A proposed CSA rule you can’t afford to ignore

For more than 5 years, the USDOT’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has been hoping to draft a rule that finalizes its multi-year overhaul of the government’s commercial truck and bus enforcement program, and now it has a proposed rule on the table.

Much has been written-and criticized-about the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) system that debuted in 2010. This is the system that uses company performance data generated by roadside inspections and investigations to determine which companies need to be given enhanced attention by government investigators. Warning letters, off-site reviews, full compliance reviews — all have been used to coax safety-challenged companies to get serious about improving their safety conditions.

The reformed CSA scheme, which measures companies on 7 factors, was always meant to lead up eventually to a shorthand way to use these data to accurately identify the worst companies and get them to conform to safety requirements or get them out of the trucking or motor coach business.

The final leg of that plan is what this new proposed CSA rule — Safety Fitness Determination — proposes to do. Simply on the basis of violations, prior audits and crash histories “earned” by the motor carrier, the government plans to identify and publicize those deemed “unfit” because of their safety records. Using what they say is rigorous data verification, the government is convinced it can accurately find the poorest performers and (finally) get their attention. While in the past only about 15,000 companies were reviewed and half assigned safety ratings based on a formal inspection, this CSA rule predicts that each month, it will be able to assess 75,000 carriers.

This is a dramatic increase and it spells potential trouble for companies that have been living on “borrowed time” and escaped enforcement so far. This is mainly because there are too many companies needing attention and too few government resources to investigate them. If this rule lives up to its intentions, companies will be declared “unfit” and their shippers and other customers will be likely looking for new business partners since using an unfit company places the shipper in legal peril for lawsuits.

This proposed CSA rule is definitely a “game changer” and companies are urged to scrutinize the plan and ensure they understand how, in the future, their performance on the road will be measured and how the public will be able to know about it when they are making business decisions like hiring a charter bus company or trucking company.

Small companies often rely on bigger firms and industry associations to “carry their water” and to formally comment on proposed rules. While that certainly helps to have their views heard, FMCSA also want to hear from small entities, owner-operators, shippers, insurers — the full spectrum of the motor carrier industry — to be made aware of any unintended consequences not contemplated by the rule writers.

In democracies, the people have the right to let their voices be heard when public policies affect them. This rule, like the Hours of Service rule — is more consequential than most. Don’t wait to discover a major policy change has happened, and that you were unaware and facing a potentially catastrophic business outcome. Perhaps more importantly — recognize that most final rules strongly resemble the major parts of the proposed Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. If this rule follows that same history, it means you need to get your safety house in order by addressing any underlying safety system defects that are producing a high risk safety profile.

On Day 1 of the effective date of this rule which is probably 12-18 months away, your business may face an “unfit” safety label and have to deal with the fall out. Don’t be caught flat-footed.

If you have questions about this proposed rule or its potential impact on your company, please contact me at rmcmurray@fdrsafety.com.