Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Safety Recommendation Details

Safety Recommendation H-02-016
Details
Synopsis: On May 31, 2001, about 3:28 p.m. central daylight time, a southbound Gayle Stuart Trucking, Inc., (Stuart Trucking) truck-tractor semitrailer exited Interstate 540 at State Highway 282 (SH-282) near Mountainburg, Arkansas. The driver was unable to stop at the stop sign at the bottom of the ramp. The 79,040-pound combination unit was traveling approximately 48 mph when it entered the intersection and collided with the right side of a westbound, 65-passenger, 1990 Blue Bird Corporation school bus operated by the Mountainburg, Arkansas, Public Schools. The school bus rotated approximately 300 degrees clockwise and overturned; the body, which partially separated from the chassis, came to rest on its right side on the eastbound shoulder of SH-282. The tractor semitrailer continued across the roadway, rotated about 60 degrees clockwise, overturned, and came to rest on its left side. Three school bus passengers seated across from the impact area were fatally injured; one was partially ejected. Two other passengers, one of whom was seated in the impact area, received serious injuries, and four passengers had minor injuries. The school bus driver and the truckdriver both sustained minor injuries.
Recommendation: TO THE FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION: Require that vehicle inspections of a motor carrier’s fleet be conducted during compliance reviews.
Original recommendation transmittal letter: PDF
Overall Status: Closed - Acceptable Alternate Action
Mode: Highway
Location: Mountainburg, AR, United States
Is Reiterated: No
Is Hazmat: No
Is NPRM: No
Accident #: HWY01MH025
Accident Reports: Collision Between Truck-Tractor Semitrailer and School Bus
Report #: HAR-02-03
Accident Date: 5/31/2001
Issue Date: 9/13/2002
Date Closed: 1/23/2015
Addressee(s) and Addressee Status: FMCSA (Closed - Acceptable Alternate Action)
Keyword(s):

Safety Recommendation History
From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 1/23/2015
Response: We discovered from our investigation of the Mountainburg accident that data from roadside inspections did not accurately reflect the actual maintenance condition of a carrier’s vehicles. Accordingly, the intent of this recommendation was for you to obtain better data to use in identifying which motor carriers need a comprehensive safety review. We are aware of the ongoing implementation of your Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program and the improved reliability of the Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASIC) data, including roadside inspection results, to determine which carriers are subject to enforcement interventions. We note that you have revised your investigation procedures and have trained your personnel regarding the new policies, which were issued in two recent memoranda: (1) Enhanced Investigation Techniques—Implementation and (2) Investigating the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC during Motor Carrier Investigations. The combined effect of these memoranda is the generation of more accurate assessment data to use in determining when to conduct an investigation, an increase in the number of motor carriers subject to comprehensive and on-site inspections, and the promotion of using Vehicle Maintenance BASIC data to enhance investigation findings. These new procedures and policies constitute an acceptable alternate method of satisfying Safety Recommendation H 02-16, which is classified CLOSED—ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE ACTION.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 10/8/2014
Response: From T.F. Scott Darling, III, Acting Administrator: On April 25, 2014, FMCSA Office of Enforcement and Compliance, in collaboration with FMCSA Office of Field Operations, issued two policy memoranda in conjunction: • Enhanced Investigation Techniques (EIT)- Implementation and, • Investigating the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC during Motor Carrier Investigations In addition to implementing EIT for all investigations the Agency has continued to increase its focus on investigating vehicle maintenance issues. This includes conducting inspections of passenger carrying vehicles during investigation, as well as conducting truck inspections when the Agency’s roadside inspection data indicates a pattern of non-compliance with the vehicle maintenance regulations. The focus on EIT and vehicle maintenance were highlighted for FMCSA personnel during the April 23, 2014, National Enforcement call and were the subject of webinar sessions conducted by FMCSA's National Training Center four times during July 2014. FMCSA shares NTSB's goal of improving motor carrier safety and is committed to providing motor carrier enforcement professionals guidance that results in safer drivers and safer operations. FMCSA believes its policy and educational outreach activities are responsive to the intent of Safety Recommendation H-02-16. FMCSA plans no further action and respectfully requests NTSB reclassify Safety Recommendation H-02-16 as "Closed-Acceptable Action."

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 9/30/2010
Response: Notation 8248: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has reviewed the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) Announcement of Public Listening Session and Request for Comment, which was published at 75 Federal Register 53015 on August 30, 2010. The notice announced that the FMCSA planned to hold a public listening session to solicit input on key challenges facing the motor carrier industry, issues facing stakeholders, and concerns that should be considered by the agency in developing its next 5-year Strategic Plan. NTSB staff attended the listening session and provided the FMCSA with a list of open recommendations that have been issued to the FMCSA. The FMCSA also invited written comments, suggestions, and recommendations from all individuals and organizations regarding the FMCSA’s mission, vision, and strategic objectives (goals) for the plan. This letter provides a more detailed history of the currently open recommendations the NTSB has made to the FMCSA (attached), a summary of the key safety issues the FMCSA should address to improve truck and bus safety as presented during the NTSB’s April 28, 2010, testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security (attached), and responds to the questions most relevant to the NTSB’s mission for which the FMCSA is seeking input. Question 2. How can the FMCSA have a greater impact in the reduction of injuries and loss of life on our nation’s highways? The NTSB currently has 51 open recommendations that were issued to the FMCSA with the intent to improve safety on our highways. The implementation of these recommendations would allow the FMCSA to have both an immediate and lasting impact on reducing loss on our highways. We continue to believe that a plan to implement the recommendations on the NTSB’s Federal Most Wanted List of Transportation Safety Improvements (MWL) would significantly contribute to transportation safety. Question 5. How can the FMCSA balance driver-focused, vehicle-focused, motor carrier- focused compliance, interventions, and enforcement to achieve its safety mission? The NTSB has recommended that the FMCSA change the “balance” of its motor carrier oversight since 1999. The two most important factors related to safe motor carrier operations are the condition of the vehicles and the performance of the drivers. Current rules prevent the FMCSA from putting carriers out of service with an unsatisfactory rating in only one of the 6 rated factors. They must be unsatisfactory in at least 2 factors. In other words, they could be unsatisfactory in either the vehicle or driver areas and still be allowed to operate. The NTSB believes that an unsatisfactory in either category should be sufficient cause to place a carrier out of service. The NTSB recommended that the FMCSA do something relatively simple: change the safety fitness rating methodology so that adverse vehicle- or driver performance-based data alone would be sufficient to result in an overall “unsatisfactory” rating for a carrier. To date, the FMCSA has not acted on this recommendation. As a result, the NTSB added this recommendation to our Most Wanted List of Transportation Safety Improvements. The NTSB has been encouraged that the FMCSA is developing the CSA 2010 Initiative to include a greater emphasis on vehicle and driver safety. However, the NTSB is disappointed that the FMCSA did not make the incremental changes to the current safety system necessary to make either driver or vehicle deficiencies sufficient to affect the safety rating of a carrier. As such, the NTSB believes the FMCSA’s strategic plan should recognize the importance of getting carriers with unsafe drivers or unsafe vehicles off the road. Question 8. What technological changes could positively impact highway safety? The NTSB has recommended numerous technological improvements to both the FMCSA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Two technologies, forward collision warning systems (FCWs) and electronic onboard recording systems (EOBRs), are currently on the NTSB’s Federal MWL. Both of these technologies have been available for the last decade and could have improved highway safety. More recently, the NTSB has recommended to NHTSA technologies for driver fatigue detection, stability control for buses, event data recording, and lane departure warning for buses. The implementation of these recommendations would significantly improve highway safety. Question 9. How will technology affect driver behavior? Well designed technology can improve driver performance. Current research by the FMCSA on vehicle based collision warning systems found improved driver performance as a result of technology. However, technology not designed for use in vehicles, such as cell phones, can distract the driver from the road. That is why the NTSB supported the FMCSA’s ban on texting. Further, the NTSB has included restricting bus drivers from using a cell phone on its Federal MWL. The NTSB appreciates the opportunity to comment on this notice addressing concerns that should be considered in developing the FMCSA’s 5-year Strategic Plan. Many of the issues discussed here have been around for decades, and much is left to be done to improve highway safety. Prompt action is needed so that the trucks and buses that surround us on the nation’s highways are safely designed, maintained, and operated. We look forward to working with FMCSA in the near future to address the concerns presented in these comments.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 8/3/2006
Response: Letter Mail Controlled 8/7/2006 12:14:43 PM MC# 2060389 - From David H. Hugel, Acting Administrator: I am pleased to provide the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) response to the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) questions from our June 15, 2006, Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 initiative briefing. Specifically, you asked how many motor carriers are included on our Safety Status Measurement System (“SafeStat”) A and B Lists annually, and how many of these carriers are subject to a Compliance Review (CR) annually . The FMCSA’s SafeStat system is updated monthly, rather than annually, to identify new high risk carriers in a timely manner and to reflect improved performance by carriers previously identified as high-risk. On average, there are approximately 5,500 motor carriers on FMCSA’s SafeStat A and B lists in a given month. As of May 2006, there were 5,636 motor carriers on FMCSA’s SafeStat A and B Lists. During fiscal year 2005, FMCSA and its Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program partners conducted a total of 12,596 CRs. Of those reviews, 6,004 were conducted on motor carriers that were included on FMCSA’s A or B list at the time the CR was conducted. Please note that not all SafeStat A and B motor carriers are considered an immediate priority for CRs, but only those which have not had a compliance review within the previous year. In many instances, motor carriers are listed on the SafeStat A and B list by virtue of the fact that violations were documented on a recent (i.e., conducted in the last 12 months) compliance review. Those A and B carriers are monitored to determine if they improve their safety performance or if an additional compliance review is warranted because sufficient improvement has not occurred. In addition to CRs on SafeStat A and B carriers, FMCSA conducts CRs in response to Congressional inquiries, citizen complaints, significant fatal crashes, and significant hazardous materials incidents. We also conduct CRs to support our hazardous materials permitting program (carriers must have a Satisfactory safety rating to obtain a hazardous materials permit). Moreover, Congress specifically directed FMCSA to require follow-up visits and monitoring of motor carriers with less-than-Satisfactory ratings in Section 216 of the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA). FMCSA implemented a program to comply with this MCSIA requirement in fiscal year 2002. Since that time, we have conducted more than 12,816 CRs on carriers with previous Conditional ratings and more than 3,822 reviews on carriers with previous Unsatisfactory ratings.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 5/9/2006
Response: Letter Mail Controlled 5/10/2006 11:12:20 AM MC# 2060234 - Warren E. Hoemann, Acting Administrator: I am pleased to provide the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) response to the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) letter dated April 19,2006, regarding our Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA) 2010 Initiative. CSA 2010 reflects a new approach to how our Agency carries out its compliance and enforcement activities. Its goal is to enable FMCSA to have contact with more regulated entities through a broader array of compliance interventions that optimize Agency resources. I appreciate NTSB's acknowledgement of this major effort. In response to your request, I have enclosed a listing of major CSA 2010 activities with corresponding timeframes. The dates, of course, are for planning purposes and subject to change pending future budgetary constraints. We are also working with your staff to arrange a CSA 20 10 briefing for Board members. We believe it is crucial that FMCSA carry on a continuing dialogue with our partners and stakeholders as we continue the development of CSA 20 10. As you know, the Agency held a series of listening sessions in 2004 to solicit public input on the conceptual CSA 20 10 operational model. Based on that input, we completed the attributes of a proposed operational model. The CSA 2010 Team is currently working through the process of defining the technical requirements, pilot testing, validation, deployment and implementation issues associated with the draft operational model. We plan to conduct the first of a new series of listening sessions later this year. At that time, we hope to be in a better position to detail specific information. The dates and locations of the listening sessions will be announced in the Federal Register. I hope that NTSB representatives will attend. Additional outreach events are being planned to include announcement of the pilot test and the State partners that will be involved in the pilot. As FMCSA continues this major safety initiative, we will engage and solicit input from our partners and stakeholders. Our Agency has been, and remains, committed to addressing NTSB safety recommendations, either by implementing NTSB's recommended approach or by pursuing alternatives which we believe will achieve the intended result. We are not "deferring action" on any safety recommendations issued to FMCSA, but are working to identify the most effective strategies for enhancing motor carrier safety. We will continue to explore all potential countermeasures, including, but not limited to, CSA 20 10. I hope that you find this information useful. FMCSA looks forward to working with NTSB to fulfill our mutual transportation safety goals and to provide more information about our CSA 2010 initiative at the upcoming Board briefing currently being arranged by our staffs. If you need additional information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me.

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 4/19/2006
Response: Six years ago, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) was launched as a new U.S. Department of Transportation agency charged with improving motor carrier safety in our nation. Then Secretary of Transportation, Mr. Rodney E. Slater, announced that the FMCSA's goal was to reduce truck and bus fatalities by 50 percent by 2010. At that time, there were more than 5,300 such fatalities every year. Five years later, the 2004 fatality count was 5,248, only slightly lower and far from approaching the FMCSA's 50 percent reduction goal. In fact, the death count in 2004 was higher than the 2003 count of 5,072, and the large truck fatality rate remained a constant 2.3 deaths per 100 million truck vehicle miles traveled. Today, there are 36 open safety recommendations that the National Transportation Safety Board issued to the FMCSA, 18 of which relate to the oversight of motor carrier operations and enforcement of regulations. The oldest of these recommendations dates back to 1993. The Safety Board is concerned that the FMCSA is not making timely progress toward meeting the intent of these recommendations. A list of the 18 recommendations, including the date and text of the last correspondence, is enclosed. Nine of these recommendations are currently on the Board's Most Wanted list. Two years ago, the FMCSA announced its Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA) 2010 Initiative, described as a top-to-bottom evaluation of the agency's motor carrier compliance review system. The FMCSA has said that this effort will address 15 of the outstanding recommendations, although the Safety Board has identified an additional 3 recommendations that may also be addressed by the initiative. Although the Board applauds the FMCSA's effort to undertake this comprehensive review, it is unaware of any public document outlining specific steps the agency plans to take and milestones it plans to meet to accomplish the review and implement necessary changes. In the 2 years since the announcement of the initiative, the FMCSA has not provided the Board with any specific information regarding implementation of the initiative or whether it will address any of the 18 open safety recommendations satisfactorily. Currently, an estimated 9 million people hold commercial drivers licenses in the United States, 3 million of whom are active drivers. These drivers operate on an aging highway system already crowded with an ever-increasing number of passenger vehicles. Protecting the safety of all these drivers and their passengers is of paramount concern today. Deferring action on these 18 safety-related recommendations until completion of the initiative in 2010 is not in the best interest of the motoring public and is therefore unacceptable to the Safety Board. The Safety Board would like to receive specific information about how the CSA 2010 Initiative will address the open safety recommendations cited in this letter. Further, the Board would appreciate receiving details about how the FMCSA plans to proceed with the CSA 2010 Initiative, including a proposed timetable and interim steps towards completing the initiative by its deadline. The Board would be pleased to meet with the FMCSA to further discuss the intent of the recommendations and the FMSCA's efforts toward improving the safety of motor carrier operations.

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 1/18/2006
Response: The Safety Board recognizes that the compliance review (a comprehensive examination of a motor carrier's overall compliance with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations) and roadside inspection are valuable tools for determining the condition of a motor carrier's fleet. The Board issued Safety Recommendation H-02-16 intending to enhance the effectiveness of the compliance review by including vehicle inspections in addition to the other elements of the examination. The FMCSA's opposition to the intent of this recommendation was discussed at Safety With a Team (SWAT) meetings held on October 30 and November 6, 2003, and March 22, 2005. At those meetings and in correspondence, the FMCSA has stated strong support for its reliance on roadside inspection history during compliance reviews. Compliance with vehicle regulations, as defined in 49 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 393 and 396, is one of six factors assessed during a review to determine the overall operational safety of a motor carrier. The FMCSA indicates that approximately 3 million roadside inspections are conducted annually across the country, generating valuable data on motor carriers' fleets, which is then used, among other applicable data, to determine the need for further vehicle inspections during a compliance review. When they do not have a sufficient amount of inspection data to calculate a motor carrier's out-of-service rate, FMCSA safety investigators are required to conduct vehicle inspections. The FMCSA indicates that it is concerned that shifting resources from compliance reviews to focus on vehicle inspections will reduce the time spent on evaluation of the five other factors used to determine a carrier's overall safety. The Safety Board remains concerned that the FMCSA's reliance on roadside inspections will continue to result in incomplete reporting of the number of out-of-service vehicles, as was found in the Mountainburg, Arkansas, and Victor, New York, accident investigations; the vehicles that received roadside inspections were not representative of the entire fleet. As a result, the carrier's safety rating may be inaccurate because it misrepresents the proportion of out-of-service vehicles. Prior to the Mountainburg, Arkansas, accident, despite placing unsafe vehicles on the road, employing no qualified brake inspectors, and its drivers committing numerous traffic violations, the motor carrier received only a conditional, rather than an unsatisfactory, rating. Current compliance review procedures, relying on roadside inspections, failed to identify the carrier as unsafe. At a September 22, 2005, SWAT meeting held to discuss other safety recommendations, Safety Board staff learned that the FMCSA is currently evaluating the compliance review process as part of its Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA) 2010 Initiative. While the goal of the CSA 2010 effort, to increase the effectiveness of motor carrier safety review procedures, is commendable, the evaluation is still in its early stages and no conclusions have yet been reached. Although consideration of Safety Recommendation H-02-16 is included on the list of issues being considered under the CSA 2010 Initiative, it is unclear whether any proposed changes resulting from the evaluation will address vehicle inspections during compliance reviews. Full implementation of any changes proposed by the initiative is not expected until 2010. The Board is concerned that this long timeframe jeopardizes motorists' safety through unnecessary exposure to possibly unsafe commercial motor vehicles. The Safety Board continues to believe that vehicle inspections of a motor carrier's fleet should be conducted during every compliance review, regardless of the number of roadside inspections that have been conducted previously, to verify that motor carriers are operating vehicles that comply with the applicable standards to travel safely on the same roads as the American public. Given that the FMCSA has opposed the intent of this recommendation and that the uncertain results and the lengthy process of implementation of the CSA 2010 Initiative offer no timely alternative to the current compliance review process, Safety Recommendation H-02-16 is classified OPEN -- UNACCEPTABLE ACTION.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 5/26/2005
Response: Letter Mail Controlled 6/9/2005 2:02:59 PM MC# 2050242 - Annette M. Sandberg, Administrator: I am pleased to provide additional information in response to the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) letter of December 15, 2004 and the March 22,2005, meeting with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) personnel and NTSB staff, regarding safety recommendation (SR) H-02-016. The March 22, 2005, meeting was helpful in clarifying the intent of SR H-02-016. FMCSA has been and remains committed fully to commercial motor vehicle safety. As a data-driven agency, we utilize all appropriate data to target our resources in those areas most likely to improve safety. FMCSA's compliance review (CR) procedures are designed on that basis. A summary of current procedures specifically related to vehicle inspections is enclosed for your ready reference. As noted in the enclosure, a CR is a comprehensive, in-depth examination of a motor carrier's overall compliance with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Vehicle inspections are an important part but not the only important part of this examination. FMCSA's program of roadside inspections (RI) provides another opportunity to inspect large numbers of commercial motor vehicles operating on the highway and to take them out of service when appropriate. Approximately 3,000,000 Ris are conducted annually across the country. Ris generate valuable data on motor carriers' fleets, which is then used, among other resources, to determine the need for further vehicle inspections. Based on your most recent letter and the March 22,2005, discussion, NTSB's recommendation intends that FMCSA conduct one or more vehicle inspections in conjunction with every compliance review without regard to roadside inspections or other applicable data. Adopting this approach in its entirety would necessitate a significant shift in the allocation of resources from compliance reviews, which assess the carrier's overall safety operation, to the single issue of vehicle inspections. FMCSA believes that too much focus on vehicle inspections to the exclusion of other safety factors would not accomplish the purpose of the CR. FMCSA believes our joint interests are best served by the current process for selecting vehicles for inspection during CRs. The enclosure outlines two different scenarios under which Level V vehicle inspections will be conducted in conjunction with the CR. FMCSA continues to believe we must carefully consider the likely safety benefits of conducting vehicle inspections in each case. FMCSA will monitor the results of its enforcement activities to ensure that established procedures are being followed and that vehicle inspections remain an important factor in the CR process. I believe the Agency's approach addresses the underlying safety objectives of the recommendation. I urge NTSB to reconsider FMCSA's current position and respectfully request that recommendation H-02-016 be reclassified as Closed-Acceptable Alternate Action.

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 12/15/2004
Response: The Safety Board acknowledges that, according to the 2004 FMCSA Field Operations Training Manual, the FMCSA requires vehicle inspections during compliance reviews, but only if the motor carrier does not have the minimum sample of vehicles inspected during roadside vehicle inspections. The Board remains concerned that this overreliance on roadside inspections results in an incomplete reporting on the number of out-of-service vehicles. In the Mountainburg, Arkansas, accident mentioned above, an independent examination of Stuart Trucking vehicles by the Missouri Division of Motor Vehicles and Railroad Safety concluded that of 12 vehicles examined, 5 (42 percent) had out-of-service violations. This rate was triple that found in the previous 12 months of roadside inspections for Stuart Trucking. This recommendation was discussed at Safety With a Team (SWAT) meetings on October 30 and November 6, 2003. At those meetings, the Safety Board was advised that the FMCSA did require compliance reviews in cases where prior reviews indicated a problem. However, the Board continues to believe that vehicle inspections of a motor carrier's fleet should be conducted during every compliance review, regardless of the number of roadside inspections that have been conducted previously. Implementing this practice will help ensure that motor carriers are operating vehicles that meet the safety standards necessary to be traveling on the same roads as the American public. Pending the FMCSA's reconsideration of this recommendation, Safety Recommendation H-02-16 is classified OPEN -- UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 5/17/2004
Response: Letter Mail Controlled 6/1/2004 2:38:49 PM MC# 2040255 - Annette Sandberg, Administrator: I am pleased to provide updated information in response to the National Transportation Safety Board's letter of July 1, 2003. The issue is Safety Recommendation H-02-016, which asks the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to require that vehicle inspections of a motor carrier's fleet be conducted during compliance reviews. The 2004 FMCSA Field Operations Training Manual (excerpts enclosed) requires vehicle inspections during compliance reviews and new entrant safety audits. Inspections are conducted to establish the effectiveness of the vehicle maintenance practices of the motor carrier or its agent, and to determine the general condition of the motor carrier's vehicles.

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 10/30/2003
Response: At a SWAT meeting held on 10/30/03, FMCSA staff reported that they currently require vehicle inspections during compliance reviews when previous inspections have indicated that there is a problem. FMCSA staff indicated that it would be sending a letter on their progress on Safety Recommendation H-02-16.

From: NTSB
To: FMCSA
Date: 7/1/2003
Response: The Safety Board recognizes that the FMCSA continually updates its operational procedures based on revisions to regulations, new statutes, improved technology, and recommendations from other Federal agencies or industry. In addition, the Board notes that the FMCSA will give this recommendation serious consideration, especially for those compliance reviews conducted after a crash involving a specific carrier's commercial motor vehicles. However, the Board recognizes the positive safety effect of regular vehicle inspections during all compliance reviews, not only those conducted after a crash. Therefore, the Board encourages the FMCSA to require vehicle inspections of a motor carrier's fleet during all compliance reviews. In the interim, Safety Recommendation H-02-16 is classified OPEN -- ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

From: FMCSA
To: NTSB
Date: 1/3/2003
Response: MC# 2030051: - From Annette Sandberg, Administrator: FMCSA continually updates its operational procedures for conducting compliance reviews based on revisions to the regulations, new statutes, improved technology, or recommendations from other Federal agencies or industry. We will give this NTSB recommendation serious consideration, especially for those compliance reviews conducted after a crash involving a specific carrier's CMV(s). We recently conducted a compliance review on the Feed Bucket Express company (formerly known as Gayle Stuart Trucking, Inc.) in response to the Mountainburg, Arkansas, crash.