“Minimum Training Requirements for Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators”
Notice of Withdrawal. September 19, 2013.
Lesson #1: The FMCSA sees this issue as very consequential, not least because Congress recently in MAP-21 saw fit to put it on FMCSA’s agenda anew.
Lesson #2: Because FMCSA had taken an earlier stab at this question pre-MAP-21, FMCSA responded to MAP-21 by taking a completely fresh effort at the minimum training requirements for entry-level CDL drivers.
“Lease and Interchange of Vehicles; Motor Carriers of Passengers”
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. September 20, 2013.
This goes to a problem the FMCSA has long been concerned with: the so-called “phantom” carrier, who accrues violations under a particular operating certificate and name, and then makes use of another name and perhaps operating certificate under which to continue its unsafe operations unsanctioned.
“Highway-Rail Grade Crossing; Safe Clearance”
Final Rule. September 25, 2013.
This is a major development in an area of much safety concern over accidents and also a much-litigated matter in tort cases.
The background here is detailed and complex.
Among other implications: The PHMSA and FMCSA standard set forth here will likely be incorporated into negligence standard of care instructions to juries and to judges as finders of fact under a “negligence per se” theory.
“Registration and Financial Security Requirements for Brokers of Property and Freight Forwarders
Notice. September 5, 2013.
“FMCSA has received a number of requests from motor carriers and other transportation companies requesting additional information about when registration as a broker or freight forwarder is required. The Agency has compiled a list of the most common questions and our responses and presents the information below in question-and-answer format. Continue reading
“Uniform Fine Assessment Version 4.0 Software; Calculating Amounts of Civil Penalties for Violations of Regulations”
Notice. September 3, 2013.
“…FMCSA is required to consider certain statutory factors when proposing civil penalties for violations of the FMCSRs and HMRs and since the mid-1990′s FMCSA has used its UFA software to consider those statutory factors. FMCSA has updated the UFA software to ensure that it adequately considers the statutory penalty factors for all statutes and regulations enforced by FMCSA; to implement the Agency’s policy for consideration of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act; and, to ensure uniformity in proposed civil penalties. UFA 4.0 software also considers the factors set forth in 49 U.S.C. 521(b)(2)(D) for violations of regulations where no statutory factors are otherwise specified by statute. To enhance transparency of the civil penalty calculation, UFA 4.0 generates a report detailing the calculations used to propose civil penalties. While UFA 4.0 is used to calculate the majority of civil penalties proposed by FMCSA, the Agency may propose a civil penalty outside of UFA 4.0 when the proposed civil penalty calculated by UFA 4.0 would not promote enhanced commercial motor vehicle safety or induce prompt and sustained compliance. In such cases, the Agency will nevertheless consider the applicable statutory factors to assess a penalty. This Federal Register Notice supersedes the Federal Register Notice issued by FMCSA entitled, “Civil Penalty Calculation Methodology. ” 76 FR 71431, November 17, 2011.”
Note well: “Oilfield-waiting-time” has been the topic of debate in the industry since the old Interstate Commerce Commission first issued hours-of-service rules for motor carriers in 1939. The lists of those whose equipment and operations qualify for the “oilfield-waiting-time” exclusion to hours-of-service and those whose equipment and operations do not qualify are long and detailed. And for those businesses who believe their equipment and operations are not adequately described, FMCSA invites them to apply for an exemption: “Therefore, motor carriers that believe the current oilfield operations exceptions do not provide sufficient relief for their operations should consider submitting an application for an exemption to the Agency describing an alternative that would ensure the requisite level of safety.”
“Hours of Service of Drivers of Commercial Motor Vehicles; Regulatory Guidance for Oilfield Exception”
August 12, 2013. Notice Of Regulatory Guidance; Response To Public Comments.
American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. FMCSA et al., No. 12-1092 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, August 2, 2013). Copy of court-issued opinion available here.
August 8, 2013. Guidance.
“Use of Wireless Mobile Data Devices as Transponders for the Commercial Motor Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Electronic Screening Systems”
July 19, 2013. Notice; Announcement of Policy. Continue reading