Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Buckle Your Seatbelt: A Federal Motor Carrier License May Soon Be Required For Many Farmers
A large percentage of Cornbelt farms have semi-trailer trucks to more efficiently handle high capacity harvesting equipment. While some of those trucks have limited use other than harvest, many others become a second home for farmers who work as commercial carriers when they are not farming. Although they have the required commercial drivers’ licenses and many of their trucks have US Department of Transportation registration, many will not be happy to learn the DOT is working its way down further into their farming operation. Buckle your seat belt.
The US Department of transportation has an internal administrative staff to develop rules and regulations and implement those for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act. It is designed to enhance safety on public roadways, and part of the rules are licensing and registration for commercial vehicles used in interstate commerce. Over the road truck and bus drivers know all about the FMCSA and its rules. And many farmers who obtained a commercial drivers license from their state department of motor vehicles will be familiar with many of those regulations, and may already have a USDOT number on their vehicle if it has been driven across a state line.
The US Department of Transportation on May 23, 2011 began to finalize rules that will impact nearly every Cornbelt farming operation engaged in harvesting grain, hauling grain, and even hauling grain for an absentee landowner. The proposed rules are contained in an agricultural rule-making notice identified as FMCSA-2011-0146. Those rules consider:
1. Grain being hauled to market as part of interstate commerce unless it is being taken to a processing plant where it will entirely be converted into other products.
(Farmers hauling grain within the state to a processing plant will not be subject to the proposed registration rules, however, farmers who cross a state line to deliver to a processing plant or deliver to their local grain elevator will be subject to the registration rules. Since local elevators are not processing the grain, delivery to them is not exempt. Since elevators can ship the grain to processors or to feedlots or to export terminals, grain delivered to elevators is being considered by US DOT to be part of interstate commerce.)
2. Tenant farmers who have crop share leases to be commercial carriers if they haul any grain to the elevator that belongs to an absentee landowner.
(Farm operators with pure cash rent leases would not be subject since the grain belongs to them. However, grain belonging to a second party, either through a crop share lease or a flex lease with partial ownership would be considered part of interstate commerce. Subsequently, the US DOT would enforce its commercial carrier registration requirements on operators who typically haul their landowner’s grain to the elevator or a bin site owned by the landowner.)
3. Implements of husbandry, also known as farm equipment, which weight more than 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight, to be a commercial motor vehicle.
(This would include a truck, a combine, or a tractor and grain cart (individually, or in combination). Since all of them travel on the roadways they are in jeopardy of being considered to be commercial motor vehicles by the US DOT and subject to Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.)
Since the proposals have not been finalized, the US Department of Transportation is accepting comments on them through the end of June. You can submit your comments several ways:
• Fax: 1-202-493-2251
• Mail: Docket Management Facility, (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room 12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
• Submit online.
If you want to see what others are thinking about the proposals, their comments can be found here.
Summary:
The US Department of Transportation is considering rules that encompass many farm implements and typical practices as being engaged in interstate commerce. Those include hauling grain to the elevator, moving a combine from the machine shed to the field, and hauling a landlord’s grain to the elevator. Such actions would require trucks and machinery to have federal registration and operators to have commercial carrier licenses. The DOT is accepting comments on the proposed rules.
Posted by Stu Ellis on 06/22 at 12:00 AM | Permalink
Comments
Posted by: donna at June 22, 2011 12:12PM
When will lawmakers understand that excessive and unneeded regulations drive costs up for not only farmers but consumers as well. Regulations have already driven many businesses overseas. Will agriculture be next? When I need a DOT # and a CDL to haul my cattle across a state line or a bull to an customer I will end my current farming operation, period. Eat Lettuce.
Posted by: Jim Clark at June 22, 2011 4:04PM
This DOT proposal is going to extremes. This Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act is just a way to generate money. Do you think just because someone gets a CDL it is going to make the roads any safer? It is usually the other driver who does not pay attention or drives to fast or makes bad decisions. The next thing you will be doing is imposing a need for a special permit because the equipment is too large to run down the road. You want to impose more and more rules and regulations on my right to make a living.
The other nonsense in your rules is that if you farm on shares and we haul the landlords half with ours we are subject to being a commercial carrier. Who sits around and thinks up these things! You are trying to make the family farm a thing of the past. You are just making it harder and harder for the farmer to provide food for you and the world to eat. Our elected officials need to slash the budget not put another industry in jeopardy! Why do they and their families need free lifetime healthcare? Washington go to work on the important things going on in the United States, NO JOBS!
Posted by: Don at June 23, 2011 11:11AM
As someone who has been working closely with farmers, our elected officials and the U.S. Department of Transportation since this issue first surfaced in late February, please allow me to provide some much needed clarity and context to Stu’s post.
The issue facing us today surfaced in Illinois when State Police auditors conducting new entrant safety audits for Illinois Department of Transportation suddenly began treating farmers with “crop-share” leases as commercial “for-hire” truckers for the purposes of enforcing federal motor carrier safety rules.
Under federal motor carrier rules, “for-hire” carriers are required to obtain a commercial drivers’ license, commercial plates, be subject to random drug and alcohol screenings and purchase much higher levels of vehicle liability insurance.
At the same time, state auditors began designating “implements of husbandry” as commercial vehicles resulting in a double whammy of enforcement never seen before in Illinois and forcing many farmers to be out of compliance.
After discovering that Illinois farmers were now likely facing the highest level of trucking enforcement of any farmers in the nation, Illinois Farm Bureau immediately went to IDOT’s motor carrier safety division and the U.S. Department of Transportation to find out what changed and why and to see how we could get it addressed.
While Illinois Farm Bureau remained very concerned about the situation, we were very pleased and continue to be impressed by U.S. DOT’s and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s attempts to address these issues in a timely fashion.
At our first meeting at U.S. DOT in early March, FMCSA administrator Anne Ferro pledged to review the issue and get back to us quickly with answers. We were pleased when an immediate moratorium on new entrant audits in Illinois was imposed. At our meeting, Administrator Ferro also told us that she was motivated to begin building a ongoing dialogue with the agriculture industry and help her staff gain a better understanding of the movement of agricultural products and equipment. Our D.C. meeting was followed a few weeks later by a large meeting in Springfield with state and federal motor carrier regulators. They had many questions for us about the nature of crop share leases and farm equipment. Administrator Ferro’s appearance yesterday at a conference Farm Bureau national legislative directors in Washington was further evidence of FMCSA’s commitment to work with us.
For reasons still unclear, IDOT—which oversees enforcement of federal motor carrier rules in Illinois—sought and received a rule interpretation from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration giving them the authority to classify crop-share tenants as commercial drivers.
FMCSA’s long standing interpretation states that any farmer with a crop-share agreement is being compensated for transporting their landlord’s grain to an elevator. IFB disagrees. We also disagree with treating implements of husbandry as commercial vehicles.
The current Federal Register request for comments is NOT a rule making. It simply asks farm organizations, farmers, and the public for feedback on the agency’s current long standing interpretations.
Before the end of the day on June 30, Illinois Farm Bureau strongly encourages farmers and other farm groups to comment on this very important matter. Tell the FMCSA about your operation, how you use trucks, what roads you travel, and how many miles you drive to the elevator. Tell them about the nature of your crop share and flex leases, how far they go back, whether the transportation of commodities is even a consideration. Show them photos of your tractors and wagons, explain how fast they travel, and discuss the safety measures you take voluntarily. Explain to FMCSA how safety is something that you think about on the farm every day. Emphasize that in addition to being a costly hassle, the current interpretations have the potential of changing the face of agriculture in Illinois. If you’ve been through an audit, and have found out of compliance, contact us and we’ll make sure your story is told.
Again, we have a chance this month to address and hopefully resolve a major issue and help educate well intentioned folks working at an important federal agency about our industry. Thank you,
Adam Nielsen
Director of National Legislation and Policy Development, Illinois Farm Bureau
Posted by: Adam Nielsen at June 23, 2011 1:01PM
DOT tax us some more! DOT will spend more money to implement their progam
than what they collect. If FMCSA dosen’t
understand how grain is delivered to elevators they better look for another job. I have been farming for 50 years hauling grain to the elevator which is 3.5 miles from my field. No accidents.
Why change something that is working?
Posted by: Duane Johnson at June 23, 2011 9:09PM
It has been determined that we need to drastically reduce federal government spending. Our country depends on it. Do they really believe they can make these rules and enforce them while spending less money in their deapartments? Do they know where their food comes from (other than the ‘store’)? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. . . . .
Posted by: Larry at June 24, 2011 2:02PM
It all boils down to two things: CONTROL AND MONEY.
If the licenses get passed for tractors and combines how long before the hand comes back for a fuel tax payment based on how many road miles you have driven?
I have a CDL and USDOT number. That alone does not make me a commercial trucker. But since I crop share and move the share grain out of the field that makes me a commercial trucker. That is a stretch of the imagination, almost as much as the grain hauled to the local elevator being considered interstate commerce on my part when I no longer own it. No way.
Posted by: Larry at June 25, 2011 2:02PM
Someone once said that a hungry nation has only one problem but a well fed nation has many. If things keep going the way they are for farmers in this country we may find out how true this is. It’s all about revenue and tax, how long can this keep going on before people wake up and realize why our fourfathers came here and why this country was created in the first place, or did they take that out of the history books in our wonderful public schools too.
Posted by: cooter brown at June 26, 2011 10:10PM
If requiring a CDL for the crop share grain isn’t enough, the CDL proposal for combines and farm tractors is over the top. Wonder how the cones will be set up for combines and 4WD tractors for the driving test.
Posted by: J.D. Kammin at June 27, 2011 7:07AM
I think this is another useless and ridiculous way for the government to hurt the innocent farming community. Why don’t we take the time and money spent to think up these regulations and spend it on reducing our debt and passing regulations to cut our spending on welfare programs. WHY DOES THIS COUNTRY KEEP SUPPORTING PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PRODUCTIVE AND DO NOT BRING ANYTHING TO THE TABLE FOR THE NATION??? Instead we decide to tax the hell out of honest, hard working individuals who actually try to improve soecity. After I deliver grain to my local elevator for my landlord I/we no longer own the grain. It is no longer my responsibility. I am not hauling interstate commerce. I haul it 5 miles in the same county and sell it. The elevator handles interstate commerce but I, the farmer, does not handle interstate commerce. Please do not passs these regulations and create more regulations for every farmer in this nation. It will only cause prices to go up!
Posted by: DJ at June 27, 2011 8:08AM
These proposed regulations are excessive and will force many changes that will negatively affect the entire nation. Adding more paperwork and time into the already busy schedules that farmers keep. Driving up the price of food and most negatively impacting the small family farmer.
Posted by: Brad at June 27, 2011 2:02PM
FMCSA considering rules that emcompass farm implements farm trucks on farmers with “crop share leases” are rediculous. This is just another reason why our govt. is failing. Taxing every farmer is going to drive food prices higher, cause a lot of smaller farmers to be nonprofitable and go broke or quit. COMMON SENSE ISN’T VERY COMMON at least in our govt. The U.S. govt. have many serious problems they need to be addressing, don’t be adding regulations where they are not needed. Thats only going to cost money to the farmer and these regulations have no sense what so ever. I have two semi’s and put around 1500 mile a year each one. My local elevator is 3.5 mile away and ADM is 10 mile away. I spend over $3000. on just licenses and inspections now on those two trucks, add a combime and auger cart and tractor. I might as well join the majority and sit on my front porch wait for my aid check. Why is this govt. set on braking the small business man and farmers that work hard for their money and pay taxes.
Posted by: Brian Albert at June 28, 2011 9:09AM
I disagree with Larry who said it’s about “Control and Money”. No it’s not . . . it’s about “Money and Control”! Seriously, Money is the means to Control, not Control is the means to Money!
This is all by design. I imagine they WANT the small farmers to all be driven out and bought up by Big AG. Then, when Big Ag decides there’s more money selling all our food to China, why, that’s what they’ll do! The Average American can just go starve. Or import food FROM China, after they process what would have been our food if Big Ag hadn’t “outsourced” it.
No doubt, it’ll have melamine and lead in it. But that’s by design, too. They want us doped up, dumbed down, brain damaged, brain washed, poisoned and DEAD.
And I’m not just talking about the present administration . . . this has been going on for decades, with both parties guilty of nothing less than treason. We’re entering the endgame just now.
Alex Jones recently reported a discussion he had with a banker who headed a very large, well-known and powerful financial institution, whom he happened to meet on a flight. The banker scornfully told Alex, “People will take *anything* we do to them. *Anything*. And we use that against them!” Alex said his blood ran cold.
How much evidence do you need that that elitist banker was expressing the actual views and visions of the Powers That Be? How much more evidence do you need?! All you have to do is look around at this USDOT regulation; WTO; “Cap and Trade” (meanwhile they want nothing to do with “Cut, Cap and Balance”!); selling off water rights to private concerns; the Patriot Act; calling everyone a terrorist but actual terrorists; and on and on and on.
There’s no end to the evidence that this destruction of our country and our lives, of our liberties and our fortunes, is by design. And the banker seems to be right . . . we’re just all going to sit here, typing our little comments, and take it!
Posted by: P.O.'d at July 29, 2011 1:01PM
All the comments I have read so far are about the “poor farmer” and quit picking on me. When you enter our system of roads to do your business all equipment and drivers of that equipment should be required to be as safe as all the other vechiles on the road. The rules are for safety purposes. Fees need to be collected to enforce those rules. This is a safety issue!!
Ok, have you ever driven behind a wagon swaying all over the lane, have you ever encountered “new shiny equipment on the road with its safety lights “off”. You farmers bring this upon yourselves.
I applaud the Federal Motor Carrier administration for finally making our roadways safer. P.S. What is the price of corn today??? There are no more “poor farmers” on our roads.
Posted by: Sam at August 9, 2011 9:09PM
What else can you possibily find to TAX!!! This idea of making farmer divvy up is a slap in the face to the dedicated farmers who have fed this country ans world for years. UNLESS I see some reduction from senate,congress and house members giving up gov’t cell phones/cars.apartments and all the freebies they receive from govt taxpayers i will look very carefully when i vote again this is getting ridiculous !!!!! all we hear is tax/tax when am i going to hear govt slash from our elected i didn;t cast my vote for you to TAKE ME DOWN THE DRAIN!!!!!