Overview
Title
Crash Preventability Determination Program
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FMCSA is changing how truck and bus accidents are checked to see if they could have been stopped. Now, they are adding new kinds of accidents they will look at, like those caught on video, but some people worry about how long it takes and if their videos are safe.
Summary AI
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is making changes to its Crash Preventability Determination Program (CPDP) that allows carriers and drivers to request reviews of commercial motor vehicle crashes to determine if they were preventable. These updates include new crash types eligible for review, such as crashes with video evidence, and changes to existing categories. While public comments largely supported these updates, some commenters expressed concerns about process fairness, video privacy, and the time taken for determinations, which FMCSA addressed by maintaining certain program requirements and emphasizing the voluntary nature of CPDP. The new changes and crash types will be effective for incidents occurring on or after December 1, 2024.
Abstract
FMCSA announces changes to its Crash Preventability Determination Program (CPDP). Under the CPDP carriers and drivers may submit requests for data review (RDR) to FMCSA to determine the preventability of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes. FMCSA proposed these changes in its Federal Register notice, "Crash Preventability Determination Program," published at https:// www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2022-0233 on April 13, 2023. This notice finalizes the proposed changes, responds to comments received, and outlines next steps for implementation.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), part of the U.S. Department of Transportation, has made notable updates to its Crash Preventability Determination Program (CPDP). This program permits commercial motor vehicle (CMV) carriers and drivers to submit Requests for Data Review (RDR) to determine if certain crashes were preventable. Announced in December 2024, these changes aim to improve the program by expanding the types of crashes eligible for review and offering more clarity on the processes involved.
General Summary of the Document
The FMCSA's recent notice outlines modifications to the CPDP, including the introduction of new crash categories like those supported by video evidence. The revisions are designed to ensure that crashes receive adequate examination to determine if they were avoidable. This adjustment comes after public comments on a proposal made in April 2023, with a majority expressing support, albeit some concerns lingered.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Despite the overall support for the changes, several concerns remain. A significant issue is the decision to apply these new categories only to incidents occurring after December 1, 2024, excluding past crashes from potentially benefiting from updated criteria. This restriction limits the scope of reassessment that could have otherwise provided insights into older incidents.
Additionally, privacy concerns related to video submissions have been raised. Although FMCSA has taken steps to secure uploads, questions about the retention and permanent deletion of such footage after investigations remain inadequately addressed, potentially leaving sensitive material at risk of being mishandled.
Some stakeholders also criticize the voluntary nature of the CPDP, which requires carriers to initiate crash reviews. Critics argue that placing the onus on carriers can be burdensome, suggesting instead that FMCSA should assess preventability more proactively.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
For the public, these changes have the potential to improve road safety by encouraging more rigorous analysis of CMV crashes. By potentially reducing the occurrence of preventable accidents, overall safety on public roads may be enhanced, benefiting everyone from cyclists to ordinary drivers.
However, specific stakeholders, like CMV operators, may experience both benefits and drawbacks. The expansion of eligible crash types could allow more carriers to challenge unfair preventability determinations, positively impacting their safety records. Yet, some requirements, like providing full Police Accident Reports (PARs), remain burdensome due to difficulties and delays in obtaining these documents.
Stakeholders also expressed dissatisfaction with the prolonged time required for evaluation, emphasizing the need for a more streamlined process. Any delays in processing these determinations can impact a carrier's operations and their reputation, depending on how crash data is presented in safety measurement systems.
Conclusion
The FMCSA's updates to the CPDP reflect a commitment to improving transportation safety and fairness in the evaluation of motor carrier incidents. However, some concerns must be addressed to optimize the balance between regulation, safety, and the operational realities faced by carriers. While the updates bring some progress, with room for further enhancement, the efforts herald a positive step towards more reliable and transparent safety practices in the industry.
Issues
• The eligibility of new crash types should not be applied retroactively, limiting the assessment of past incidents.
• Concerns about video privacy and security are raised but not fully addressed, especially regarding the permanent deletion of video evidence after determination.
• The CPDP remains a voluntary program, relying on motor carriers to initiate requests, which may add extra burden on them instead of the agency handling preventability assessments proactively.
• The current eligibility criteria for 'wrong direction' crash types are not broadened to include partial crossings of the center line, potentially excluding some relevant incidents.
• The process and timeline for determination reviews is noted as too lengthy by multiple commenters, indicating potential inefficiencies in processing.
• FMCSA's requirement for complete Police Accident Reports (PARs) continues to be a concern due to delays and difficulties in obtaining them.
• The document maintains complex legal language, potentially making it difficult for non-experts to fully comprehend all procedural and regulatory implications.