News

Recently, IME met with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) hazmat chief, James Simmons to discuss concerns over the agency’s recent response to IME’s petition for rulemaking made in 2005.  Although IME is pleased that FMSCA will alter the safety permit rule to account for unpreventable accidents, we are still trying to convince them that the system is flawed and will not provide the desired results.

The rule provides that motor carriers must perform in the top 70% of the population for crashes, vehicle out-of-service, driver out-of-service, and hazmat out-of-service.  IME is aware several safety permit applications by explosives companies have been denied because they fell in the bottom 30% of motor carriers in these categories.  Because most explosive companies carry their own materials, denial of a safety permit is in essense, a "death sentance" for that company.  Fortunately, FMSCA does not consider one occurrence in any one category as statistically significant.  Nevertheless, just two hazmat out-of-service tickets means a carrier would need 30-40 perfect inspections to stay in the top 70%.  IME has anecdotal reports that carriers who are near the cut-off statistically drive around trying to get clean inspections to lower their numbers.  This certainly does not improve public safety; neither does bringing inexperienced carriers into the market to take the place of carriers with long histories of safe operation who may loose their safety permit.

Because there seems to be an understanding gap, IME has filed a Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) for data on the issuance, denial, suspension, and revocation of Safety Permits.  Curiously, FMSCA claims that only 144 carriers of Class 1 have received safety permits.  This number is almost ten times less than the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s number of hazmat registrants that reported carrying Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 materials by highway.  Theoretically, the numbers should be about the same.

IME has also sent a formal reply to FMCSA’s ruling on IME’s 2005 petition stating that we reserve judgment on most issues until we can see their data.  The letter also recommends that the criteria for determining preventability be the issuance of a traffic violation to the carrier’s driver and that carriers be allowed to submit proof of preventability prior to FMCSA issuing a denial.

Mr. Simmons will attend IME's Annual Meeting in September to discuss the data and concerns from both sides.  Hopefully, better understanding of each others’ concerns will lead to productive changes in the rule.