FMCSA Looks To Future And Sees Need For Major Change
The FMCSA can complete compliance reviews on only 12,000 to 13,000 carriers each year, which is less than 2% of the 650,000 carriers now on the agency's rolls.
Oliver B. Patton
Washington Editor
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has to change the way it does business or it's not going to get its job done.
That's the message agency leaders put forth at a "listening session" at which they sought industry advice on how to improve their operations.
The agency's problem is easy to describe: too many trucking companies, not enough resources.
"I cannot go to Congress and ask for another 5,000 inspectors," said agency administrator Annette Sandberg. "I would be laughed out of the room."
But under the current system it would take at least that much to keep up. The agency can complete compliance reviews on only 12,000 to 13,000 carriers each year, which is less than 2% of the 650,000 carriers now on the agency's rolls.
The agency anticipates that freight volume will grow more than 50% in the next 20 years. Moreover, it has to deal with the anticipated opening of the Mexican border to long-haul trucking, security responsibilities arising from the war on terrorism, and congressional requirements such as the new rule regulating entrance into the business.
So, like the trucking companies it regulates, the agency must figure out how to make do with what it's got.
The first step in the process is asking the industry for advice and suggestions. "We need to hear from you how to do business better," Sandberg said.
The agency held "listening sessions" around the country this fall. At the Virginia session in October, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta told the attendees that they are part of the agency's research department. The reform program that the agency has under way, called Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010, "has the potential to fundamentally reform the approach to safety enforcement," Mineta said.
The agency chose the date, 2010, because it anticipates needing that much time to implement changes, and because the process may require legislation that could be attached to the next major highway bill, Sandberg said.
One thing Sandberg already knows is that she wants to improve the way the agency goes about writing rules. She used the hours of service rule is an example of what's wrong.
The agency took its own counsel in coming up with the original proposed rule, rather than reaching out for ideas from the industry and others, she said. The resulting proposal was met with a firestorm of opposition from the industry. It took almost four years to put a scaled-back rule into place - and now that rule is in legal limbo.
"We will not do it that way again," Sandberg said. She anticipates reaching out to the industry and other interested parties for major rules.
The agency believes that the current compliance review process is effective in some respects. It has educated carriers about safety and has contributed to a reduction in accidents, said agency staffer Bob Miller.
But the process is labor intensive - a compliance review can take three days or even longer - and it can disrupt the carrier's daily operations, Miller said. Further, the result is a snapshot in time, not necessarily reflective of a dynamic situation. And, the process has created an unintended result: a superficial "seal of approval."
What the agency wants is ideas on how to reduce the burden of the compliance review process on fleets, and reach more fleets, Miller said.
What the agency got from this particular "listening session" was familiar themes. Fleet executives are looking for fairness: Uneven enforcement of the safety rules allows some fleets to gain a competitive advantage by cutting corners. They urged the agency to look for ways to pull automobile drivers into the safety equation, since upwards of 70% of accidents involving cars and trucks are initiated by the car.
One owner of a small company complained about a system that forces executives to fit into a government model that makes no sense for them. He explained that he recently put his parents on the payroll. "Do you know what it's like to tell Mom and Dad that they have to get a pre-employment drug test?"
One suggestion was for the agency to create a no-penalty compliance review: Put fines into escrow so the company can recoup a portion of the money when it comes into compliance - on the condition that they put the funds into their safety program.
Washington Report continued...
