Recently, a combine traveled a considerable distance on the highway from Saskatchewan to Manitoba, accompanied by an escort vehicle. The journey was documented and sparked a wave of comments on Facebook. Many of these comments focused on the misconception that farmers "own the road" and don't need to follow regulations. While farmers do receive exemptions from certain rules, it’s not a free-for-all. Some argue that these exemptions should be eliminated because many farms operate as corporations rather than traditional family farms. Let’s look at some of Alberta’s regulations for farmers operating commercial vehicles.
First is what is a farm? The answer is it depends on who is asking. Fuel tax defines a farm as a farm business that has $10,000 or more of gross annual farm production. If Canada Revenue is asking you are a farmer if you claim income from farming activity (subject to additional rules). For Statistics Canada Farm Census a farm is defined as an agricultural operation that produces at least one of the following products intended for sale: crops (hay, field crops, tree fruits or nuts, berries or grapes, vegetables, seed); livestock (cattle, pigs, sheep, horses, game animals, other livestock); poultry (hens, chickens, turkeys, chicks, game birds, other poultry); animal products (milk or cream, eggs, wool, furs, meat); or other agricultural products (Christmas trees, greenhouse or nursery products, mushrooms, sod, honey, maple syrup products).
For commercial vehicle regulation purposes what matters is if the farm is required to hold a Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC). A farm is exempt from needing a SFC if: (a) commercial vehicles primarily used to transport agricultural products, if the driver of the truck is a bona fide farmer or employee of the farmer who owns or produces the agricultural product; (b) 2- or 3-axle commercial vehicles primarily used to transport primary products of a forest, lake or river, if the driver or the driver’s employer produces the primary product.
Farm Plates fall under Class 2 registration
2-58: Farm Vehicles Includes classes 2-58 (farm vehicles) and 2-58c (sod operation vehicles).
A 2-58 plate class is used to register the vehicle of a carrier who has been approved by Alberta Agriculture and Forestry for their Alberta Farm Fuel Benefit (AFFB) Program.
Carriers who use their vehicle for both farming and commercial business activities do not require a farm registration to haul their own goods. The carrier is eligible to apply to Alberta Treasury Board and Finance for a rebate of the fuel tax, and if applicable, the AFFDA on fuel used to haul their own goods.
The following vehicles qualify as farm vehicles:
Trucks (anything with a 5th wheel is defined as a truck tractor)
Utility vehicles and Sport Utility Vehicles
Cargo vans
All other vehicles are not eligible as farm vehicles and are not eligible to hold a (2-58) Farm Vehicle plate.
Air Brakes
A holder of a class 2, 3, 4 or 5 Driver's Licence driving a motor vehicle with air brakes that is registered as farm vehicle does not require the driver to have an air brake certificate or endorsement on their licence if the farmer is only engaged in the delivery of animals, farm products, grains or farm produce to:
The farmer’s farm, if those commodities are to be used by the farmer in the operation of the farm. Or a market, if the commodities being transported were either grown or raised by the farmer on the farmer’s farm
Dual Registration
A client may register a motor vehicle in two registration plate classes using the motor vehicle dual registration program. All registration requirements must be met for each plate class.
The dual registrations may have different expiry dates.
Issuing Plates
Dual registration licence plates are issued as follows:
Definition of (q) “farm equipment” means equipment designed and
intended for use in farming operations, but does not include (i) a truck, trailer or semi-trailer, (ii) farm equipment that is loaded on a truck, trailer or
semi-trailer, or (iii) farm equipment that is towing equipment other than
another piece of farm equipment; (yy) “truck” means a motor vehicle designed and intended for the transport of goods or carrying of loads; (zz) “truck tractor” means a truck that may be coupled to a semi-trailer by means of a fifth wheel, but does not include a bed truck, picker truck or winch truck;
Provincial Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) = Do not leave Alberta
Federal Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) = Can leave Alberta
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer that holds a Provincial SFC (Alberta only), operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW of 4501 – 11793 kgs only in Alberta is exempt from:
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer that holds a Provincial SFC (Alberta only), operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW of 11794 kgs or greater only in Alberta is exempt from:
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer the holds a Federal SFC, operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW of 4501 – 11793 kgs operating inside of Alberta is exempt from:
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer the holds a Federal SFC, operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW over – 11794 kgs operating inside of Alberta is exempt from:
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer the holds a Federal SFC, operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW of 4501 – 11793 kgs operating outside of Alberta is exempt from:
A farmer or a driver employed by a farmer the holds a Federal SFC, operating a commercially or dual farm plated vehicle with a RGVW over – 11794 kgs operating outside of Alberta is exempt from:
When it comes to Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), there are no permits or exemptions available for farmers and ranchers in Canada. Unlike the United States, where agriculture has an ELD exemption, Canada chose not to adopt it. Interestingly, Alberta Transportation granted both ELD and time-recording exemptions to the oil industry but not to agriculture or ranching.
One reason Alberta farmers have historically secured exemptions is their political engagement and vocal advocacy for their industry. For example, in 1997, farmers protested by dumping thousands of pounds of manure on the steps of the Alberta Legislature. This dramatic act highlighted their dissatisfaction with inadequate support programs and the government's perceived inaction on rural issues. It sent a powerful message about the dire conditions in rural areas.
Now, imagine what might happen if truckers mobilized with the same level of commitment. Truckers have already demonstrated their power, such as when they effectively shut down Ottawa in protest of COVID-19 measures. If truckers united to demand change in their industry, they could shine a spotlight on the poor working conditions drivers endure due to insufficient attention from federal and provincial governments.
As an Alberta-based carrier, understanding the intricacies of Safety Fitness Certificates (SFC) is essential for compliance and avoiding costly penalties. A common question that arises is whether an Alberta-based carrier with a Provincial SFC can operate outside of Alberta by simply purchasing permits in other provinces like British Columbia or Saskatchewan. The short answer is no, and here's why.
Intra-Provincial vs. Extra-Provincial: Know the Difference
First, let’s clarify the two types of SFCs:
It’s crucial to understand that an Intra-Provincial SFC does not give you the flexibility to temporarily operate outside Alberta by buying a permit in another province. The permits available in British Columbia and Saskatchewan that many carriers refer to are for vehicle registration (IRP) and fuel tax (IFTA) purposes, not for operational authority. This common confusion often leads carriers into regulatory trouble. Yes, I know your cousin’s uncle that owns a trucking company has been doing it for years but, that just means they haven’t been caught yet.
Why Permits Don’t Equal Permission
Many carriers mistakenly believe that purchasing a permit for registration or fuel tax allows them to operate extra-provincially. However, these permits are solely for the legal use of highways (registration) and the payment of fuel taxes. They do not grant you the authority to pick up or deliver loads outside Alberta.
The responsibility of understanding the need for a Federal SFC falls on the carrier. Unfortunately, Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division do not provide education on this requirement. Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section focus is on compliance, and they expect carriers to be informed about the regulations governing their operations.
The Siloed System and Its Impact
One of the reasons carriers often find themselves in violation is the lack of communication between various government departments. Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, the departments responsible for permits and those overseeing SFCs operate in silos. This means that when you obtain a permit from one department, there is no cross-communication to inform you of other regulatory requirements, like the need for a Federal SFC.
This disconnect often results in carriers unintentionally violating regulations. Operating extra-provincially with an intra-provincial SFC the carrier is not just risking tickets or penalties but, extra-provincial carriers carry insurance that intra-provincial carriers do not. Should the carrier have an accident while outside the jurisdiction the insurance company may deny that claim and open the carrier up to liability.
The High Stakes of Non-Compliance
Safety Fitness Certificate follows the virginity rule, you only get one shot. An Alberta carrier with a Provincial SFC that is stopped operating in another jurisdiction would be made Federal and the carrier would have to apply to return to intra-provincial. The regulation AR 314/2002 Commercial Vehicle Certificate and Insurance Regulation Section 6 4.2(1)(c) uses the wording operates or intends to operate. Getting caught operating extra-provincially proves the intention to operate. Operating with an Intra-Provincial SFC outside Alberta is not just a minor infraction—it’s a serious violation.
Carriers operating extra-provincially require ELDs, speed limiters, and are required to pay Provincial Sales Tax (PST) in jurisdictions like British Columbia and Saskatchewan. Non-compliance with these requirements may put the carrier on the radar of Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section and the carrier will be caught on the never ending NSC Audit wheel of fortune.
Final Thoughts: Stay Educated and Compliant
Remember, Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section role is enforcement, not education. Ignorance of the law is no excuse; carriers must take the initiative to educate themselves on the regulatory environment they operate in. Investing time in understanding these regulations can prevent significant headaches down the road. Stay informed, stay compliant, and keep your operations running smoothly.
BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
The federal vs provincial SFC is an Alberta system, not BC. A BC NSC Certificate is not different for carriers whether they operate only in province or over borders.
If you have a Provincial SFC, you will need to apply and obtain a Federal one in order to cross into BC. We do not issue permits changing a carrier's standing or operational category.
SASKATCHEWAN SGI PERMIT OFFICE
Saskatchewan does not have any permits that covers the provincial safety fitness, customers need to have their fitness safety changed to federal before entering SK
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.
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.
The Humboldt incident, which tragically highlighted the need for better driver training in the operation of commercial vehicles, prompted Alberta Transportation and other jurisdictions to introduce MELT (Mandatory Entry Level Training) to bridge this knowledge gap. MELT, as the name suggests, is entry-level training aimed at equipping individuals new to the field with essential skills, knowledge, and competencies necessary for safe and competent driving. This crucial training encompasses formal instruction, on-road training, mentoring, and assessments, laying the foundation for growth and development behind the wheel.
Most individuals undergo driver education in high school and then gradually build experience by driving. Most new drivers did not get a class 5 go home and hook up a trailer and drive in the mountains the next day. It is the same thing for MELT, it is entry level, why is it okay for a MELT driver to graduate and the next day load up a set of super B’s and go trucking? It isn’t and that is the carrier training component of AR314/2002 Section 41(1)(h)(i). to provide ongoing training related to vehicle operation and compliance with safety laws even after a driver has completed MELT.
Recognizing that experience plays a vital role in ensuring safe driving practices, Alberta Transportation is set to roll out an apprenticeship program starting in 2026. This program aims to transition drivers from entry-level to experienced while being closely monitored, akin to how pilots accumulate hundreds of flight hours before flying passengers. This underscores the importance of hands-on experience and continuous learning to mitigate risks and enhance safety standards in the commercial driving sector.
What do we do until 2026? Train the drivers!
What are the regulatory requirements for carrier driver training?
A Carrier Safety program in regards to driver training; According to section 40(1) of the Alberta Commercial Vehicle Certificate and Insurance Regulation (AR314/2002), a carrier must create policies that discuss these subjects in their safety program:
Carriers are required by law to make sure all employees are trained in and knowledgeable of all applicable safety laws: Traffic Safety Act - including, but not limited to those related to: Hours of Service, Cargo Securement, Rules of the Road, Use of Safety Equipment, Weights and Dimensions, Vehicle Maintenance and DVIR and Record Keeping.
Carrier Orientation and Training:
Carriers must also choose the ways they will inform all new employees about the company’s policies and procedures. They may also provide training to ensure the effective and safe operations of their commercial vehicles. Carriers may develop and deliver suitable training material within their own company or they may use public training courses. They may also hire a consultant to provide customized training, or they may use a combination of these options to train their employees.
Can I train drivers in house? This is the guidance from Alberta Transportation to auditors;
Answer yes if, There is a record of all related training on file (e.g. tests, certificates, course attendance lists, certificate of completion or list of all training completed), including training identified in the carrier’s Safety Program. It is expected that a driver receives training (such as: hours of service, trip inspection, load securement, weights and dimensions, DG as applicable, etc.) in all areas with respect to the operation of a commercial vehicle, if applicable. It is acceptable if this information is contained in a separate “training” file, computer or other system viewable by the User provided the carrier could easily produce training information for an individual driver verifying that applicable training was taken. Also answer “Yes” if evidence is found that drivers have been adequately instructed by their previous employer, then evaluated and accepted by their current employer. A written record of the evaluation must be present. User may accept any training that the carrier can demonstrate is adequate for their drivers given the type of job, vehicle, etc. that the employees operate. Alberta Transportation’s Education Manual was not created or intended to be used as formal training.
Can I use the Alberta Transportation Education Manual?
No, Education Manual disclaimer:
The material in this document is not intended to represent a full training course in any subject area covered. However, it may form part of a carrier’s larger training program. The reader is invited to reproduce all or part of this document, however, at no time should the information contained here be altered in any way nor used in a manner that would change the intended meaning of the material or its accuracy.
What records do I need to document driver training?
This is the guidance from Alberta Transportation to auditors: Does the carrier instruct drivers for: Hours of Service; Trip inspection; load securement; applicable safety law requirements; have an ongoing eval of driving skills?
Regulation: AR314/2002 Section 40 (1)(c) & (e).
Carrier has a written policy and any applicable training materials (may include evidence of instruction or examination from an external source/provider) clearly specifying the training required for drivers and an ongoing program for evaluating driving skills. Examples of training material that would be acceptable include tests, course materials and instructional videos. User may accept any written training policy that the carrier says they feel is adequate for their drivers given the type of job/ vehicle the employee operates. User should comment if they feel the training material is poor or requires updating. An example of what would be expected in order to be answered yes might include: The carrier’s program states “All drivers will be trained in Federal hours of service, trip inspections, load securement (commodity specific), weights/dimensions and must successfully pass a road test with the Safety Officer prior to being authorized to drive an NSC vehicle. Each driver will be required to re-certify in the vehicle every 24 months and pass a driver qualification review every 12 months.” For the purposes of answering this question only, actual proof of training is not required to answer “yes”; it must be in their program and, if it is, there should be training material available to support this. User may ask the carrier to see this material if it is not readily available. This question is asking what is the carrier doing with their drivers AFTER they have hired them and authorized them to drive in the first place (i.e. we don’t want a carrier hiring a driver and then never check up on them for as long as they work there). There is no measurement of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable, only does the carrier have a program in place to actually check on their drivers periodically to ensure they are still good drivers. This can be nearly anything, but it must still be reasonable.
Driver training is a endeavor that demands ongoing commitment and diligence from carriers to uphold standards and promote the professional development of drivers. By adhering to regulatory guidelines, implementing comprehensive training programs, and embracing the value of experience, carriers can avoid penalties as a result of an audit or investigation. Untrained drivers expose a carrier to increased liability in a serious on road incident.
In the world of commercial transportation, safety is paramount. To ensure the safety of drivers and other road users, regulations and monitoring programs are essential. One such program is the National Safety Code (NSC), which sets standards for commercial vehicles, drivers, and motor carriers in Canada. This code, though not law, is crucial in guiding provincial and territorial governments in drafting their safety regulations. In Alberta, the regulations are outlined in the Commercial Vehicle Certificate and Insurance Regulation, AR 314/2002 (Part 4.1).
NSC Standard 7 is the criteria for carrier and driver profiles. The Carrier Profile system is designed to provide an overview of a carrier's safety performance, encompassing records of infractions, collisions, on-road inspections, and facility audits. This system allows Alberta to monitor carriers' performance and take action against those posing safety risks across North America.
The Carrier Profile acts as a report card for carriers, offering transparency to stakeholders like shippers, insurance companies, and the public. By accessing this information, stakeholders can make informed decisions about engaging with specific carriers, promoting safety and accountability within the industry.
However, there is a critical issue with the reliability of the Carrier Profile data. Despite its intended purpose, there is a significant flaw in data sharing between jurisdictions. Alberta is not accurately capturing enforcement data from other provinces. This oversight means that Alberta trucking companies involved in incidents outside the province may not have their records updated promptly or accurately on their Carrier Profiles.
The implications of this data discrepancy are concerning. Carriers with incomplete or delayed information may not face the necessary interventions or audits, leading to inaccuracies in their risk factor scores. This discrepancy could potentially result in carriers maintaining a clean record, qualifying for insurance discounts, and evading enhanced monitoring or audits due to inaccurate risk assessment.
Moreover, the shortcomings extend to the auditing process itself. TPA (Third Party Auditors) do not have encryption keys and cannot audit unencrypted RODS. TPA (Third Party Auditors) lack proper training, support, and communication channels with Alberta Transportation, leading to flawed audits that further impact safety compliance determinations. This systemic issue raises questions about the effectiveness and integrity of the safety oversight program in Alberta.
Despite federal funding allocated to enhance road safety and data exchange initiatives, the existing gaps in the Carrier Profile system highlight a critical need for improvement. The discrepancy between intended safety measures and operational shortcomings underscores the urgency for corrective actions and increased accountability within the transportation safety framework.
Why is Alberta Transportation allowed to continue a program that is fundamentally flawed? Why are taxpayers paying salaries to a leadership group to run a flawed program? This is just another example of government inertia that is allowed to continue unabated while bureaucrats collect taxpayer salaries to do a terrible job. As taxpayers and stakeholders invested in road safety, it is essential to demand transparency, efficiency, and accuracy in safety monitoring programs. Accountability and rectification of existing flaws are imperative to uphold the standards of safety and compliance in the commercial transportation industry.
In conclusion, the revelations regarding the Alberta Transportation safety monitoring system shed light on the need for reform and transparency in data sharing and auditing processes. By addressing these issues, we can ensure that carriers are held accountable, road safety is prioritized, and the integrity of safety compliance programs is maintained for the well-being of all road users.
The Federal HOS was amended to mandate that drivers must use a certified Electronic Logging Device (ELD) to automatically record driving and working time instead of a paper logbook. The ELD section of the Federal Hours of Service (SOR/2005-313) (HOS) is 77 and the ELD mandate was fully enforced as of January 1, 2023. It is important to remember the HOS duty status limits (working time) and off duty time requirements did not change.
A driver is never exempt from the HOS duty status time limits but, the driver may be exempt from using a ELD to record time. The driver, if operating under an exemption, must record duty status time using an alternative time record such as a paper log. ELDs have the ability to accommodate exempt and non-exempt drivers, Technical Standard 3.1.3 but, the driver must be trained to use the exempt driver functionality.
It depends, each provider is different but, the costs a carrier should be aware of are: device cost, lease or buy, contract length, data charges, cloud storage and support. A ELD works exactly like a cellphone and just like cellphone contracts need to be reviewed carefully. All ELDs function the same the only difference is the user interface for the driver and carrier. Some ELD providers offer a Federal and Provincial application if you run 2 companies.
ELDs are important because it’s the law, if a driver has a serious incident without a functioning ELD the consequences can be grave for the carrier and the driver. Penalties for ELDs roadside and administrative in audit can get expensive. ELD penalties contribute to negative points on a carrier profile.
Certified ELD devices can be found on the Transport Canada website. Only certified ELDs can be used in Canada. The header page of a RODS contains the ELD Authentication Value, ELD Identifier and ELD Certification ID that confirm the authenticity. Motor carriers need to do required software updates to ensure the ELD remains compliant.
No, Raven teaches motor carriers and drivers how to use the ELD they currently have. We help carriers set up new ELDs to ensure compliance at the start. Raven can help motor carriers set up effective ELD monitoring policies to ensure compliance and limit liability in the event ELD data is needed as evidence.
