FMCSA data on safety reviews over the last few years reveals some startling statistics. While it is hard to determine reasons from the data itself, anecdotal evidence suggests troubling conclusions.  The Agency publishes summary data on reviews including Motor Carrier Safety Compliance Reviews and CSA2010 reviews. It is clear that (1) fewer safety reviews are being conducted; (2) vastly more of the reviews are resulting in “Not Rated” findings; and (3) fewer carriers are being rated Satisfactory.

In 2011, total safety reviews dropped from 15-17 thousand down to 11 thousand. In the first quarter of fiscal 2012 (FY 10/1/11 to 9/30/12) fewer than 2,000 reviews were conducted. With all of the new data FMCSA has to identify carriers requiring intervention, why are we on pace to conduct safety reviews with only half the number of carriers compared to 2008-2010? Even 16,000 annual reviews is an incredibly small number given the size of the trucking industry.

Between 2008 and 2010 only 10-12% of all reviews resulted in Not Rated, but that jumped to 16% in 2011 and is running at 55% YTD. Astonishingly, reviews conducted by federal staff were resulting in only 2% Not Rated and now over half of all federal reviews are resulting in no rating. Finally, while about 60% of all carriers were rated Satisfactory in the 2008-2010 period, that number fell to 48% in 2011 and is on pace for even lower numbers this year.

It is hard to tell from the data why these changes are occurring, but discussions with carriers sheds light on what may be happening. In an effort to show that carriers with high SMS scores have safety problems, investigators are spending much more time at each carrier searching the records with a fine tooth comb to prove that the high score indicates a safety concern. Spending significantly more time at each audit is a plausible explanation for the dramatic decrease in the number of audits. Some Investigators also report being pressured to find violations and stay as long as it takes when they are sent to carriers with high SMS scores. It seems plausible that Investigators are unwilling to give a Satisfactory rating to a carrier with high SMS scores but can’t justify a Conditional rating, so they punt and the carrier ends up Not Rated. While legally, Not Rated is just as good as Satisfactory from the standpoint of a shipper or broker relying on the FMCSA as the sole determinant of a carrier’s fitness for use, from a practical standpoint some shippers and brokers are less likely to use that carrier. I have been advocating that carriers are entitled to due process rather than being mathematically graded on a curve that results in half of all carriers receiving an F (or at least our industry’s modern equivalent of a scarlet letter - a golden triangle). When the prosecutor, the judge, and the jury are all the same entity we have to be very carful about potential abuse of power.

There is not enough evidence to suggest that the FMCSA is cooking the books to make CSA/SMS a self-fulfilling prophesy, but both the numbers and the anecdotes are troubling. I welcome carriers reading this post to weigh in and let us know if you have experienced bias in Compliance Reviews or significantly longer reviews than in past years. I will certainly understand if you choose to contribute your thoughts anonymously.

If someone has a less ominous interpretation of the numbers, please enlighten me.