Compliance and Regulatory Update: March, 2018

Having trouble viewing this email?
Click here

Compliance and Regulatory Update: March, 2018

FMCSA Issues Guidance

Crash Preventability Program

The Crash Preventability Demonstration Program gives motor carriers a chance to submit information via the DataQ system relating to crash preventability. More to the point, if the submission is successful, the crash will be listed as non-preventable on the CSA web site. Since the program started last August more than 2,500 requests have been received. Recently the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published guidance to clarify the process and ensure that the requests meet the guidelines and are properly submitted. If improperly submitted there will be no action taken.

Some submitters have incorrectly selected ”Not an FMCSA-reportable crash” prior to entering the information. This selection is for those crashes that do not meet FMCSA’s recordable crash definition of a fatality, injury, or property damage requiring a vehicle to be towed from the scene. Carriers use this option to request that it be removed from their record.

For the crash preventability demonstration program, choose ”Crash could not be prevented” and select an eligible crash type as listed below:

1. When the commercial motor vehicle (CMV) was struck by a motorist driving under the influence (or related offense);

2. When the CMV was struck by a motorist driving the wrong direction;

3. When the CMV was struck in the rear;

4. When the CMV was struck while it was legally stopped or parked, including when the vehicle was unattended;

5. When the CMV struck an individual committing or attempting to commit suicide by stepping or driving in front of the CMV;

6. When the CMV sustained disabling damage after striking an animal in the roadway;

7. When the crash was the result of an infrastructure failure, falling trees, rocks, or other debris; or

8. When the CMV was struck by cargo or equipment from another vehicle.

Problems Resulting in Ineligibility

1. Crashes that do not match any eligible crash type.

2. Asserting the driver who struck the CMV was operating under the influence without any supporting evidence, such as documents showing testing results, citation, or arrest.

3. Crashes identified as ”struck by a motorist driving the wrong direction” where the vehicle that struck the CMV was not operating completely in the wrong lane and in the wrong direction. These crashes do not include when the vehicle that struck the CMV swerved across the center line but did not travel entirely in the wrong lane and in the wrong direction. In addition, this crash type does not include crashes at intersections, crashes with vehicles completing a U-turn, or when a vehicle traveling in the same direction as the CMV crashes into the CMV for whatever reason. Eligible crashes include when the vehicle that struck the CMV completely crossed the median or center line and traveled into opposing traffic or was operating in the wrong direction on a divided highway.

4. Crashes where the CMV was struck in other places on the vehicle, but not in the rear. For the purposes of this demonstration program, FMCSA is defining ”struck in the rear” to mean only crashes when the rear plane of the CMV was struck. Crashes where the CMV was struck on the side near the rear of the vehicle, or other places on the vehicle, are not eligible. This includes crashes where the vehicle was struck at the 7 o’clock or 5 o’clock positions.

5. Crashes when the vehicle was stopped in traffic and not legally stopped or parked.

6. Alleging a suicide attempt without any supporting evidence.

7. Indicating the CMV struck other vehicles stopped for a fallen tree or rocks, but the CMV did not strike the tree or rocks.

8. Asserting the CMV was struck by cargo or equipment, but the documentation establishes the CMV was actually hit by another vehicle.

Documents To Be Submitted

Because the burden is on the submitter to show by compelling evidence that the crash was not preventable, they should include all relevant evidence. FMCSA is not, however, requiring any specific documentation.The Agency could request additional information on the crash, which may include any documentation the carrier is required to maintain under the Agency’s regulations. To date, FMCSA has requested proof of a valid CDL and valid Medical Certificate.

Re-Opening Reqeuests

If a submitter receives a determination that the crash was preventable or undecided, or the request is closed for another reason, the request may be reopened once and will be reconsidered only if additional documentation or new information is submitted. If additional information or documentation is not provided, the request will be closed without further consideration.

For more information, use this link to view the FMCSA video

Detention Time Study

Finds Link to Safety

The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act) directed the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to issue regulations that cover the collection of data on delays experienced by drivers prior to the loading and unloading of their vehicles. The act also directed the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to report on the effects of driver detention and that report was recently released.

Accurate industry-wide data on driver detention does not currently exist because most industry stakeholders measure only time spent at a shipper or receiver’s facility beyond the limit established in shipping contracts. Available electronic data cannot readily discern detention time from legitimate loading and unloading tasks, and are unavailable for a large segment of the industry. The OIG estimated that a 15-minute increase in average dwell time-the total time spent by a truck at a facility-increases the average expected crash rate by 6.2 percent. In addition, they estimated that detention is associated with reductions in annual earnings of $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion for for-hire commercial motor vehicle drivers in the truckload sector.

To estimate safety impacts, given the limitations of available data on driver detention, the OIG used statistical methods that enable estimation with limited information and measurement error. The data available included 2013 data assembled for a 2014 FMCSA-sponsored study of detention and FMCSA safety data.

In response to the FAST Act directive, FMCSA plans to collect data on driver detention through use of a reporting form on its public website that drivers and carriers can use to voluntarily submit data on detention. However, FMCSA’s plan does not call for collection or detailed analysis of reliable or representative data, and the Agency has no plans to verify the data that motor carriers and drivers would provide. According to an FMCSA official, the costs of rigorous data collection and analysis would likely outweigh the benefit and the Agency primarily views detention as a market efficiency problem best addressed by private industry rather than through government action.

Although the Office of Inspector General’s report reached a conclusion that there is a link between detention time and safety, it was based on “statistical methods that enable estimation with limited information” and, as such, it’s really not possible to achieve a higher level of accuracy. Also, since FMCSA’s future data collection will be more anecdotal in nature, an in depth statistical analysis won’t be possible. Unless something changes detention will remain, as FMCSA says, a market efficiency problem.