WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are asking for public feedback on finding a new way to determine whether motor carriers are safe to operate on the nation’s roads.
In an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on Monday, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration stated that it is not yet making specific proposals but wants input on potentially using its safety management system (SMS) methodology to issue safety fitness determinations (SFDs).
“The Agency’s current SFD process is resource-intensive and reaches only a small percentage of motor carriers,” FMCSA stated. “A successful SFD methodology may: target metrics that are most directly connected to safety outcomes, provide for accurate identification of unsafe motor carriers, and incentivize the adoption of safety-improving practices.”
With crashes involving large trucks increasing over the past decade — up over 40% between 2013 and 2022, according to government data — FMCSA has been under pressure to get better at identifying unsafe carriers, and the rules FMCSA uses to identify them have a direct effect on carriers’ ability to stay in business as well as on their hiring of commercial truck drivers.
FMCSA currently uses a three-tiered comprehensive review (CR) process that may result in a “satisfactory,” “conditional” or “unsatisfactory” safety rating.
Of the CRs conducted in FY 2019 (the last year before the pandemic limited the number of CRs conducted due to safety concerns), 306 resulted in a final safety rating of unsatisfactory, 1,842 in a final safety rating of conditional and 2,701 in a final safety rating of satisfactory.
“Only a small percentage of carriers with safety management control deficiencies are required to submit corrective action to continue operating and avoid a final unfit determination based on an unsatisfactory rating,” according to FMCSA.
In the proposed rulemaking, FMCSA seeks comment on a list of 12 questions, including whether it should retain this three-tier rating system or — as it asked in a similar Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued in 2016 that was never acted upon — replace it with a single rating of “unfit” for those carriers that did not successfully complete a safety review.
“Under such a structure, carriers that completed safety fitness reviews successfully would continue operating and not appear different, in terms of their SFD, from carriers that had not yet been reviewed,” FMCSA states. “Would this approach be sufficient to ensure safety?”
The agency also notes in the current proposed rulemaking that the existing SFD does not use all available safety data, such as all inspection-based data. It requests input, therefore, on whether its SMS methodology should be used to issue SFDs in a manner similar to what was noted in the 2016 proposed rulemaking.
“If so, what adjustments, if any, should be made to that proposal?” FMCSA asks.
“If not, should the agency include more safety data in the SFD process in other ways and, if so, how? The Agency is interested in comments specifically on whether the integration of on-road safety data into the SFD process would improve the assessment of motor carriers’ safety posture and the identification of unfit motor carriers.”
Other questions FMCSA is asking for comment on include:
- Should motor carriers of passengers be subject to higher standards than other motor carriers in terms of safety fitness rating methodology?
- How will states be affected if the agency changes the SFD? What resources might be needed to accommodate any changes, and how long would it take to incorporate proposed changes?
- Given the importance of driver behavior in preventing crashes, how should the agency incorporate driver behavior data into the SFD? What data should the agency use? How should this methodology distinguish between data resulting in a conviction and data without a conviction?
- Should SFD consider motor carriers’ adoption and use of safety technologies in a carrier’s rating? How should this fit into the SFD methodology?
- Given that unsafe driving behaviors, such as speeding and texting while driving, are highly correlated with crash risk, should the safety fitness rating methodology give more weight to [such] unsafe driving violations?
Calvin
Most of these numbers are from big carriers pushing students through their programs. There was a boom in the trucking world for a bit. Escalated all your numbers and now you all don’t wanna blame the pocket liners! Instead you want to come after small business. With all the hoops and hurdles we have already your lucky we still even have a trucking industry. There’s so much wrong with this industry and I’d say it starts at FMCSA and trickles south. But this is just my opinion.
Donato Ruiz
The electronic book was the biggest mistake that the transportation system has, and to make it worse, the brokers are changing the prices of the loads and that forces us to go further when we shouldn’t and if we want to take a break we can’t because the clock It does not stop, and also all the complications are paid by the drivers. FMCSA have to require companies to have a good training program for new drivers. and that they pay their drivers well. At the end of the day we move the economy of the country. while most peoplesare sleeping we are running.
Craig Childers
I think trucking has enough rules, you aren’t gonna make any more laws to decrease or stop an accident from happening, that’s why they are called “accidents” no professional driver has an accident on purpose.
If you really wanna help commercial truck drivers, ride with some for a month or two and stop Monday morning quarterbacking. Then you will see the real problems in the industry. Should be stiffer penalties for passenger vehicles not respecting the rules of the road and the all to common disregard for commercial trucks period. Or are you afraid you can’t handle the finger pointing back?
Sincerely a Profesional Driver.
Driver
Why don’t we start with abolishing the FMCSA and driver logs? Sure would be a lot safer if I could sleep when I need sleep!!!
Jeremiah Cooper
The ELD and governing a truck under 75 mph are the 2 biggest things that play a part in the increase of accidents. Drivers are forced to speed in situations and places they shouldn’t due to such a strict time clock. I’m a driver myself, so I’ve seen it and had to deal with it personally. I see other drivers fly by me in school zones and in town where someone with any sense would know to take it easy, but out on the open highway they can’t hardly do the speed limit due to the truck being governed, so the driver will have more of a tendency to speed where the speed limit is lower than what the truck is governed at to try and make up lost time. Also another thing that needs to be addressed, especially since it is now mandatory, is the driving school programs. A lot more needs to be taught than just how to pass the test. I see so many drivers out on the road that have been through a driving school and have no clue what they’re doing.
Fred Richardson
And why the fmcsa never says anything about brokers that taken more percentages and rapping carriers off and paid 81 cents a mile coming out Florida ,you guys never think Abt to keep eyes on brokers
Neil Grueninger
Keep the non-American from driving here.
Stefan K Dorsz
Please put timers, cameras in the FMCA offices, the company cars they drive and then will see how drained these people going to be mantaly and physically.
Anyway FMCA doesn’t take any advice from real drivers that’s been driving for long time they only listen to the computer and all these people whith Master degrees. That’s why the trucking industry its not worth it.