Beyond Compliance Program, 22770-22772 [2015-09463]
Download as PDF
22770
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 78 / Thursday, April 23, 2015 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0124]
Beyond Compliance Program
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for public
comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Transportation and motor carriers have
invested millions of dollars in research,
development, and implementation of
strategies and technologies to reduce
truck and bus crashes. FMCSA is
evaluating the impacts of considering a
company’s proactive voluntary
implementation of state-of-the-art best
practices and technologies when
evaluating the carrier’s safety. FMCSA
requests responses to specific questions
and any supporting data the Agency
should consider in the potential
development of a Beyond Compliance
program. Beyond Compliance would
include voluntary programs
implemented by motor carriers that
exceed regulatory requirements, and
improve the safety of commercial motor
vehicles and drivers operating on the
Nations’ roadways by reducing the
number and severity of crashes. Beyond
Compliance would not result in
regulatory relief.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
bearing the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA–
2015–0124 using any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
Each submission must include the
Agency name and the docket number for
this notice. Note that DOT posts all
comments received without change to
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a
comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Apr 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at
any time or visit Room W12–140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The online Federal document
management system is available 24
hours each day, 365 days each year. If
you want acknowledgment that we
received your comments, please include
a self-addressed, stamped envelope or
postcard or print the acknowledgment
page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bill Mahorney, Chief, Enforcement
Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
Telephone 202–493–0000, E-Mail:
Bill.Mahorney@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FMCSA Research
During the past 10 years, FMCSA,
Canada, Australia, and other countries
have completed studies that provided
information on Beyond Compliance
programs and technology. For example,
the FMCSA ‘‘Driver Notification
Feasibility Study,’’ tested the use of an
Employer Notification System (ENS)
versus the current annual requirement
for obtaining a driver motor vehicle
record and reviewing the driver
qualification files for violations. This
report found that when registered
carriers in that study received near realtime notification that a driver had been
issued a citation, conviction or
commercial driver’s license
disqualification, they took action. This
study estimated that Nationwide
implementation of ENS could prevent
6,828 crashes and 88 fatalities
annually.1 In addition, in 2005, the
Agency completed additional studies on
roll stability control systems 2 and tire
1 Smith, M., Owens, N., Stock, D., Lantz, B.,
Murray, D. and Sensiba, G. 2005. Driver Violation
Notification Service Feasibility Study. Prepared by
Science Applications International Corporation for
the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration,
USDOT.
2 Murray, D., S. Shackelford and A. Houser.
Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Roll Stability
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
pressure sensors 3 that demonstrate the
safety benefits of these technologies.
Likewise, a 2009 FMCSA study,
‘‘Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Lane
Departure Warning Systems for the
Trucking Industry,’’ 4 predicted a
reduction of 1,973 injuries and 100
fatalities annually through use of that
technology. This report projected that
for each $1 spent on this technology, the
return on investment was $1.98.
Additionally, in development of the
Agency’s Compliance, Safety,
Accountable program, FMCSA
conducted six listening sessions. In
those sessions, it was agreed that an
incentive-based approach to improving
carrier safety would be a more effective
tool than the current penalty-based
system.
Transportation Research Board (TRB)
In 2007, the TRB explored the
potential for integrating certification
programs with regulatory frameworks.5
The TRB research suggested that a pilot
program for Beyond Compliance
activities, certification, and
identification of best practices be
conducted. The 2007 report concluded
that Beyond Compliance programs
could provide significant incentives for
carriers to adopt best practices.
However, that study recommended
additional research was needed to
determine the level of effectiveness that
a Beyond Compliance approach would
have on safety.
On April 3, 2014, TRB’s Truck and
Bus Safety Research Committee
published its ‘‘Overview of Truck and
Bus Safety Research Needs,’’ which
included a request for implementation
of a Beyond Compliance pilot test to
‘‘Develop, evaluate and promote new
safety strategies, including technology
applications, for appropriate carriers
using discrete incentives or
inducements, such as tax credits or
exemptions relating to FMCSA’s
Control Systems for the Trucking Industry.
Publication FMCSA–RRT–09–020. Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 2009.
3 FMCSA. July 2005. Technical Brief: Commercial
Motor Vehicle Tire Pressure Sensors. Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation.
4 Murray, D., S. Shackelford and A. Houser.
Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Lane Departure
Warning Systems for the Trucking Industry.
Publication FMCSA–RRT–09–022. Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 2009.
5 Bergoffen, G., Short, J., Inderbitzen, B. and
Daecher, C. 2007. Commercial Truck and Bus Safety
Synthesis 12: Commercial Motor Vehicle Carrier
Safety Management Certification. Transportation
Research Board.
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 78 / Thursday, April 23, 2015 / Notices
Compliance, Safety, Accountability
(CSA) system.’’ 6
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
American Transportation Research
Institute (ATRI)
In January 2011, the American
Transportation Research Institute
(ATRI) released a report titled,
‘‘Assessing the Benefits of Alternative
Compliance.’’ 7 The ATRI research was
premised on the hypothesis that new
approaches were needed to achieve the
next significant improvement in the
national highway safety statistics. The
ATRI report identified possible
alternatives for giving credit against
things like Behavior Analysis System
Improvement Category (BASIC) scores,
based on motor carrier activities that are
believed to provide safety and/or crash
reduction benefits. In its analysis, ATRI
considered carrier safety data for preand post-Compliance Review time
periods. These were cross-factored by
fleet sizes to determine the safety
impact and significance of existing
versus emerging safety compliance.
Carrier Compliance Reviews and out-ofservice rates were examined based on
the safety rating received and carrier
size to determine whether a Beyond
Compliance program would benefit
certain fleet sizes. Previous pre- and
post-Compliance Review crash rate data
were examined to identify carriers most
affected by traditional compliance
activities.
The ATRI report also considered
implementation methods such as the
Inspection Selection System (ISS). ATRI
hypothesized that participation in a
Beyond Compliance program could
mean that a carrier would be provided
with a 20 point leeway on the ISS
inspection value. For example, an
original ISS score of 60 would be
modified by 20 points resulting in a new
value of 40. Therefore, the Beyond
Compliance program would be used as
a reward system for carriers. The ATRI
report also proposed credit in FMCSA’s
Safety Measurement System (SMS) for
voluntary participation. ATRI also
proposed other incentives beyond
FMCSA’s jurisdiction, including
insurance costs decreases and tax
credits.
Other Programs
FMCSA is aware of other nongovernmental safety-related programs
that have been voluntarily implemented
by some motor carriers because they
6 https://rns.trb.org/dproject.asp?n=36343.
7 ‘‘Assessing the Benefits of Alternative
Compliance,’’ January 2011, Daniel C. Murray,
Steve Keppler, Micah Lueck, Katie Fender,
American Transportation Research Institute, St.
Paul, MN.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Apr 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
resulted in cost savings and safety
benefits. These include, but are not
limited to:
• North American Fatigue
Management Program;
• ISO 9000;
• National Private Truck Council’s
Best Practices Program;
• North American Transportation
Management Institute’s (NATMI)
Certification Program;
• Partners in Compliance (PIC);
Outside of the United States, FMCSA
is aware of the successful
implementation of the Maintenance
Management Accreditation Scheme, the
Australian Trucking Association’s
TruckSafe Program, and the Canadian
Standards Association Safety
Management System, which all
encourage voluntary best practices and
safety improvement programs.
FMCSA’s Waiver, Exemption, and Pilot
Programs
FMCSA is not considering regulatory
relief as part of the Beyond Compliance
program, because the Agency already
has an existing process for seeking
waivers for up to 90 days, applying for
exemptions of up to 2 years (which can
be renewed), and pilot programs that
may run for up to 3 years. Through each
of these processes, the Agency can
provide relief from certain safety
regulations as long as the terms and
conditions of the waiver, exemption or
pilot program ensure a level of safety
equivalent to or greater than what
would be achieved through compliance
with the safety regulations. These
processes are explained in 49 CFR part
381.
A pilot program is a formal project
established by FMCSA in accordance
with Part 381 to test the effectiveness of
certain safety strategies or technologies,
using a group of carriers and/or drivers.
A pilot program includes relief from
specified regulations during the life of
the pilot program, up to 3 years, to
allow testing of alternatives. Part 381
includes formal requirements for a pilot
program.
While FMCSA is not considering
waivers, exemptions, and pilot
programs as Beyond Compliance, the
Agency welcomes the opportunity to
work with the private sector to conduct
demonstration projects. A
demonstration project is an informal
effort, to show that certain safety
strategies can be effective in reducing
crashes. Individual carriers or groups of
carriers may design and implement their
own demonstration projects, or
voluntarily participate in any sponsored
by FMCSA.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22771
Motor Carrier Safety Advisory
Committee (MCSAC) Tasking
On March 30, 2015, FMCSA tasked
the MCSAC with providing
recommendations to the Agency on the
potential benefits and feasibility of
voluntary compliance and ways to
credit carriers and drivers who initiate
and establish programs that promote
safety beyond the standards established
in FMCSA regulations.
The Agency specifically asked for the
views of the MCSAC on this concept,
with any data or analysis to support it
with regard to 3 basic areas:
1. What voluntary technologies or
safety program best practices would be
appropriate for beyond compliance?
2. What type of incentives would
encourage motor carriers to invest in
technologies and best practices
programs?
3. How would FMCSA verify the
voluntary technologies or safety
programs were being implemented?
Per the tasking to the MCSAC, a letter
report should be provided to the
Administrator outlining
recommendations on incentives for
increased safety compliance by the
MCSAC’s June 2015 meeting.
Request for Comments
In determining possible development
of a Beyond Compliance program,
FMCSA seeks responses to the following
specific questions and encourages the
submission of any other reports or data
on this issue.
1. What voluntary technologies or
safety program best practices would be
appropriate for a Beyond Compliance
program?
2. What safety performance metrics
should be used to evaluate the success
of voluntarily implemented
technologies or safety program best
practices?
3. What incentives would encourage
motor carriers to invest in technologies
and best practices programs?
a. Credit on appropriate SMS scores
(e.g., credit in Driver Fitness for use of
an employer notification system)?
b. Credit on ISS scores?
c. Reduction in roadside inspection
frequency?
d. Other options?
4. What events should cause the
incentives to be removed?
a. If safety goals for the carrier are not
consistently achieved, what is the
benefit to the motoring public?
5. Should this program be developed
by the private sector like PrePass, ISO
9000, or Canada’s Partners in
Compliance (PIC)?
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
22772
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 78 / Thursday, April 23, 2015 / Notices
6. How would FMCSA verify that the
voluntary technologies or safety
programs were being implemented?
Issued on: April 17, 2015.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015–09463 Filed 4–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0154; FMCSA–
2012–0332]
Qualification of Drivers; Application for
Exemptions; Hearing
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
AGENCY:
FMCSA announces its
decision to grant requests from 4
individuals for exemptions from the
Agency’s physical qualifications
standard concerning hearing for
interstate drivers. The current regulation
prohibits individuals who do not meet
the standard from operating CMVs in
interstate commerce. After notice and
opportunity for public comment, the
Agency concluded that granting
exemptions for these CMV drivers will
provide a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level of
safety maintained without the
exemptions. The exemptions are valid
for a 2-year peiod and may be renewed,
and the exemptions preempt State laws
and regulations.
DATES: The exemptions are effective
April 23, 2015. The exemptions expire
on April 24, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Office of
Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety, (202)
366–4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov,
FMCSA, Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W64–224, Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
A. Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online
through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at:
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov
and/or Room W12–140 on the ground
level of the West Building, 1200 New
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Apr 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
B. Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315,
FMCSA may grant an exemption from
the safety regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ‘‘such exemption would likely
achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level
that would be achieved absent such
exemption.’’ The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end
of the 2-year period. The current
provisions of the FMCSRs concerning
hearing state that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person:
First perceives a forced whispered voice in
the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested
by use of an audiometric device, does not
have an average hearing loss in the better ear
greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz,
and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid
when the audiometric device is calibrated to
American National Standard (formerly ASA
Standard) Z24.5—1951.
49 CFR 391.41(b)(11). This standard was
adopted in 1970, with a revision in 1971
to allow drivers to be qualified under
this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970)
and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
FMCSA grants 4 individuals an
exemption from the regulatory
requirement in § 391.41(b)(11) allowing
individuals who do not meet the
hearing requirements to operate CMVs
in interstate commerce for a 2-year
period. The Agency’s decision on these
exemption applications is based on the
current medical literature and
information and the ‘‘Executive
Summary on Hearing, Vestibular
Function and Commercial Motor
Driving Safety’’ (the 2008 Evidence
Report) presented to FMCSA on August
26, 2008. The evidence report reached
two conclusions regarding the matter of
hearing loss and CMV driver safety: (1)
No studies that examined the
relationship between hearing loss and
crash risk exclusively among CMV
drivers were identified; and (2) evidence
from studies of the private driver license
holder population does not support the
contention that individuals with hearing
impairment are at an increased risk for
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a crash. In addition, the Agency
reviewed the applicant’s driving record
found in the CDLIS,1 for CDL holders,
and interstate and intrastate inspections
recorded in MCMIS.2 The Agency
acknowledges there could be potential
consequences of a driver being hearing
impaired and/or deaf while operating a
CMV under some scenarios. However,
the Agency believes the drivers covered
by the exemptions do not pose a risk to
public safety.
C. Comments
FMCSA announced the exemption
applications and requested public
comment for each of the applicants in
the notices below. For those applicants
discussed in a previous notice but who
are not mentioned in this notice, the
Agency has announced its decision in a
previous notice.
Docket # FMCSA–2012–0154
On May 25, 2012, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of exemption
applications and requested public
comment on 45 individuals. The
comment period ended on July 30, 2012.
This application was in response to a
request from the National Association of
the Deaf (NAD). In response to this
notice, FMCSA received 570 comments
and granted 40 exemptions. The 570
comments were addressed in the
Agency’s notice published on February
1, 2013 (78 FR 7479).
Docket # FMCSA–2012–0332
On July 16, 2013, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of exemption
applications and requested public
comment on 9 individuals. The
comment period ended on August 15,
2013. In response to the notice, FMCSA
received seven comments. All seven
commenters support the idea of granting
exemptions.
D. Exemptions Granted
Following individualized assessments
of the exemption applications, FMCSA
grants exemptions from 49 CFR
391.41(b)(11) to 4 individuals. Under
current FMCSA regulations, all of the 4
drivers receiving exemptions from 49
CFR 391.41(b)(11) would have been
1 Commercial Driver License Information System
(CDLIS) is an information system that allows the
exchange of commercial driver licensing
information among all the States. CDLIS includes
the databases of 51 licensing jurisdictions and the
CDLIS Central Site, all connected by a
telecommunications network.
2 Motor Carrier Management Information System
(MCMIS) is an information system that captures
data from field offices through SAFETYNET,
CAPRI, and other sources. It is a source for FMCSA
inspection, crash, compliance review, safety audit,
and registration data.
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22770-22772]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09463]
[[Page 22770]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0124]
Beyond Compliance Program
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Transportation and motor carriers have
invested millions of dollars in research, development, and
implementation of strategies and technologies to reduce truck and bus
crashes. FMCSA is evaluating the impacts of considering a company's
proactive voluntary implementation of state-of-the-art best practices
and technologies when evaluating the carrier's safety. FMCSA requests
responses to specific questions and any supporting data the Agency
should consider in the potential development of a Beyond Compliance
program. Beyond Compliance would include voluntary programs implemented
by motor carriers that exceed regulatory requirements, and improve the
safety of commercial motor vehicles and drivers operating on the
Nations' roadways by reducing the number and severity of crashes.
Beyond Compliance would not result in regulatory relief.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0124 using any of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The online Federal document management system
is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgment
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bill Mahorney, Chief, Enforcement
Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, Telephone 202-493-0000, E-Mail:
Bill.Mahorney@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FMCSA Research
During the past 10 years, FMCSA, Canada, Australia, and other
countries have completed studies that provided information on Beyond
Compliance programs and technology. For example, the FMCSA ``Driver
Notification Feasibility Study,'' tested the use of an Employer
Notification System (ENS) versus the current annual requirement for
obtaining a driver motor vehicle record and reviewing the driver
qualification files for violations. This report found that when
registered carriers in that study received near real-time notification
that a driver had been issued a citation, conviction or commercial
driver's license disqualification, they took action. This study
estimated that Nationwide implementation of ENS could prevent 6,828
crashes and 88 fatalities annually.\1\ In addition, in 2005, the Agency
completed additional studies on roll stability control systems \2\ and
tire pressure sensors \3\ that demonstrate the safety benefits of these
technologies. Likewise, a 2009 FMCSA study, ``Analysis of Benefits and
Costs of Lane Departure Warning Systems for the Trucking Industry,''
\4\ predicted a reduction of 1,973 injuries and 100 fatalities annually
through use of that technology. This report projected that for each $1
spent on this technology, the return on investment was $1.98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Smith, M., Owens, N., Stock, D., Lantz, B., Murray, D. and
Sensiba, G. 2005. Driver Violation Notification Service Feasibility
Study. Prepared by Science Applications International Corporation
for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, USDOT.
\2\ Murray, D., S. Shackelford and A. Houser. Analysis of
Benefits and Costs of Roll Stability Control Systems for the
Trucking Industry. Publication FMCSA-RRT-09-020. Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
2009.
\3\ FMCSA. July 2005. Technical Brief: Commercial Motor Vehicle
Tire Pressure Sensors. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation.
\4\ Murray, D., S. Shackelford and A. Houser. Analysis of
Benefits and Costs of Lane Departure Warning Systems for the
Trucking Industry. Publication FMCSA-RRT-09-022. Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, in development of the Agency's Compliance, Safety,
Accountable program, FMCSA conducted six listening sessions. In those
sessions, it was agreed that an incentive-based approach to improving
carrier safety would be a more effective tool than the current penalty-
based system.
Transportation Research Board (TRB)
In 2007, the TRB explored the potential for integrating
certification programs with regulatory frameworks.\5\ The TRB research
suggested that a pilot program for Beyond Compliance activities,
certification, and identification of best practices be conducted. The
2007 report concluded that Beyond Compliance programs could provide
significant incentives for carriers to adopt best practices. However,
that study recommended additional research was needed to determine the
level of effectiveness that a Beyond Compliance approach would have on
safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Bergoffen, G., Short, J., Inderbitzen, B. and Daecher, C.
2007. Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis 12: Commercial Motor
Vehicle Carrier Safety Management Certification. Transportation
Research Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 3, 2014, TRB's Truck and Bus Safety Research Committee
published its ``Overview of Truck and Bus Safety Research Needs,''
which included a request for implementation of a Beyond Compliance
pilot test to ``Develop, evaluate and promote new safety strategies,
including technology applications, for appropriate carriers using
discrete incentives or inducements, such as tax credits or exemptions
relating to FMCSA's
[[Page 22771]]
Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) system.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://rns.trb.org/dproject.asp?n=36343.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI)
In January 2011, the American Transportation Research Institute
(ATRI) released a report titled, ``Assessing the Benefits of
Alternative Compliance.'' \7\ The ATRI research was premised on the
hypothesis that new approaches were needed to achieve the next
significant improvement in the national highway safety statistics. The
ATRI report identified possible alternatives for giving credit against
things like Behavior Analysis System Improvement Category (BASIC)
scores, based on motor carrier activities that are believed to provide
safety and/or crash reduction benefits. In its analysis, ATRI
considered carrier safety data for pre- and post-Compliance Review time
periods. These were cross-factored by fleet sizes to determine the
safety impact and significance of existing versus emerging safety
compliance. Carrier Compliance Reviews and out-of-service rates were
examined based on the safety rating received and carrier size to
determine whether a Beyond Compliance program would benefit certain
fleet sizes. Previous pre- and post-Compliance Review crash rate data
were examined to identify carriers most affected by traditional
compliance activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Assessing the Benefits of Alternative Compliance,''
January 2011, Daniel C. Murray, Steve Keppler, Micah Lueck, Katie
Fender, American Transportation Research Institute, St. Paul, MN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ATRI report also considered implementation methods such as the
Inspection Selection System (ISS). ATRI hypothesized that participation
in a Beyond Compliance program could mean that a carrier would be
provided with a 20 point leeway on the ISS inspection value. For
example, an original ISS score of 60 would be modified by 20 points
resulting in a new value of 40. Therefore, the Beyond Compliance
program would be used as a reward system for carriers. The ATRI report
also proposed credit in FMCSA's Safety Measurement System (SMS) for
voluntary participation. ATRI also proposed other incentives beyond
FMCSA's jurisdiction, including insurance costs decreases and tax
credits.
Other Programs
FMCSA is aware of other non-governmental safety-related programs
that have been voluntarily implemented by some motor carriers because
they resulted in cost savings and safety benefits. These include, but
are not limited to:
North American Fatigue Management Program;
ISO 9000;
National Private Truck Council's Best Practices Program;
North American Transportation Management Institute's
(NATMI) Certification Program;
Partners in Compliance (PIC);
Outside of the United States, FMCSA is aware of the successful
implementation of the Maintenance Management Accreditation Scheme, the
Australian Trucking Association's TruckSafe Program, and the Canadian
Standards Association Safety Management System, which all encourage
voluntary best practices and safety improvement programs.
FMCSA's Waiver, Exemption, and Pilot Programs
FMCSA is not considering regulatory relief as part of the Beyond
Compliance program, because the Agency already has an existing process
for seeking waivers for up to 90 days, applying for exemptions of up to
2 years (which can be renewed), and pilot programs that may run for up
to 3 years. Through each of these processes, the Agency can provide
relief from certain safety regulations as long as the terms and
conditions of the waiver, exemption or pilot program ensure a level of
safety equivalent to or greater than what would be achieved through
compliance with the safety regulations. These processes are explained
in 49 CFR part 381.
A pilot program is a formal project established by FMCSA in
accordance with Part 381 to test the effectiveness of certain safety
strategies or technologies, using a group of carriers and/or drivers. A
pilot program includes relief from specified regulations during the
life of the pilot program, up to 3 years, to allow testing of
alternatives. Part 381 includes formal requirements for a pilot
program.
While FMCSA is not considering waivers, exemptions, and pilot
programs as Beyond Compliance, the Agency welcomes the opportunity to
work with the private sector to conduct demonstration projects. A
demonstration project is an informal effort, to show that certain
safety strategies can be effective in reducing crashes. Individual
carriers or groups of carriers may design and implement their own
demonstration projects, or voluntarily participate in any sponsored by
FMCSA.
Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC) Tasking
On March 30, 2015, FMCSA tasked the MCSAC with providing
recommendations to the Agency on the potential benefits and feasibility
of voluntary compliance and ways to credit carriers and drivers who
initiate and establish programs that promote safety beyond the
standards established in FMCSA regulations.
The Agency specifically asked for the views of the MCSAC on this
concept, with any data or analysis to support it with regard to 3 basic
areas:
1. What voluntary technologies or safety program best practices
would be appropriate for beyond compliance?
2. What type of incentives would encourage motor carriers to invest
in technologies and best practices programs?
3. How would FMCSA verify the voluntary technologies or safety
programs were being implemented?
Per the tasking to the MCSAC, a letter report should be provided to
the Administrator outlining recommendations on incentives for increased
safety compliance by the MCSAC's June 2015 meeting.
Request for Comments
In determining possible development of a Beyond Compliance program,
FMCSA seeks responses to the following specific questions and
encourages the submission of any other reports or data on this issue.
1. What voluntary technologies or safety program best practices
would be appropriate for a Beyond Compliance program?
2. What safety performance metrics should be used to evaluate the
success of voluntarily implemented technologies or safety program best
practices?
3. What incentives would encourage motor carriers to invest in
technologies and best practices programs?
a. Credit on appropriate SMS scores (e.g., credit in Driver Fitness
for use of an employer notification system)?
b. Credit on ISS scores?
c. Reduction in roadside inspection frequency?
d. Other options?
4. What events should cause the incentives to be removed?
a. If safety goals for the carrier are not consistently achieved,
what is the benefit to the motoring public?
5. Should this program be developed by the private sector like
PrePass, ISO 9000, or Canada's Partners in Compliance (PIC)?
[[Page 22772]]
6. How would FMCSA verify that the voluntary technologies or safety
programs were being implemented?
Issued on: April 17, 2015.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015-09463 Filed 4-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P