From:
"James Lamb" <james@truckers.com>
Date:
Fri, Jan 18, 2019 9:35 am
To:
raymond.martinez@dot.gov
Cc:
"Avelino.Gutierrez@state.nm.us" <Avelino.Gutierrez@state.nm.us>, "jboppjr@aol.com" <jboppjr@aol.com>, "cyoungs@bopplaw.com" <cyoungs@bopplaw.com>, "anarog@bopplaw.com" <anarog@bopplaw.com>, "laurence.socci@influence-strategies.com" <laurence.socci@influence-strategies.com>, "larry.minor@dot.gov" <larry.minor@dot.gov>, "charles.fromm@dot.gov" <charles.fromm@dot.gov>
Subject:
SBTC Request for FMCSA Preemption of UCR Board policy that obstructs motor carriers' registration of interstate operations with the states
Dear Mr. Martinez,
As you are the leader of the Federal agency that is delegated authority by the Secretary for appointment and oversight of the Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors, the SBTC wishes to bring to your attention that effective October 1, 2018, the Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Plan Board has implemented a new platform on the UCR.gov domain for online UCR registration through its contractor-agent SeikoSoft that now requires motor carriers to enter the last four digits of their tax id number to comply with the annual UCR filing requirement. Many states are no longer accepting registrations and are directing the carriers domiciled in their states to use this new system that replaced the ucr.in.gov portal previously hosted by the state of Indiana. We want to bring to your attention that numerous motor carriers are currently being adversely affected by this new requirement as they try to comply with their filing requirement and make payment.
The SBTC is hearing about
thousands
of carriers from permitting companies, including my own, that are not able to file their UCR because the SeikoSoft system is rejecting their tax id numbers. That is, if an error was made on the carriers' initial CS-150 form, they will never be able to comply as only what was entered on the MCS-150 will be accepted by SeikoSoft. This system has also caused some filers not to be able to file because they did not enter a CAPTCHA code when no such prompt ever asks the user to enter same.
Although the UCR Board's vendor made representations to the permitting company industry, many members of which are members of the SBTC as industry suppliers, during an August 2018 training session that the new site would allow permitting companies special access similar to state access to avoid the need to enter the last four of the carriers' tax id numbers to effect registration, the UCR Board chairman copied here now appears to be denying this promise was made because it came from the vendor-agent and not the Board itself and appears to be reneging on that commitment upon which permitting companies relied. Because of this, we believe tens of thousands of carriers that have hired permit companies to effect their registration annually by outsourcing their compliance contractually cannot comply with the UCR requirement, despite having made good faith efforts to comply through third parties. This is compounded by the recent delay (the second year in a row) caused by 11th hour FMCSA rulemaking which caused the UCR Board to direct the states to return good faith payments carriers made during the typical renewal period of October 1st until late December when the new FMCSA promulgated 2019 UCR fees went into effect on December 28, 2018.
It is my understanding that the decision to implement this 4 digit requirement purportedly for security reasons (although we cannot understand why the UCR would need to prevent someone from paying someone else's UCR), was never discussed in an open UCR meeting and was decided behind closed doors without the public's knowledge and opportunity to comment. As you know, the SBTC is already suing the UCR Board for various violations of the Federal
Sunshine Act
so this would be in line with the Board's MO and flagrant disregard for the open meetings law. I am asking our legal team by copy of this email to investigate whether this negates the legality of the imposition of the four digit requirement, which is an obstacle to making payment.
I also wish to bring to your attention the language of the
UCR Act
itself referenced below in which Congress indicated it did not want "unreasonable burdens" placed on the industry by the states or political authorities of two more states. Regardless of whether the Board is indeed such a political authority (again I will defer to my legal team on that question), it appears Congress would not approve of the enactment of a "requirement" or "standard" that serves to block motor carriers' registration of their interstate operations with the 41 participating states.
(c)Unreasonable Burden.—For purposes of this section, it shall be considered an unreasonable burden upon interstate commerce for any State or any political subdivision of a State, or any political authority of two or more States—
(1)to enact, impose, or enforce any requirement or standards with respect to, or levy any fee or charge on, any motor carrier or motor private carrier providing transportation or service subject to jurisdiction under subchapter I of chapter 135 (in this section referred to as an “interstate motor carrier” and an “interstate motor private carrier”, respectively) in connection with—
(A)the registration with the State of the interstate operations of the motor carrier or motor private carrier;
We do not understand why they are making it more difficult for the motor carrier industry to pay and comply other than create opportunities for the states to issue summonses of up to $1,100 per violation in states like Colorado for non-compliance. This is not in the interest of the Board, the states, the industry or the motoring public.
The SBTC therefore wishes to ask the FMCSA to preempt the Board's policy of requiring carriers enter the last four digits of their tax id number as a condition for online payment and direct the Board to return to unfettered access so that motor carriers can comply, and the states can maximize their collection of funds used for motor carrier safety enforcement. Simply stated, the current obstacle to paying UCR fees is not in the public's safety interest and the FMCSA should address this problem and intervene to eliminate this unnecessary obstacle.
By copy of this email to Laurence Socci, our lobbyist, I am requesting he request an immediate meeting with you to discuss this matter as this is affecting our 15,000 members and the industry at large daily. Mr. Minor and Mr. Fromm are copied here as well for their information.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
James Lamb, president
Small Business in Transportation Coalition ("SBTC")
