Testimony of Thomas J. Donohue, ATA E. SAFETY ENFORCEMENT SHOULD NOT BE A STRATEGY TO RAISE MONEY Since the inception of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program in 1982, ATA has been a strong advocate of this safety program. We have sought increases in funding levels because we wanted to make sure that all carriers were following the safety rules. We believe that the funding for this program should be sustained so the program remains a safety program, and not become a program for the states to raise monies. The issue of using fines as a source of revenue and not as a deterrent factor is being addressed by the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance by establishing a schedule of uniform sanctions for violations. However, we are hearing growing concerns that tickets or citations are being issued for the most trivial violations and high fines are being assessed. For example, on May 9 at an eastern-central state inspection point, a driver was over hours and placed out-of-service. The driver was only over the 70 hour limit by less than one hour. However, in addition, the driver received a fine of $1,010.00! This is not what the program is all about, and we are willing to work with you and DOT to ensure that the program remain "safety focused." We do not want truck safety enforcement to be the modern day equivalent of the old small-town speed trap. F. IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED IN SAFETY RATING PROCESS The FHWA is evaluating the procedures currently used to determine Safety Fitness Ratings and exploring other approaches, in order to develop an improved motor carrier safety fitness determination process. Testimony of Thomas J. Donohue, ATA The safety ratings are used to determine which motor carriers need an in-depth investigation of serious areas of non-compliance. FHWA also uses the rating to sort motor carriers into different programs for educational and enforcement activities. These ratings, which have been assigned to over one hundred thousand motor carriers, are available to the general public and can be obtained by a simple a telephone request. While the safety rating of a carrier is used as a tool by FHWA in helping to prioritize which motor carriers are scheduled for follow-up reviews, the safety rating has an entirely different impact on the carriers. The for-hire motor carrier industry is under scrutiny by shippers in their efforts to define the "best" carrier to haul their products. One universal criterion being used in shippers' selection of the best carrier is the safety rating. Many shippers are even in the position of only using carriers with a "Satisfactory" rating. Under these conditions an adverse rating can become the "kiss of death" to the continuation of the carrier's retaining the shipper's business. Once a motor carrier loses the shipper's business and the shipper secures the services of other carriers, it is almost impossible for the carrier to recoup the lost business. Accordingly, FHWA must be extremely careful to ensure that the rating process denotes a true and accurate description of the carrier's over-all safety fitness. We have several items that need to be addressed in determining safety ratings of motor carriers. The first is due process. The severity of an adverse safety fitness determination requires notice to the motor carrier of the proposed change in the rating and an opportunity for the motor carrier Testimony of Thomas J. Donohue, ATA to contest the change. The safety fitness determination must be based on accurate data, with an identifiable method to correct faulty information. Second, the safety fitness determination must be restricted to items that have a direct relationship to the creation of accidents or accident risks. Grouping rating factors and assigning weighted factors distorts the true representation of the motor carrier's safety fitness posture. Finally, forcing all motor carriers into three ratings is too restrictive and fails to give a true representation of compliance. III. CONCLUSIONS ATA has in the past, and will continue to support in the future new safety programs that will enhance commercial motor vehicle safety. We have fought hard for programs that showed promise of increased safety. The results of these labors can be seen in accident trend data that show a steady decrease in truck accident rates. o Common sense must be an element in any new program consideration. We are not seeing this in the new alcohol and drug testing rules because they will not require random roadside testing, and will require preemployment testing for alcohol use that is legal. This will cost the industry millions dollars during the first year. These are dollars that could be used more effectively in other safety programs. Testimony of Thomas J. Donohue, ATA The commercial driver's license program is the foundation for identifying and keeping unfit drivers off of our highways. We are concerned that there appear to be flaws in the program. Any break-down in the CDL information system needs to be investigated immediately and corrective action taken, since the drivers that are beating the system are the worst drivers. While we support the antilock braking systems on trucks, we believe that the mandated dates for compliance and the lack of a performance standard can only result in serious setbacks in the years ahead. Roadside inspection is the best way to remove unsafe vehicles from our highways and the best deterrent for motor carriers not to operate a defective vehicle. This program must remain dedicated to safety and not become a formula to enrich the coffers of states or any political subdivision of the state. The safety rating process cannot become out-dated. The rating must be fair and accurate and based on factors that truly identify unsafe motor carriers. Thank your for the opportunity to present these important safety issues to this Subcommittee. I would be pleased to answer any questions. |