Do Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration safety ratings have any teeth? Freight brokers don’t seem to think so and want the agency to fix the system fast.
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision holding freight brokers liable for negligently hiring unsafe motor carriers, the industry is scrambling to navigate the new legal landscape. Part of C.H. Robinson’s argument in the Montgomery v. Caribe case was that FMCSA already determines who is and isn’t safe, so why are they burdened with double-checking its work?
Not only was that argument shut down by the Supreme Court, but FMCSA itself has acknowledged that its safety ratings should be taken with a grain of salt. Its Safety Measurement System (SMS) uses a ⚠ symbol, which, to the layperson, may look to mean a motor carrier is problematic. But FMCSA states that the symbol only indicates that the agency “may prioritize a motor carrier for further monitoring.”
“The ⚠ symbol is not intended to imply any federal safety rating of the carrier pursuant to 49 USC 31144,” FMCSA states on the SMS webpage. “Readers should not draw conclusions about a carrier’s overall safety condition simply based on the data displayed in this system.”
Furthermore, when anyone accesses the SMS homepage, they are greeted with a message informing them that once publicly available information is no longer public. That includes Crash Indicator and Hazardous Materials Compliance within the Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASIC).
With no clear safety measurements from the agency tasked with keeping unsafe motor carriers off the road, freight brokers are trying to figure out how to do it themselves in a post-Montgomery world.
C.H. Robinson, for example, no longer works with carriers with a Conditional rating and requires a seven-day waiting period for new authorities, among other changes.
But it is not known whether that would be enough to protect the broker from liability. That is why the Transportation Intermediaries Association, which represents freight brokers, has submitted a petition for rulemaking, asking FMCSA to establish a federal safety standard for motor carriers.
“In light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Montgomery v. Caribe, it is now clear that brokers and shippers continue to face an untenable burden in attempting to evaluate, develop, and apply disparate methodologies and standards (using potentially suspect data) in an effort to discern whether a federally-licensed motor carrier will nevertheless be deemed unsafe according to judges and juries in every state and federal jurisdiction across the country,” TIA states in its petition. “The determination of what motor carriers are safe to use properly rests with the federal government.”
TIA wants FMCSA to create a “carrier selection safety standard that informs brokers and shippers whether or not the use of a given motor carrier is reasonable.”
That includes verifying whether a motor carrier:
- Is registered under Section 13902 of Title 49
- Has the federal minimum insurance coverage
- Is not determined unfit to safely operate a commercial vehicle or otherwise ordered to discontinue operations by FMCSA (including not renewing a Department of Transportation registration number) or a state, for intrastate commerce
Establishing a motor carrier selection safety standard could take a long time if FMCSA accepts the challenge. In the meantime, TIA is also asking the agency to publish a list of carriers it considers to be “high risk.”
Freight brokers argue that having a federal safety standard could mitigate the unintended consequences of the Supreme Court decision. Specifically, some industry stakeholders are worried that brokers will overcorrect to avoid legal consequences. In other words, safe and compliant carriers could be excluded. A few owner-operators are claiming that it has already happened to them.
More than 90% of active interstate motor carriers have no safety rating. Of the less than 10% that do, nearly a quarter have a Conditional or Unsatisfactory rating. That means only 2% of all active carriers have a Satisfactory rating.
Revising safety fitness determinations has been in the works for years.
FMCSA held three listening sessions in 2024. Last year, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association told the Office of Management and Budget that the current safety fitness determination does not reliably assess a motor carrier’s ability to operate safely.
“Most of SFD’s shortcomings relate to the inaccuracy and inconsistency of the data that is collected and analyzed during a safety investigation,” OOIDA wrote. “As FMCSA pursues the development of a new methodology to determine when a motor carrier is unfit to operate, the agency must avoid relying on the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) and Safety Measurement Systems (SMS) programs.”
A notice of proposed rulemaking was expected to drop in June 2025. One year later, nothing. According to FMCSA’s spring 2025 agenda, a proposed rulemaking was projected for May of this year. One month later, and still no rulemaking.
“While TIA recognizes that FMCSA is actively working to modernize the SFD process, the industry cannot continue to operate effectively and provide its essential role to the U.S. economy in the absence of a clear, enforceable federal standard,” the association states in the petition. LL
Land Line Managing Editor Mark Schremmer contributed to this story.
Credit: Source link
