In FMCSA's eyes, you must blame the carrier

The news that FMCSA will not remove truck crashes from carriers’ CSA scores, even in instances where the truck driver was not at fault, is troubling but certainly not surprising in our modern society.

The American Trucking Assns. (ATA) led a call to adjust CSA ratings – which are publically available – when a truck-involved crash is scored. The issue, ATA and others claim, is that carriers are being unfairly burdened with responsibility for accidents that their drivers have no control over. A car slams into the rear of a stopped trailer or a car crossing the center line and hitting a truck are just two examples.

In both cases, the driver of the truck would not have been at fault, but the CSA report notes the “violation” just the same. In fact, according to the FMCSA’s own Large Truck Crash Causation study, more than 72% of accidents involving large trucks with a death resulting were not the fault of the truck driver, yet under CSA’s scoring, the public would never know that. And the public, including shippers, sees that the carrier has a “history” of incidents. That could lead to a loss of business, loss of goodwill, and ultimately, a loss of jobs.

For no sane reason.

“With FMCSA moving ahead with its CSA carrier oversight system, it is more important than ever that the agency uses not only the best data, but also common sense to ensure it is targeting the right carriers and drivers for oversight,” ATA president & CEO Bill Graves said in a statement. “By backtracking on their commitment to implement a crash accountability determination process in early 2012 to hold carriers accountable for crashes clearly caused by the actions or inactions of a truck driver, FMCSA has bowed to anti-industry interest groups and unfairly called into question the integrity of police accident reports prepared by America’s law enforcement community.”

I understand the logic of including the information in the CSA data – I think- but there doesn’t seem to be any rational explanation for it. There’s the old saying that “trouble just seems to find certain people,” but otherwise safe individuals and companies should not be penalized for the actions of others.

If this policy must continue, than perhaps it’s time for state Dept. of Transportations to require two hours of instruction on how to drive safely around big rigs for all drivers requesting a license as a condition of being approved.

Where this will eventually end, of course, is in the courts. A company somewhere that loses business as a result of an unavoidable accident that appears on their record is going to sue the automobile driver who caused the accident. It’s inevitable. And that will cost more than simply removing crash data from a file.

Discuss this Blog Entry 2

Anonymous (not verified)
on Mar 22, 2012

There are other factors to consider as well when an accident involves a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) There is the possible scenario of the accident being investigated by an Officer with little to no experience with CMV's (the mechanics, dynamics, etc..). If the person issued the citation fights the citation in court and is found not guilty, then what, data-q only to have it rejected by the Officer that investigated the accident who disagrees with the courts ruling? I have 25+ years as a PD assigned to the accident reconstruction unit, and I cannot even begin to count the number of witnesses that claimed to have seen the entire accident and give a statement that isn't even close to what the evidence, and the Laws Of Physics, indicate. I am not faulting these people in any way, as they have seen a traumatic event. It may be several days before they are able to recall with any level of accuracy what they actually observed, but on the scene at the time of the immediate investigation, they can become confused from all the commotion. and then there are some, not very many, but a very few, that it doesn't matter what happened, if a CMV is involved, the CMV is at fault. The FMCSA needs to revise the CSA scores in regards to accidents along with taking into consideration of calculating the remainder of CSA scores to include Mileage based formulas similar to those used in determining accident ratio.

Dotinspector
on Aug 12, 2012

While the issue of the investigating officer is not incorrect , most crashes are not that difficult. There can certainly be times when recon or an experienced Motor Carrier Enforcement Officer is needed to help sort things out.

I spent over 25 years as a Police Officer and approximately half that time as a MCSAP certified officer. I was also a weigh master and cert in Hazmat and cargo tank inspections.

The accident reports done by officers are certainly reliable enough as most crashes are not a whodunit. CMV's run red lights just like smart cars do. The current system is quite reliable and should be accepted by the FMCSA as accurate.

To hold carriers responsible for all crashes is reprehensible. A drunk rear ends a CMV causing injury or rendering his car unsafe and the carrier takes the hit. The CMV driver has to go for post crash testing and his CSA Basic takes the hit for a recordable crash. Imagine if your own personal car insurance worked that way !

Another unfair issue is that all trucks down to 10,000 pounds are included regardless of them being intrastate. Up to 17,000 lbs, a truck is not subject to the DOT regs if it is operating in Intrastate commerce. For the crash Basic , the 10,000-17,000 lbs are included regardless.

Carriers/ drivers indicated to be partially or fully at fault or having committed a violation should be held responsible in Basic. Otherwise, they should not be held accountable for a crash.

This is the only fair and proper way to assign blame in the Basic scores.

Also, at least in PA , the officer that did the DOT INSPECTION does not make the decision on a fatal challenge. They may be contacted for their side of the story but they do not have the final authority. I was called only twice by the PA State Police Motor Carrier Enforcement Unit that handles the dataq challenges. I did well over 800 Level One inspections during my time as an officer.

Now that I am retired , I travel to companies who either have high Basuc scores or are concerned that they dont want to get them. I will do the exact same Level One inspection that II did as an enforcement officer without any fines or OOS orders.

I can be reached through dotinspector@gmail.com

I have filed 6 dataq challenges on behalf of a carrier and won 4 of them. To file a challenge using the language of the regs is very important to having a hope of winning.

I have also applied to be on the FMCSA Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee to work towards changes in the CSA system.

Please or Register to post comments.

What's Trucking Straight Talk?

Trucking Straight Talk is designed to engage readers with fresh insight and thoughts on topics important to all the players in the trucking industry.

Blog Archive