Last month we kicked off a new series discussing common violations we see from motor carriers during compliance reviews and mock audits. Last month we focused on Hours of Service and provided some tips for avoiding these violations. Next month we’ll move on to driver qualification violations but, in the interim, we wanted to opine on a frustrating trend we’ve observed in the field: carriers being issued acute violations based solely on roadside inspection results.

Being issued an acute violation for a roadside inspection violation that occurred months ago and was most likely corrected since is frustrating to the say the least. After all, FMCSA created an entire system (CSA - Compliance, Safety, Accountability) to collect and analyze roadside inspection violations to help “identify carriers with potential safety problems for intervention,” not as a system used to dole out punishment.

The purpose of a compliance review is to investigate the safety management controls of the motor carrier, not to play gotcha with old data. As such, safety investigators can and should use roadside inspection data to help them identify where to look for potential problems but should stop short from penalizing the carrier twice for the same violation.  That’s double jeopardy. So, if a non-CDL driver had previously been found at roadside driving a vehicle requiring a CDL, then the investigator conducting the audit should endeavor to understand: 1) why the violation occurred; 2) if action has been taken to address the deficiency, and; 3) if effective controls are in place to avoid future violations. Absent this investigation, the extremely consequential acute violation should not be applied.

Sadly, the consequences of being issued an acute violation is placing the carrier into Alert Status for that BASIC for the next 12 months, irrespective of the carrier’s BASIC percentile score. In one recent case, the carrier didn’t even have enough violations to have a BASIC percentile score. Now, the BASIC will be in alert status for 12 months despite the roadside violation being written 10 months ago and the carrier already have taken corrective action.

As this trend increases, we’re sad to report that recourse is limited. Some have had limited success using DataQs to correct or remove the violation, but the hill is steep. If it was a rateable review, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations provide some administrative recourse as well. If this has happened to your motor carrier, let us know. As Peter Griffin would say, “this really grinds our gears,” and we’d be happy to help.