Intermodal Equipment Provider/Final Rule (Vehicle Defects for Vehicle 2 to IEP)

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has issued the final rule to implement provisions in section 4118 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), applicable to ?Roadability.? Section 4118 is codified in 49 U.S.C. 31151.Before operating intermodal equipment (chassis) over the road, the driver accepting the equipment must inspect the equipment components listed in ? 392.7(b) and be satisfied that they are in good working order. Drivers who operate the equipment over the road are deemed to have confirmed that the following components were in good working order when the driver accepted the equipment. ? Service brake components that are readily visible to a driver performing as thorough a visual inspection as possible without physically going under the vehicle, and trailer brake connections; ? Lighting devices and reflectors; ? Tires; ? Coupling devices; ? Rails or support frames; ? Tiedown bolsters; ? Locking pins, clevises, clamps, or hooks; and, ? Sliders or sliding frame lock.

Inspection defects on the chassis of vehicle 2 are still being given to drivers - adversely and unfairly impacting CSA 2010 scores. Unfortunately, it appears the widespread general rule for roadside inspectors is that if the driver indicates he has done the required pre-trip, most/any defect found on vehicle 2 is thereafter assigned to the driver, not the Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) as the law intended. Examples: Violations are being given to drivers for brakes out of adjustment and brake hose chaffing which are NOT conditions that fall within the pre-trip visual chassis inspection requirements \"Lights not working\" - could clearly have been working at pre-trip but failed/burned out while on the road.

Please provide notice and training emphasis for roadside inspectors on correctly assigning Vehicle 2 defects to IEPs. FMCSA/CVSA should increase inspector training and send out an informational message like they recently did on the 5th Chassis Marking issue, to highlight for the inspection/enforcement community the proper regulatory impact/nexus between pre-trip inspection and responsibility for defects assignment.