On the final day of this week’s full Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee meeting in Alexandria, Va., the committee prioritized a list of 38 different potential action items for FMCSA to consider approaching Congress with for inclusion in the next surface transportation reauthorization.
The items receiving majority votes are discussed below, and following are others that achieved up to eight votes. For more on the broad discussion from Day 1 of the meeting, see this story.
1. Exploration of requirements for broader, tougher standards for New Entrants. (15 votes) Among other ideas expressed by various MCSAC members, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association Executive Vice President Todd Spencer expressed bewilderment over the current New Entrant safety audit program, which for most freight carriers today includes a safety audit within the first 18 months of a carrier being granted new operating authority. More focused, up-front vetting that happens for passenger carriers and household goods New Entrants, Spencer said, potentially “could serve as something of a framework” for boosting vetting of Entrants in future.
Spencer later added that OOIDA believes the New Entrant audit, “whether done at 18 months or 12, is simply a waste of time and resources for all concerned. Whatever scrutiny FMCSA deems necessary to give a thumbs-up to a New Entrant should take place before the first mile is run.”
Other ideas explored in the meeting included an exploration of financial solvency, boosted insurance requirements, a rise in registration fees and more.
2. Extending the “chain of responsibility” for coercing drivers or creating conditions that force drivers to operate unsafely to shippers and other entities along the supply chain. (15 votes) Chief in MCSAC members’ consideration here were pressures on drivers resulting from excess detention times. “Shippers have been able to stay distanced from a lot of this,” noted Clark Freight Lines Operations Manager Danny Schnautz, referring to motor carrier safety issues. “If they could be brought into it, that’s a driving force behind the entire industry.”
Shippers “need to be held responsible for holding the truck up,” Schnautz added. “FMCSA needs to pursue what they can do to ensure that when a truck is held up, the company and/or the driver are paid.” Today, he said, in many instances it’s “cheaper to hold trucks up rather than pay for another forklift.” And while the issue of authority is somewhat “sticky,” he said, “it’s surmountable if we want it to be.”
