Safety & Compliance

FMCSA Study: Costs of Crash Accountability Outweigh Benefits

January 21, 2015

By Oliver Patton

SHARING TOOLS        | Print Subscribe
HDT file photo
HDT file photo

UPDATED -- The difficulty and cost of including crash fault in the CSA safety enforcement system appears to outweigh the benefits, according to an analysis by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

American Trucking Associations said it is disappointed by the findings.

The long-awaited report to Congress, made public today, says that police accident reports probably don’t provide enough information to support determinations of fault.

It also says that incorporating fault does not consistently improve CSA’s ability to predict crash risk.

Further, the cost of a system that gives the public a chance to weigh in on crash fault determinations would be at least four times greater than the cost of the initial review of the police accident reports, the report says.

The initial review process itself would cost from about $4 million to $11 million, depending on the number of reports.

And, it would take a long time to complete the review process – more than two years from the initial report to completion of an appeal process, the report says.

The report is not the final word on the crash accountability issue. The agency said that these conclusions will inform its final decision, but they are not definitive, and it may have to do more analysis.

CSA (Compliance, Safety Accountability) uses roadside inspection and traffic enforcement data to find the carriers most in need of enforcement action.

The agency includes non-fault crashes in the CSA Safety Measurement System because its ability to distinguish fault is limited and there is a statistical probability that some of the crashes will be the carrier’s fault.

The agency and safety advocacy groups contend that past crashes are a predictor of future crash risk no matter who is at fault.

Carriers say it is illogical and wrong to include non-fault crashes in a system that measures safety performance.

ATA said the agency is delaying action on the issue. The association has repeatedly asked the agency to screen out crashes in which the truck driver is plainly not at fault, said ATA Executive Vice President Dave Osiecki in a statement.

“Instances where a truck is rear ended by a drunk driver, or hit head on by a motorist traveling in the wrong direction on the Interstate, or as happened just Monday when a truck was struck by a collapsing bridge are clearly not the fault of the professional driver,” Osiecki said.

“(They) certainly should not be used to target his or her carrier for potentially intrusive government oversight.”

FMCSA is asking for comments on the study, and suggestions on what to do next. Specifically, the agency wants ideas for how to improve the data in police accident reports, and if there is other information it should consider. Comments are due in about a month.

Update includes ATA comments.

Comments

  1. 1. barb [ January 21, 2015 @ 07:50AM ]

    whatever happened to INNOCENT until proven guilty instead of the guilty until proven innocent?

  2. 2. Mr Truck [ January 21, 2015 @ 09:20AM ]

    Tell this to the driver that hit the fallen bridge on I-75 in Cincinnati. A DOT recordable accident goes on his PSP and JB hunt gets a ding to their crash score on the FMCSA's SMS system. Absurd, that the wisdom of many police officers is good enough to smear a company/driver safety record on a roadside inspection, but a police report can't be trusted to ascertain fault in an accident such as the one in Cincy.

  3. 3. Robert Nutter [ January 21, 2015 @ 12:15PM ]

    They won't stop until the driver shortage that they are causing brings empty shelves to the grocery stores in their town. OH SNAP WHAT HAVE WE DONE?

  4. 4. PWK [ January 22, 2015 @ 06:37AM ]

    Don't have the funds to change the CSA to indicate fault???????????
    This affects the drivers score...the companies score..and anyone who looks at the crash indicator will assume the company and driver was at fault.

  5. 5. Cliff Downing [ January 22, 2015 @ 07:13AM ]

    There never has been anything associated with "innocent until proven guilty". If you can find that in the Constitution, please share it with us and collect your reward. But, the FMCSA clearly, as usual, has an agenda on its plate and facts be damned.

  6. 6. JL [ January 22, 2015 @ 07:24AM ]

    I agree, Mr. Truck. This is absurd!

  7. 7. mike [ January 24, 2015 @ 06:20AM ]

    I was hit broad side by a pickup in Kansas City coming onto the interstate on icy roads. He slid into the side of me (I'm in the middle lane), but still counted against my CSA. That's our government they do what they want.

 

Comment On This Story

Name:  
Email:  
Comment: (Maximum 2000 characters)  
Leave this field empty:
* Please note that every comment is moderated.

Newsletter

We offer e-newsletters that deliver targeted news and information for the entire fleet industry.

GotQuestions?
sponsored by
sponsor logo

ELDs and Telematics

Scott Sutarik from Geotab will answer your questions and challenges

View All
GotQuestions?

Sleeper Cab Power

Steve Carlson from Xantrex will answer your questions and challenges

View All