwise tamper with an ELD so that the device does not accurately record and retain required data. violation and place the driver OOS for 10 consecutive hours.
In Canada the comparative violation:
SOR 2005-313 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.
False RODS where the driver still has available hours should result in a ticket, but the driver is allowed to continue. If the RODS are false and the driver is over their hours, the driver should receive a ticket and be placed out of service until sufficient hours are available to drive again. If the RODS have been tampered with or reprogrammed so the ELD cannot accurately determine driving time, the driver should receive a ticket and be placed out of service for 10 consecutive hours.
Why This Matters in Canada
Finally, after many years, there is an opinion of what constitutes an ELD violation and what to do about it.
There is still no opinion regarding historical violations discovered during a NSC Standard 15 audit or compliance review, but because NSC Standard 15 is currently under review this issue should eventually be addressed.
Here is the problem.
It has taken regulators years to reach this point — just in time for technology to already be moving ahead again. Full telematics systems including ELDs, in-cab cameras and exterior cameras are becoming standard across the industry.
Insurance companies are increasingly demanding this level of data. Recent information from the insurance industry (HUB Insurance 2026 report) stated that adoption and optimization of emerging technology are non-negotiable. Underwriters now expect the use of critical transportation technology systems when negotiating policy terms.
Which raises a reasonable question.
Why are regulators spending years writing interpretations for technology the industry is already moving beyond?
ELDs rely on driver input. A driver must log in, change duty status and make manual entries. Regulators already recognize the weakness of this system — the technical standard itself includes diagnostics and tampering provisions because the data can be manipulated.
Meanwhile the next generation of safety technology already exists. Driver-facing AI cameras, telematics and engine data can identify exactly who is driving and when the vehicle is moving. Systems like DriveWyze already transmit vehicle and carrier information to enforcement agencies for weigh station preclearance.
If autonomous trucks are still years away, the alternative is obvious: automate the driver monitoring systems instead.
So why are regulators spending years writing interpretations for technology that the industry is already preparing to replace?
Regulators had years to educate stakeholders and failed to do so. Instead, enforcement issued thousands of tickets that carriers had little ability to challenge because regulators either did not understand the technology themselves or did not publicly release the limited information they had.
The Canadian Hours of Service Problem
So what is the real problem?
SOR 2005-313 91(1) Out-Of-Service Declaration.
In Canada we do not have an ELD interpretation guide or enforcement direction from regulators. The only reference available is the federal Hours of Service regulation itself.
If we compare SOR 2005-313 to 49 CFR Part 395, we see that SOR 2005-313 section 91(1) (e) addresses false records and (f) addresses tampering, while SOR 2005-313 91(3)(a-e) outlines the out-of-service conditions. The U.S. equivalent is 49 CFR 395.13 Drivers ordered out-of-service.
SOR 2005-313 91(3) An out-of-service declaration applies
(a) for 10 consecutive hours, if the driver contravenes paragraph 4(b) – driving would be likely to jeopardize the safety or health of the public, the driver or the employees of the motor carrier;
(b) for 10 consecutive hours, if the driver contravenes section 12 – 13 and 14 hours in a day
(c) for 8 consecutive hours, if the driver contravenes sections 13 – off-duty time or 39 – north of 60 off duty time;
(d) for 72 consecutive hours, if the driver contravenes section 86 – 86(1) duplicate, 86(2) false and 86(3) tampered;
(e) for the number of hours needed to correct the failure, if the driver fails to comply with the off-duty time requirements of any of sections 14 to 29 and 41 to 54 or of a term or condition of a permit or with the requirements of section 98.
(4) The out-of-service declaration in respect of a driver who contravenes section 86 continues to apply beyond the 72 hours until the driver rectifies the record of duty status, if applicable, and provides it to the director or inspector so that the director or inspector is able to determine whether the driver has complied with these Regulations.
Basically, how it works is the driver receives a ticket for 86(2) or 86(3) and is then placed out-of-service according to 91(1) and 91(3).
The Big Question
Carriers and stakeholders now need to understand how CVSA Enforcement Bulletin 2026-02 will impact enforcement in Canada.
Is Transport Canada, the CCMTA and each provincial and territorial jurisdiction planning to adopt the principle that “The goal is to only place drivers OOS who pose an imminent hazard”?
We do not have this language written into Canadian Hours of Service regulations.
However, CVSA represents enforcement agencies from Canada, the United States and Mexico. Canadian regulators and enforcement agencies sit on CVSA committees and participate in the development of these enforcement policies. It is therefore reasonable to assume Canadian regulators were involved in approving this guidance.
This matters because an ELD error is not the same thing as an imminent safety risk.
ELDs are not error-proof. We cannot engineer away poor decision making, inconsistent network connectivity or temporary data transmission failures.
A driver who makes a mistake and is placed out-of-service for 72 hours faces a very different outcome than a driver placed out-of-service for 10 hours.
A Real-World Example
Consider a driver operating in northern Ontario between Wawa → White River → Marathon → Terrace Bay → Nipigon.
There are long stretches of highway in this corridor with weak or no cellular connectivity.
When the driver enters an area with good signal again, the ELD recalculates and updates duty status information. During these periods of low connectivity, the driver must manually keep track workshift time.
Sometimes the math simply does not math and the driver exceeds a duty status limit even if it’s only 10 minutes.
If the driver cannot explain that connectivity gap — where the ELD did not accurately record and retain the required data — will that driver be sitting roadside for 10 hours or 72 hours?
The Bottom Line
Carriers and drivers should carefully review any ELD violation they receive.
For years there has been no publicly available interpretation explaining how ELD data should be enforced.
Now with CVSA Enforcement Bulletin 2026-02, there is finally something tangible that can be used when challenging an ELD penalty.
If you receive an ELD violation roadside, during a compliance review, or through a NSC Standard 15 audit, it may be worth examining whether the enforcement action actually aligns with this guidance.
If you have received an ELD penalty and want a second opinion before deciding whether to challenge it in court, send it to me and I will let you know if it may be worth fighting.
CVSA Inspection Bulletin 2026-02 False Records of Duty Status and Electronic Logging Device Tampering
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) has released Inspection Bulletin 2026-02 addressing enforcement distinctions between false Records of Duty Status (RODS) and Electronic Logging Device (ELD) tampering.
In North America’s regulatory structure:
This bulletin is important because it provides structured enforcement interpretation in an area that has historically lacked consistency — distinguishing between ordinary falsification and data integrity compromise.
False Record of Duty Status
§ 395.8(e)(1) (U.S.) and 86(2) – Canada
A false RODS occurs when the recorded duty status does not reflect actual activity, but the timeline can still be reconstructed.
Personal conveyance misuse is one example — but not the only one.
Common falsification scenarios include:
If the inspector can determine when the driving occurred and correct the record:
The key factor is whether compliance can be reconstructed.
Reengineered, Reprogrammed, or Tampered RODS
§ 395.8(e)(2) (U.S.) and 86(3) – Canada
Tampering is fundamentally different.
Here, the issue is not an incorrect duty status selection — it is compromised data integrity.
Examples include:
The bulletin provides an example where fuel receipts proved activity in one state while the RODS reflected off-duty status in another, with approximately 21 hours of driving unaccounted for.
When required ELD data has been altered or cannot be relied upon, enforcement escalates.
If the inspector cannot determine actual driving and rest periods:
At that point, the question is no longer whether a driver exceeded hours — it becomes whether compliance can be verified at all.
Context Within the Broader ELD Discussion
This bulletin does not arise in isolation.
In a previous article, “Late to the Party: The U.S. Wakes Up to Widespread ELD Tampering,” I examined how ELD manipulation practices had already been identified across the industry before formal enforcement clarification was issued.
https://raventransportationsafetyconsulting.com/late-to-the-party-the-u-s-wakes-up-to-widespread-eld-tampering/
That analysis identified recurring indicators such as improper unidentified driving reassignment, credential sharing, manual driving entries where automatic capture should occur, and discrepancies between supporting documents and recorded duty status.
The CVSA bulletin now formalizes the enforcement distinction between:
That distinction is significant for both carriers and enforcement.
Interpretation and Guidance Gaps
The CCMTA and Transport Canada have previously issued technical guidance relating to Data Diagnostic Events in Table 4 of the Canadian ELD Technical Standard. However, that guidance has not consistently filtered through to industry stakeholders in Alberta.
As a result, carriers have faced ELD violations for several years without a comprehensive interpretation framework clarifying how enforcement should evaluate data structure, transmission methods, and Technical Standard compliance.
Inspection Bulletin 2026-02 provides a foundation that Canadian jurisdictions can use in developing consistent interpretation guidance.
Final Observations
Full U.S. ELD enforcement began in 2019.
Full Canadian enforcement followed in 2023.
Structured regulatory interpretation of falsification versus tampering is only now being clarified.
This bulletin signals a shift toward evaluating not only hours compliance, but the integrity of the underlying ELD dataset itself.
For carriers, that distinction matters.
A recent article published by Overdrive has once again brought ELD tampering into the spotlight. While the U.S. passed its ELD Mandate in 2017, it’s taken nearly eight years to fully acknowledge what many in the industry have known for a long time: widespread, organized manipulation of ELD data is not only happening—it’s become its own nefarious industry.
As the article outlines, ELD data manipulation is now a business in itself. Let’s add this to the growing list of concerning trends in the commercial transportation sector: shape-shifting “chameleon” carriers, drivers under the “Driver Inc.” model to avoid taxes, unpaid workers making less than minimum wage, immigration fraud, shady consultants selling permanent residency, unregulated trucking schools handing out licences to unqualified individuals, multi-layer freight brokers undercutting rates and disappearing into bankruptcy, and rampant equipment and cargo theft. Now, ELD data manipulation joins the club.
The problem isn’t just the manipulation—it’s the lack of understanding from regulators who are tasked with enforcing Hours of Service (HOS) rules. Far too often, enforcement bodies lack the technical training to understand how ELD data works and how it aligns with HOS regulations. This is why the recent push from the U.S. to address tampering only underscores a major gap here in Canada: the ongoing absence of a clear, unified interpretation guide from the CCMTA or Alberta Transportation.
What’s Happening in the U.S.?
The CVSA’s Driver-Traffic Enforcement Committee recently took two important steps to combat fatigue-related incidents tied to tampering:
Frankly, there’s no need for another committee recommendation. I have an Excel template with all the required column headings and corresponding tables from the Technical Standard. It’s all right there—let’s stop pretending this is rocket science.
Why the U.S. ELD System is Failing
The core issue in the U.S. stems from the lack of third-party certification for ELD devices. In the States, ELDs are self-certified by the manufacturers. That opens the door for devices to be programmed with backdoors, allowing driving time manipulation and data tampering.
In contrast, Canada requires third-party certification to ensure ELDs meet the Technical Standards. While tampering does happen here, it's harder and leaves a bigger digital footprint. Most of what we encounter in Canada involves unplugged ELDs or devices not connected to the truck’s ECM.
One key difference? Canada built the definition of tampering directly into the federal HOS regulations, unlike the U.S.
Canada's Regulatory Approach
Federal Hours of Service – SOR/2005-313
Section 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.
This is reinforced in the Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII – SOR/2023-137):
Even though not every province uses Schedule XVIII, similar charges exist across jurisdictions. During roadside or scale inspections, drivers must produce the current day plus the previous 14 days of logs. If tampering is detected for each day, that’s up to $14,000 in fines for the driver, plus out-of-service status. Carriers can face $28,000 in penalties, plus additional sanctions.
And keep in mind—this is real-time data. If a driver is tampering, the carrier knows it.
The Bigger Picture
Let’s be clear: ELD tampering is not new. It started the day after the U.S. ELD mandate went live in 2017. The FMCSA only began revoking non-compliant devices in 2023—long after the manipulation was deeply rooted.
According to Overdrive, the FMCSA and CVSA are working on an out-of-service inspection standard for tampering, but it won’t be operational until 2026. That’s three more years of vulnerable data enforcement. In the meantime, perhaps the FMCSA should consider involving the U.S. Department of Justice—because selling manipulated ELD data online for a fee? That’s wire fraud.
Under 18 U.S. Code § 1343, wire fraud is defined as:
“...a scheme to defraud or obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmitted by wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce.”
Conclusion
Until regulators on both sides of the border catch up with the technology they’re meant to enforce, we’ll keep seeing bad actors exploit the system. The tools to fight tampering exist. The data is available. The problem is enforcement training—and the willingness to learn to use the data properly.
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.
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.
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
Introduction:
We can all agree the ELD hours of service regulations desperately need an interpretation guide especially around NSC Standard 15 Audits. The adoption of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) has brought about significant changes in how hours of service regulations are enforced and monitored. Understanding the intricate guidelines around ELDs, particularly in relation to NSC Standard 15 Audits, is crucial for both trucking companies and drivers to avoid penalties and ensure compliance.
ELD Interpretation Guidelines and Regulatory Responsibility:
The need is great for a comprehensive interpretation guide for ELD regulations, specifically NSC Standard 15 Audits. The CCMTA (Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators) in conjunction with Transport Canada developed the ELD Technical Standard and the certification testing. However, the responsibility for interpreting these regulations falls on individual provincial jurisdictions. When a provincial jurisdiction chooses to adopt a federal regulation, it is up the provincial jurisdiction to decide what that regulation means to its constituents. This lack of standardized guidelines can lead to confusion and misinterpretation, highlighting the importance of clear communication between regulatory bodies and industry players.
When Alberta Transportation chose to adopt the Federal Hours of Service regulation, which included the ELD mandate, Alberta Transportation had a governmental obligation to inform industry what that meant, especially when issuing administrative penalties/fines for contravention of that regulation. A trucking company that received an administrative penalty or downgraded SFC should seek clarification from Alberta Transportation, to explain the penalty. Industry needs fair treatment and transparency in enforcement of regulations. Maybe if industry starts questioning things, Alberta Transportation will have to deal with ELDs. Alberta Transportation dropped the ball that is clear, but what does industry do now? Status quo isn’t going to work anymore; it’s been 2 years.
The Spirit of ELD Mandate and the Technical Standard:
Whenever a regulation is questioned, bureaucrats like to revert to the spirit of the regulation. Simply, this means determining what were the regulators looking to accomplish when they wrote the ELD mandate and the Technical Standard. Let’s examine the spirit of the ELD mandate and the Technical Standard. To do this, it is essential to delve into the historical context of paper logs and the evolution of monitoring technologies in transportation. In the old days, driver tracked their own time in a paper log book. The driver turned in the paper logs every few weeks and the trucking company that employed the driver would review those records to verify the accuracy, but for the most part it was on the driver. GPS was adopted by most trucking companies in the 90’s and GPS was used to track drivers and audit logs but, it was still weeks after the trip. The trucking company was, and still is, very rarely held liable for a driver’s behaviour. People who were injured in collisions or fatalities got sick of suing broke truck drivers and decided it was better to go after trucking companies with big insurance policies. What better evidence than a government certified system that continuously monitors the driver and alerts the driver and company in real time if the driver is in an out-of-service condition? Add in front and rear facing cameras and the lawyers are golden.
The Role of ELDs in Enhancing Safety and Accountability:
ELDs establish real-time monitoring of driver activities, ensuring compliance with rest requirements and promoting road safety. While the intentions behind these regulations are noble, the practical implementation and adherence pose significant challenges for both drivers and carriers. ELDs serve as a crucial tool in enhancing safety standards and accountability within the transportation industry. By providing real-time data on driver activity and alerting carriers to potential violations, ELDs aim to prevent instances of driver fatigue. The driver and the carrier working together, using the information from the ELD, are supposed to ensure the driver is never exceeding daily limits or are in an out of service condition. The wording from the hours of service regulation (78.3 & 78.2) is certify, verify and monitor. The collaborative effort required between drivers and carriers in using ELD data for monitoring and compliance underscores the shared responsibility in upholding road safety standards.
Conclusion:
It is paramount as the ELD technology evolves; the hours of service regulation will need continuous updates. Industry needs cohesive interpretation guides and transparent communication channels. By embracing the spirit of ELD mandate and leveraging technological advancements to enhance safety and compliance, the transportation industry can pave the way for a more efficient and secure operating environment for all parties involved. That is the spirit of the regulation, to ensure that liability is shared equally.
What do planes, trains and semi trucks all have in common? Regulations to ensure the operators of those vehicles do not work fatigued. The Federal Hours of Service HOS (SOR/2005-313) regulates the amount of time a commercial driver is allowed to drive, be on duty and mandatory off duty time limits. The intent of regulating a driver’s time is an attempt to mitigate the number and gravity of truck crashes by tackling driver fatigue.
All carriers holding a Federal Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) must follow the Federal Hours of Service (HOS) SOR/2005-313, which includes the mandatory use of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) for tracking driver hours (HOS 77). It is important to recognize that some provinces in Canada like Alberta and Manitoba have both federal and provincial SFCs, leading to potential variations in HOS regulations between federal and provincial rules. Example, a carrier with a provincial SFC has no cycle limitations and can be on duty a total of 15 hours a day. A carrier with a federal SFC is limited to 70 hrs in 7 days or 120 hours in 14 days in a cycle and on duty a total of 14 hours in a day. Moreover, some provinces like Alberta did not adopt the ELD mandate for carriers with Provincial SFCs. Regardless of the specific type of Safety Fitness Certificate held by a carrier, all drivers operating regulated commercial motor vehicles are obligated to comply with the relevant Hours of Service duty status limits. This underscores the importance of understanding and adhering to the appropriate regulations to ensure compliance.
The Federal Hours of Service (SOR/2005-313) section 4 outlines the responsibilities of motor carriers, drivers, shippers, consignees, safety officers, dispatchers, and others to help prevent driver fatigue.
They are responsible to ensure a drivers must not drive if:
ELDs record time by the second and track how much time is remaining in a drivers shift. The ELD alerts the driver 30 minutes before a duty status limit is reached, Technical Standard 4.6.4. Drivers and persons listed in Section 4 of the HOS must be trained in the rules of HOS. However, it is no longer imperative to understand the minutia of team split sleeper or deferral calculations because the ELD does and the ELD monitors and alerts the driver to available time.
On duty and driving limits: driving and on duty time is automatically recorded by the ELD. Team drivers must authenticate (log in) to the ELD, (Technical Standard 4.1.4 b). The ELD monitors and calculates time concurrently for team driving conditions such as; team split sleeper berth.
Operating zone is set by the motor carrier during the drivers account creation (Technical Standard 7.46). The ELD will track and alert the driver 30 minutes before a duty status is reached. North of 60 covers three territories: Nunavut, Yukon, and the Northwest Territories. There are no daily limits only work shift limits.
A driver is allowed to defer 2 hours of off duty time to the following day. This allows drivers to obtain two additional driving and on-duty hours in a 24-hour period (Day 1). Then, they can take the required two hours off immediately the next day (Day 2).
The ELD will track and alert the driver to the time requirements ensuring compliance to the regulation.
Certified ELDs are now required for commercial carriers as part of the law. Carriers must understand how ELDs work and how to review the data they generate. Previously, drivers used paper logbooks to track their time, with the burden of accurate recording falling on the driver. Carriers were responsible for monitoring these logs, but they provided historical information. With ELDs offering real-time certified data, it is now the motor carrier's duty to actively monitor drivers through the ELD's features and confirm the accuracy of their records of duty status (RODS). In case of a serious collision, the carrier can no longer shift blame to the driver, claiming ignorance of any violations of driving hours, as they are now expected to constantly monitor and verify compliance using the ELD data.
Drivers of commercial motor vehicles are subject to roadside inspections and NSC Standard 15 audit inspections. If a driver or vehicle is placed out of service, the driver and/or carrier would be subject to a written warning, tickets and/or points on the Carrier Profile. If the non-compliance is serious the driver and/or vehicle would be placed Out Of Service (OOS) until corrected. These are considered HOS violations. Not all provinces and territories follow the Federal Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII): SOR/2023-137, which means that penalties for violations can vary depending on where the violation occurs. The penalties outlined in the contravention regulations are different for the driver and carrier involved in the violation. Specifically, carrier penalties are set at double the amount of driver penalties in order to ensure that responsibility is appropriately distributed between the driver and carrier.
77 (1) A motor carrier shall ensure that each commercial vehicle that it operates is equipped with an ELD that meets the requirements of the Technical Standard and shall ensure that it is mounted in a fixed position during the operation of the commercial vehicle and is visible to the driver when the driver is in the normal driving position. Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII): SOR/2023-137 suggested penalty is $1000.00.
How to avoid: Install a $20.00 magnetic cell phone holder if the ELD is on the driver’s phone and not a wired connection.
77 (7) The motor carrier shall ensure that each commercial vehicle that it operates carries an ELD information packet. Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII): SOR/2023-137 suggested penalty is $600.00.
How to avoid: Ensure each CMV contains an information packet that contains; (a) a user’s manual; (b) an instruction sheet for the driver describing the data transfer mechanisms supported by the ELD and the steps required to generate and transfer the data with respect to the driver’s hours of service to an inspector; (c) an instruction sheet for the driver describing the measures to take in the event that the ELD malfunctions; and (d) a sufficient number of records of duty status to allow the driver to record the information required under section 82 for at least 15 days.
77 (8) The motor carrier shall ensure that the driver records the information related to their record of duty status and the driver is required to record that information in a complete and accurate manner.
78.1 A motor carrier shall create and maintain a system of accounts for ELDs that is in compliance with the Technical Standard and that (a) allows each driver to record their record of duty status in a distinct and personal account; and (b) provides for a distinct account for the driving time of an unidentified driver.
Technical Standard 4.1.5 Non-Authenticated Driving of a CMV
87 (1) A motor carrier shall monitor the compliance of each driver with these Regulations.
Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII): SOR/2023-137 suggested penalty 77(8) is $500.00 for the driver $1000.00 for the carrier. 78.1 suggested penalty is $1000.00 for the carrier. 87(1) suggested penalty is $2000.00 for the carrier.
How to avoid: Carrier to assign all unidentified time.
Technical Standard 4.6.1 Compliance Self-Monitoring, Malfunctions and Data Diagnostic Events Table 4
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.
Contraventions Regulations (Schedule XVIII): SOR/2023-137 suggested penalty 86 (3) is $2000.00 for the carrier.
Data diagnostic events: Table 4 Technical Standard
(Code 1) Power Data Diagnostic Event: Problem ELD is not fully powered/functional within one minute of the vehicle’s engine receiving power. How to avoid: Plug the ELD in.
(Code 2) Engine Synchronization Data Diagnostic Event: Problem the ELD loses ECM connectivity to any of the required data sources and can no longer acquire updated values for the required ELD parameters within five seconds of the need. Connectivity must be maintained while the vehicle is powered on. How to avoid/ fix the connectivity where the ELD loses ECM connectivity to the required data sources, you can try the following steps:
(Code 3) Missing Required Data Elements Data Diagnostic Event: Problem there are missing data elements (like GPS location) in the ELD event record. How to avoid: Instruct drivers to input missing information when ELD prompted.
(Code 4) Data Transfer Data Diagnostic Event: Problem the internal monitoring of the data transfer test fails and is unable to send the output file data. How to correct: consult with technical support
(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. Unidentified Driving Records Data Diagnostic Events will clear when the cumulative time for unidentified driving is less than 15 minutes. How to correct: Assign all unidentified driving time.
Technical Standard 4.6.1 Compliance Self-Monitoring, Malfunctions and Data Diagnostic Events Table 4
(Code P) Power Compliance Malfunction
(Code E) Engine Synchronization Malfunction
(Code L) Positioning Compliance Malfunction
(Code T) Timing Compliance Malfunction – Drivers using a smartphone as a device must disable the Automatic Time Zone Detection or Automatic Time Zone Adjustment.
(Code R) Data Recording Compliance Malfunction
(Code S) Data Transfer Compliance Malfunction
How to avoid: Malfunctions occur when Data Diagnostic Events are not corrected, fix the data, avoid the Malfunction. When a Malfunction is detected, the driver is to stop, switch to paper logs and follow the Malfunction criteria 78 (2)(3)(4).
That’s my top 5 and the easiest to avoid and correct. In my experience 75% of issues are driver training and safety officers not understanding how ELDs work. It’s not the device, the ELD records data, the ELD does not interpret what that data means. With ELDs providing a digital record of a driver’s activity it is important for carriers to recognize the level of liability that entails if your driver is involved in a serious incident.
