Tuesday, November 3, 2009

What's Up With California and UCR?

Unregistered Carriers on 10/30/2009 - 1821
Unregistered Carriers on 11/03/2009 - 1798

I have been interested to read about California's "disenchantment" with the UCR program. I've been even more interested to read about their proposed solutions. But I've been the most interested - and I'm not trying to cast aspersions here - that the criticisms have come from a State that seems to be "part of the problem".

In pursuit of that last point:

As of this morning, California has registered 66.42% of their carriers during the fourteen months of 2009 UCR Registration.

If my recollection serves me correctly: 1) that's a below-average percentage for a UCR participating state, 2) it's only a couple of points higher than a couple of the non-participating states they criticize, and 3) it's 15-20% below many states that do IRP in the same agency as UCR.

In fact, according to the Feds, there are still nearly 10,000 (9,828 to be exact) "active interstate carriers that have had a crash, an inspection, an MCS-150 update or a UCR registration in the last year" domiciled in California that have yet to complete 2009 UCR registration.

I know, I know, ..... it's probably 9,828 bad MCMIS records. But it's a heck of a lot more than any of the rest of us have. And it is, after all, one-third of the "alleged" motor carrier population in California.

In defense of California, they have collected revenues over and above their cap. They are, in fact, a Donor state. We don't have enough of those. But, in a state with 30,000 carriers, that's not exactly a colossal feat. And it certainly masks several more important issues.

Look ..... if we had a different law, different rules, and different definitions, UCR would, indeed, be a different program.

If California had their way, UCR would apparently look an awful lot more like IRP. But, if the Feds have their way (PRISM, mandatory DOT numbers, safety for license plates, etc.), IRP might start to take on more of a UCR look - except, of course, for that pesky 26K weight limit and that definition of "interstate carrier" and no paper credential and ... oh, heck with it!

No comments:

Post a Comment