WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are providing a rare glimpse into information they may consider for a significant rule affecting how carriers are considered fit to be operating.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration published on Friday a “notice of data availability” — or “NODA” — to alert the public about a set of studies it could rely on to develop a proposed or final rule that will be used to determine a carrier’s safety fitness rating.
“This NODA is necessary to disclose such possible reliance and to provide the interested public an opportunity to comment on the accuracy and relevance of the information,” FMCSA stated.
P. Sean Garney, a motor carrier regulations expert and co-director of Scopelitis Transportation Consulting, pointed out that it’s the first such notice to be published by the agency since its inception more than 20 years ago, based on a search of Federal Register documents.
“What’s more interesting to me are the research titles listed and what they could mean for rulemaking,” Garney told FreightWaves. He noted that of six reports listed in Friday’s Federal Register notice, three are related to the effectiveness of driver-assist types of technology. A fourth study that is not listed in the Federal Register but has been added to the rulemaking docket relates to the effectiveness of front-crash prevention systems in reducing large truck crash rates.
All four cited a positive correlation between technology and safety.
“Could FMCSA be suggesting they’re considering crediting carriers who go beyond compliance by adopting safety technology?” Garney asked.
FMCSA posed that question — whether its current safety fitness determination (SFD) regulations consider motor carriers’ adoption and use of safety technologies in a carrier’s safety rating — in an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) issued last year.
The OOIDA Foundation, an affiliate of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, is reviewing the studies mentioned in the notice, an OOIDA spokesman told FreightWaves.
In comments filed on the ANPRM, OOIDA, which represents small-business truckers, maintained that installing safety technologies does not ensure improved safety.
“We believe rewarding carriers that simply adopt safety technologies without improving actual safety performance would only benefit motor carriers who can afford costly new technologies,” OOIDA stated. “If these motor carriers are rewarded with better safety ratings, then smaller carriers would likely see their safety rating downgraded without any actual change in their safety performance.
“We would also note that CMVs equipped with safety technologies today still end up in crashes. Driver training, experience, and safety performance must still be valued … over the mere installation of safety technologies.”
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) sided with OOIDA in opposing FMCSA formulating a rule that would consider a carrier’s use of safety technology into the SFD.
In comments filed on the ANPRM, CVSA asserted that if a motor carrier that proactively deploys safety technology intended to prevent or mitigate the severity of crashes ends up receiving an “unfit” designation from FMCSA, the technology is not having its intended benefit.
“Either the technology has been purchased but is not being used properly, or the motor carrier’s other safety management processes are so insufficient that their poor performance offsets the safety benefit of the technology,” CVSA stated.
“Either way, the end result is that the SFD methodology has identified patterns of unsafe behavior that could, if deemed accurate, justify removing the motor carrier from operations. That determination should not be masked by adjustments to the SFD methodology in an attempt to reward carriers for deploying safety technology unsuccessfully.”
Reports and studies that FMCSA may consider in formulating a new safety rule:
- Bell, Jennifer L., et al. (2017). “Evaluation of an in-vehicle monitoring system (IVMS) to reduce risky driving behaviors in commercial drivers: Comparison of in-cab warning lights and supervisory coaching with videos of driving behavior.” Journal of Safety Research.
- Cicchino, Jessica B. (2017). “Effectiveness of forward collision warning and autonomous emergency braking systems in reducing front-to-rear crash rates.” Accident Analysis & Prevention.
- Lotan, Tsippy and Toledo, Tomer (2006). “In-vehicle data recorder for evaluation of driving behavior and safety.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
- Cai, Maio, et al. (2021). “The association between crashes and safety-critical events: Synthesized evidence from crash reports and naturalistic driving data among commercial truck drivers.” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies.
- Chen, Guang Xiang (2008). “Impact of federal compliance reviews of trucking companies in reducing highway truck crashes.” Accident Analysis & Prevention.
- NHTSA (2023). 2021 FARS/CRSS coding and validation manual.
- Teoh, Eric R. (2021) “Effectiveness of front crash prevention systems in reducing large truck real-world crash rates.” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Related articles:
Quentin Cooper
I found over the years the best. Safety mechanism in a truck is the driver that’s been Well, trained by veteran driver that has at least 2 million miles under his or her belt after The Trainee spends at least a month on the road with a veteran Driver They will have the common sense and the Knowledge to be safe .the three biggest causes of accidents is driver trying to beet the clock bye driving to fast and dodging in and out of traffic. And driving drowsy and being distracted.
Doug Johnson
Very bad idea they need to operate one of those trucks before implementing that I had a front sensor go out on me while driving truck broke hard to avoid something in front of me and there was nothing there almost cost a bad accident and cold and wet conditions a lot of those systems fail so they need to rethink that
Michael Stoltz
Safety devices help, but good driving habits are key to safety. I get flustered with all the cars flying around, and think they should be governed. Then I see all the trucks breaking the speed limit and realize these Professional Drivers will guarentee truck’s get governed. Too many Truck Drivers only see the dollar signs, and somehow associate speed with money. There are also the newer O/O that associate going off the clock and running over legal hrs makes more money, which it does. So in the future all trucks will be governed and there will be tougher penalties.
Joh Sawatzky
I believe those safety ratings would not change or help anything. It is the 4 wheelers. Is that 95% of the time? Create a problem for a big rig. Let us assume that 4 wheelers would also be liable for drug and alcohol test as truck drivers are. When a 4 Wheeler, pass me on the right shoulder. Just to get around me and get off the next exit. If I have crashed into him I would have fault for that.
Because I rearranded him. That is not right.
Mike
So the fmcsa (government) wants all companies to use the latest technology and gain “points” with the government. Stranding and closing all small trucking business and O/O trucks. Eventually, only big truck companies will be around and somebody will notice and cry “monopoly”. Government in its infinite wisdom creates its on nightmares. SMH
James E Young
I think what really should happen is whatever is passed for the commercial drive should also be done for the normal drivers. You want speed limiters then put it in ALL vehicles. You want safety regulations start with the vehicles that are out of control , the automobiles.
Andrew Dockhorn
No amount of technology can mitigate the danger posed by a company that cannot, or will not, properly maintain the equipment they’re putting out on the road. “ Horseshoes and hand grenades “ is not a mission statement; relying on drivers’ skill & luck has an inevitable conclusion.
Chuck
The safest truck is tne one that is parked. The safest driver is the unemployed one . And then you ask why we are in desperate need of truck and bus drivers. The 2024 new rules & regulations will not help either the truck or bus industry. If you are in the business you know the regulations are NOT written for the improvement , but for the HEFTY fines they will impose.