Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/591411
U .S. Rep. Richard Hanna (R-NY), a Congressional trucking advo- cate in recent years, sent a letter recently to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration stating his opposition to June's proposed rule to require motor carriers operating in interstate commerce to have all vehicles dis- play a compliance decal denoting that all safety standards in effect at the time the vehicle was manu- factured were met. The rule requires the decal to be in place throughout the truck's life. Hanna, a member of the House's Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, writes "penalizing CMV operators if their equipment had a missing or unreadable certification la- bel, as proposed, is an unworkable rule that would create a duplicative layer of regulation and fail to reduce the risk of crashes." He adds that it's not conceivable for every CMV to have a certification label. For instance, in his district, he says, mo- tor carriers often buy used tractors and trailers that may not have the certifica- tion labels, or the labels are unreadable. Hanna also notes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is "already responsible for certifying that newly manufactured CMVs comply with the applicable FMVSS." He said ex- panding FMCSA's role would "unfairly burden CMV operators with respon- sibility for something that remains an obligation of the manufacturer." In his final point, Hanna states the certification label only means the vehicle met regulations when it was manufactured, and it doesn't have any bearing on how the vehicle operates years or decades after it was purchased. "With no evidence available that sug- gests there were any accidents where the lack of a certification label was responsible for the crash, the proposed rule will not reduce the risk of crashes and therefore falls outside the scope of FMCSA's primary regulatory responsi- bility." Others in the trucking industry have also voiced their opinions on the pro- posed rulemaking. The American Trucking Associations said it "adamantly opposes" the rule- making for several reasons: • There's no safety benefit, but only unnecessary administrative compli- ance costs • Operational efficiencies for drivers, carriers and vehicles will be reduced • No certification label is permanent • Several CMV manufacturers are no longer in business, so obtaining the label could be impossible • The NTSB recommendations for this rule "were a result of a bus crash that the Board attributed to the driver's failure, not the equip- by Jason Cannon Noteworthy News www.jobsfor teams.com JOBS for TEAMS | 32 FMCSA's proposed compliance sticker rule: Congressman, ATA, others weigh in with 'adamant opposition'