UNIFORM FINE ASSESSMENT (UFA) 4.0 

CALCULATION EXPLANATION

Prepared by:

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

 UNIFORM FINE ASSESSMENT (UFA) 4.0

CALCULATION EXPLANATION

ATTACHMENT B
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

UFA 4.0 supersedes any prior methodology and is effective for any 

investigation initiated on or after August 12, 2013.

Page 2 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

Attachments:

1. UFA Report Example

2. UFA Fines Table (Identifies Nature of the Violation and Minimum 

and Maximum Penalties) 

3. UFA Gravity Table (Identifies Severe Level I and II violations, 

Fundamental, and Essential Safety Management Violations)

4. Default 1 Charged Violation (Extent) 

Page 3 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

Contents

UFA METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 6

I. STATUTORY FACTORS CONSIDERED BY SUBJECT.......................................................................... 7

A. Subject Factors ..................................................................................................................................... 7

1. FMCSRs and HMRs (49 USC 521 (b)(2)(D) and 5123(c)) and all other statutes 

and regulations enforced by FMCSA where no other statutory penalty factors 

apply 7

2. HHG (49 USC 14901) 7

3. MANDATORY INSURANCE VIOLATIONS (49 USC 31138(d)(1)—passenger 

carriers and 31139(g)(1)) –property carriers 7

B. Subject Criteria Points and Percentage....................................................................................... 7

C. Zero Point Value................................................................................................................................... 8

II. SUBJECT FACTOR DESCRIPTIONS AND POINTS............................................................................... 8

A. History of Prior Violations and History of Prior Conduct.................................................... 8

B. Degree of Culpability.......................................................................................................................... 9

C. Ability to Continue in Business and, if applicable Ability to Pay.................................... 10

D. Penalties Not Reduced by Gross Revenue Cap or SBREFA –Statutory Minimum 

Penalties, Section 222 Penalties, and Egregious Hours of Service Violations. ......... 10

E. Administrative Minimum Total Penalties............................................................................... 11

F. Small Business Regulatory Fairness in Enforcement Act (SBREFA)............................ 11

G. Such Other Matters as Justice and Public Safety May Require........................................ 11

III. SUBJECT CALCULATIONS: UFA REPORT.......................................................................................... 12

A. Subject Points..................................................................................................................................... 12

B. Gross Revenue Cap........................................................................................................................... 12

C. Total Reducible Amount. ............................................................................................................... 13

D. Total Reduction Amount................................................................................................................ 13

E. Total Penalty Proposed. ................................................................................................................. 13

F. Total Penalty Proposed Rounded............................................................................................... 14

IV. STATUTORY FACTORS CONSIDERED FOR EACH VIOLATION.................................................. 14

A. FMCSRs; HMRs (49 USC 521 (b)(2)(D) and 5123(c)); 49 USC 31138 (d)(1) and 

31139 (g)(1) and all other statutes and regulations enforced by FMCSA where no 

other statutory penalty factors apply....................................................................................... 14

Page 4 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

B. HHG (49 USC 14901)....................................................................................................................... 14

V. VIOLATION FACTORS DESCRIPTION AND POINTS ...................................................................... 14

A. Nature of Violation............................................................................................................................... 14

B. Gravity of Violation.......................................................................................................................... 15

1. High Gravity 15

2. Medium Gravity 15

3. Low Gravity 16

4. Contributed to Crash and/or HM incident 16

C. Extent of Violations.......................................................................................................................... 16

D. Circumstances of Violation........................................................................................................... 17

E. Harm to Shipper (Household Goods Only)............................................................................. 18

F. Whether Shipper has Been Adequately Compensated (Household Goods Only).... 18

VI. VIOLATION FACTOR CALCULATIONS: UFA REPORT.................................................................. 19

A. Initial Calculated Fine ..................................................................................................................... 19

B. Proportional Reductions based on Ability to Continue in Business or Ability to Pay

................................................................................................................................................................. 20

C. Rounding Conventions for Penalties......................................................................................... 20

Page 5 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

UFA METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW

The Uniform Fine Assessment (UFA) Software was developed by FMCSA to promote 

uniformity and consistency in the assessment of civil penalties for violations of the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs), as 

well as other statutes and regulations enforced by FMCSA. UFA assists FMCSA Staff and its 

State partners that perform any type of investigation in calculating civil penalties for 

violations of the federal statutes and regulations. 

By statute, FMCSA is required to consider legislatively mandated factors when assessing a 

civil penalty for violations of the FMCSRs, and HMRs, as well as other statutes and 

regulations relating to household goods transportation. Consistent with the statutory 

language, certain statutory factors are considered for the entity or individual against whom 

the penalty is proposed and other statutory factors are considered for each violation. UFA 

also applies the factors applicable to FMCSRs and HMRs to violations for which no penalty 

factors are otherwise required by statute to be considered. In calculating a civil penalty, 

the UFA software takes into consideration all statutory factors, regulatory requirements, 

and administrative policies including any administrative minimum penalties.

UFA use is mandated for all civil penalties processed through FMCSA’s adjudication 

system. Deviations from UFA must be approved by the Field Administrator. Any fine 

proposed outside of UFA must consider all applicable statutory penalty factors.

UFA prepares a report demonstrating the manner in which FMCSA considered the 

statutory penalty factors, regulatory requirements, and administrative policies. A sample 

UFA report is included as Attachment 1 and is used throughout this Explanation to 

illustrate the UFA calculations. The sample provided is not intended to represent the 

penalties assessed for the violations cited. The penalty assessed in any particular case will 

be based on consideration of the statutory factors, regulatory requirements, and 

administrative policies.

Page 6 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

1. STATUTORY FACTORS CONSIDERED BY SUBJECT

 

A. Subject Factors

FMCSRs and HMRs (49 USC 521 (b)(2)(D) and 5123(c)) and all other statutes 

and regulations enforced by FMCSA where no other statutory penalty factors 

apply

UFA uses the word “SUBJECT” to refer to the entity or person against whom a 

penalty is proposed. For violations of the FMCSRs, and HMRs, UFA calculates a 

proposed penalty by considering four legislatively mandated Subject Factors: (1) 

history of prior violations (2) culpability (3) ability to continue in business1 and (4) 

such other matters as justice and public safety may require. 

HHG (49 USC 14901)

For HHG violations UFA calculates a proposed penalty by considering four Subject 

Factors: (1) history of prior conduct (2) culpability (3) effect on ability to do 

business and ability to pay and (4) such other matters as fairness may require.

MANDATORY INSURANCE VIOLATIONS (49 USC 31138(d)(1)—passenger 

carriers and 31139(g)(1)) –property carriers

For mandatory insurance violations, UFA calculates a proposed penalty by 

considering four Subject Factors: (1) history of prior violations (2) degree of 

culpability (3) effect on ability to continue doing business and ability to pay and (4) 

such other matters that justice requires.

B. Subject Criteria Points and Percentage

The initial calculated fine for each charged violation is determined based on the 

penalty range for the violation and the Violation Factors (See Section IV). Points 

assigned to each Subject Factor are then applied to reduce or increase the initial 

calculated fine for each charged violation. The cumulative points are summed for all 

Subject Factors and then expressed as a percentage, e.g. 30 = 30%. The initial 

calculated fine is then multiplied by the Subject Factor (expressed as a percentage + 

1) to reduce or increase the penalty per violation within the penalty range for the 

violation. 

1 For HMRs violations, ability to pay is also a factor expressed in the statute. UFA considers ability to pay in 

the same way that the Agency treats ability to continue in business.

Page 7 of 21

 
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

C. Zero Point Value.

A “zero” point assignment does not increase the penalty assessment. 

2. SUBJECT FACTOR DESCRIPTIONS AND POINTS

A. History of Prior Violations and History of Prior Conduct 

UFA considers history by evaluating the Violator’s enforcement history with FMCSA. 

Enforcement history is a significant factor since it provides an indication of both the 

carrier’s or individual’s awareness of its safety obligations and its historical 

willingness to comply with the regulations. History of prior violations refers only to 

those prior closed cases processed under FMCSA’s adjudication system with an 

admission of the violation within the six years preceding the close of the compliance 

review. Admission of the violation may occur as a result of an express admission by 

the motor carrier, e.g. admission of the violations as a condition of binding 

arbitration; by full payment in response to a notice of claim that contains language 

notifying the carrier that full payment will be an admission; by an adjudication of 

liability; by a default finding; by a Notice of Default and Final Agency Order; or by 

Subject Criteria Points Application Example

Example 1 (Subject Factors Increase Penalty): A carrier is assigned 20 points for history factor 

and 10 points for culpability. It receives zero points for Other Matters. The total Subject Factor 

points are 30 and are expressed as 30%. The initial calculated fine for each charged violation would 

be affected as follows:

Initial calculated fine per charged violation= $8,672 

Subject Factor = $8,672 x (30% Subject Factor+ 1) = $8,030 x 130% = $11,273

Example 2 (Subject Factors Decrease Penalty): A carrier is assigned zero points for the history 

and culpability Factors. It is assigned -20 points in Other Matters for corrective action taken before 

the investigation. The total Subject Factor points = -20 and is expressed as -20%. The initial 

calculated fine for each charged violation would be decreased.

Initial Calculated fine per charged violation=$8,672 

Subject Factor = $8,672 x (-20% Subject Factor + 1) =$8,672 x 80% = $6,937

Example 3 (Subject Factors Do Not Affect Penalty): A carrier is assigned zero points for all

factors. The Subject Factor points would be zero expressed as zero percent. The initial calculated 

fine for each charged violation would not be impacted.

Initial Calculated fine per charged violation =$8,672

Initial penalty calculation: $8,672 x (0% Subject Factor +1) = $8,672 x 100% = $8,672

Page 8 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

the execution of a settlement agreement containing language that expressly admits 

the violation. UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the history 

selection as follows:

HISTORY CRITERIA HISTORY

POINTS

No enforcement history 0

Penalized for violation(s) in any other regulatory part(s) 20

Penalized for violation(s) in the same regulatory part(s) 35

Penalized for two or more prior closed cases OR prior case for 

violation of an order. 

50

B. Degree of Culpability

UFA considers degree of culpability by evaluating the Violator’s conduct or actions 

and knowledge of the conditions, or practices that resulted in the discovered 

violations. It is an assessment of the Violator, not the individual violation, and 

determines the knowledge level, accountability, and fault level of the Violator. 

“Should have known of any discovered violation” refers to the knowledge attributed 

to entities and individuals subject to FMCSA’s jurisdiction. These entities and 

individuals are required to be knowledgeable regarding the regulations applicable 

to them. They are also responsible for the acts of their agents and employees. An 

entity or individual should have known of any violation committed by its agents or 

employees. Should have known of the violation is the default selection for 

culpability. Any selection other than “should have known of any discovered 

violation” will be explained in the Memo section.

“Knew of any discovered violation” refers to actual knowledge that any of the 

charged violations occurred. Actual knowledge may be imputed to the Subject 

where the evidence of the violation is contained in the Subject’s own files. For 

example, using a driver whose commercial license is suspended when the evidence 

of the driver’s suspended license is contained in the Subject’s files. 

“Any violation discovered is intentional” refers to acts of the Subject or its agents 

expressly directing a violation or deliberately disregarding the regulations. 

Page 9 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the culpability selection as 

follows:

CULPABILITY CRITERIA CULPABILITY

POINTS

Should have known of any discovered violation (s) 0

Knew of any discovered violation(s) 10

Any violation discovered is an intentional violation 25

C. Ability to Continue in Business and, if applicable Ability to Pay

FMCSA evaluates a Subject’s ability to continue in business and, if applicable, ability 

to pay, based on the Subject’s gross revenue or gross income (for individual 

subjects) after determining the initial calculated fine for the violation. The initial 

calculated fine considers the Subject Factors (other than ability to continue in 

business and ability to pay), SBREFA, and the Violation Factors. 

UFA limits the total penalty for all violations to a percentage (currently 2%) of the 

Subject’s gross revenue or income. This is referred to as the gross revenue cap. UFA 

then reduces the proposed penalty proportionally for each violation within any 

statutory and administrative minimum penalty limits. See UFA Fines Table, 

Attachment 2, for applicable statutory and administrative minimum penalties). 

The total reduction amount, if any, is shown on under Subject Calculations in the 

UFA report and the individual per charged violation reductions are shown under the 

Violation calculations in the UFA report. 

If the gross revenue is unknown UFA does not reduce the initial calculated penalty. 

The Subject is responsible for providing gross revenue information to determine 

eligibility for a reduced penalty based on ability to continue in business or ability to 

pay. If the Subject refuses to provide gross revenue information, there is no data 

from which UFA could consider to warrant a penalty reduction based on ability to 

continue in business or ability to pay.

D. Penalties Not Reduced by Gross Revenue Cap or SBREFA –Statutory 

Minimum Penalties, Section 22 Penalties, and Egregious Hours of 

Service Violations.

Statutory minimum penalties will not be reduced to conform to the gross revenue 

cap, but administrative minimum penalties per violation may be reduced to conform 

to gross revenue cap. Penalties assessed under Section 222 of the Motor Carrier 

Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) will not be reduced to conform to the 

gross revenue cap. Egregious hours of service violations will not be reduced to 

conform to gross revenue cap. The UFA report will note that the penalties for these 

Page 10 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

types of violations have not been reduced. UFA will calculate a penalty for the 

remaining violations within the gross revenue cap and then add any mandatory 

minimum or maximum penalties to the calculation.

E. Administrative Minimum Total Penalties

Based on FMCSA’s experience in proposing civil penalties, insignificant civil 

penalties which may be viewed as a cost of doing business in violation of FMCSA’s 

statutes and regulations, do not promote compliance or motor carrier safety. 

Therefore, to ensure prolonged, sustained, and meaningful compliance, UFA 

establishes a minimum gross revenue cap of $2,000 for entities and $150 for 

individuals. 

F. Small Business Regulatory Fairness in Enforcement Act (SBREFA)

UFA also considers the provisions of SBREFA when calculating a proposed penalty. 

SBREFA applicability is determined by the number of employees (NOT drivers) for 

each Subject. Because the majority of the entities regulated by FMCSA are 

considered small businesses under SBREFA, UFA defaults to a selection that the 

entity is subject to SBREFA. If the entity is identified as a small business, then the 

penalty is reduced by 20% for each violation. (See Section VII. Violation Factor 

Calculations)

SBREFA also limits the total proposed penalty by reducing any total gross revenue 

cap initially determined by 20%. (See Section III. Subject Calculations) 

G. Such Other Matters as Justice and Public Safety May Require

FMCSA considers matters that are not otherwise specified by statute but 

nevertheless have bearing on public safety under this factors. Under this factor, 

FMCSA evaluates action taken to correct the violations and the timing of corrective

action. 

Corrective action take before the investigation began is selected if the Violator 

significantly corrected any of the charged violations before any contact by the 

investigator. Partial corrective action may, but is not required to be credited, and a 

description of the corrective action credited will be provided in the Memo section.

Corrective action taken after the investigation but before the Notice of Claim issued 

is selected if the violator significantly corrected any of the charged violations after 

contact by the investigator but before the NOC is issued. Partial corrective action 

may, but is not required to be credited and a description of the corrective action 

credited will be provided in the Memo section.

Page 11 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the corrective action selection as 

follows:

CORRECTIVE ACTION CRITERIA

OTHER 

MATTERS

POINTS

No Corrective Action 0

Corrective Action before Investigation Began -20

Corrective Action after Investigation Began but Before Notice of Claim -10

Any selection other than “no corrective action” will be explained in the Memo section of 

the UFA report. 

3. SUBJECT CALCULATIONS: UFA REPORT

The “Subject Calculations” on the UFA report identifies the Subject Points, the gross 

revenue cap, total reducible amount, total reduction amount, Total Proposed Penalty 

and Total Rounded Proposed Penalty. 

A. Subject Points. 

The Subject Points for each Subject Criteria Factor are shown on the UFA Subject 

Calculations page. They are summed and then expressed as a percentage. The UFA 

Report (Attachment 1) shows the following points assigned:

Subject Criteria:

Factor Selection Points

History Penalized for violation(s) in same parts 35

Culpability Should have known of any discovered violation(s) 0 

Other Matters No corrective action 0 

Total 35

Subject Factor = 35%

B. Gross Revenue Cap. 

The gross revenue cap is calculated as gross revenue *2%. If the carrier also is a 

small business as defined in the Small Business Regulatory Fairness and 

Enforcement Act (SBREFA), the cap is further reduced by 20%. To ensure prompt 

and sustained compliance, the gross revenue cap may not be less than $2,000 unless 

the Subject is an individual, in which case the gross revenue cap will not be less than 

$150. 

Page 12 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

 

Report Example: Gross Revenue = $123,400 

Gross Revenue Cap ($123,400 * 2%) = $2,468

SBREFA Cap = ($2,468 * 80%) = $1,974

Gross Revenue Cap = $2,000 

The gross revenue cap may not be less than the minimum administrative 

penalty for all violations and therefore, although SBREFA reduced the penalty, it 

would not be reduced below the minimum total penalty. 

 

C. Total Reducible Amount. 

This is the amount that the penalty could be reduced considering statutory or 

administrative minimums without reference to the gross revenue cap. Calculated as 

the sum of (the initial calculated fine minus statutory or administrative minimum 

penalties) times the number of charged violations. 

D. Total Reduction Amount. 

This amount represents the sum that was actually reduced to conform to the gross 

revenue cap. It is the sum of (initial calculated fine * number charged) – gross 

revenue cap but not greater than Total Reducible Amount.

 

Total Penalty Proposed. 

Report Example:

Total reducible amount = $13,844

Sum of (initial calculated fine – statutory or administrative minimum) * number 

charged for each violation

Violation Penalty 

Statutory/Adm. Min

Counts Sum

382.115(a) ($8,672 – 0) *1 $8,672

391.11(b)(1) ($4,395 – 0) *1 $4,395

396.3(b)(2): ($777 -0) *1 $777

$13,844

Report Example:

Total Reduction Amount= $13,844– 2,000 = $11,844

Sum of reduced individual violation calculations (See Violation Calculations in 

Report).

Page 13 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

E. Total Penalty Proposed Rounded. 

Total penalty proposed is rounded down to the nearest tenth to eliminate the 

potential that any assessment would be less than a whole dollar figure. This is the 

total penalty that is proposed in the Notice of Claim. 

4. STATUTORY FACTORS CONSIDERED FOR EACH VIOLATION

A. FMCSRs; HMRs (49 USC 521 (b)(2)(D) and 5123(c)); 49 USC 31138 

(d)(1) and 31139 (g)(1) and all other statutes and regulations enforced 

by FMCSA where no other statutory penalty factors apply

For violations of the FMCSRs, HMRs, mandatory insurance violations, and other 

statutes and regulations enforced by FMCSA where no other statutory penalty 

factors apply, UFA considers four legislatively mandated Violation Factors: (1) 

nature of violation (2) circumstances of violation (3) extent of violations (4) gravity 

of violation.

B. HHG (49 USC 14901)

For HHG violations UFA calculates a proposed penalty by considering two Violation 

Factors: (1) degree of harm to shipper or shippers and (2) whether the shipper has 

been adequately compensated before institution of the proceedings.

5. VIOLATION FACTORS DESCRIPTION AND POINTS

A. Nature of Violation

UFA considers the nature of each violation by the type of violation, e.g. 

recordkeeping, non-recordkeeping, commercial driver’s license. Violations are 

assigned to a category (VCAT) based on the type of violation. A list of the nature of 

each type of violation is contained in the UFA Fines Table (Attachment 2). The UFA 

Fines Table also assigns a penalty range for the violation based on the statutory 

minimum and maximum penalties and any administrative minimum or maximum 

penalties. The UFA Fines Table demonstrates how each regulatory violation is 

mapped to its nature by type. The nature of the violation is automatically 

determined by UFA when the violation is entered into the UFA software. 

Page 14 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

B. Gravity of Violation

The gravity of the violation is evaluated by the relative seriousness of the violation. 

It is mapped and automatically assigned at the time the violation is selected. The 

violation gravity descriptions are as follows if the violation did not contribute to a 

crash and/or HM incident: High, Medium, and Low: 

1. High Gravity 

High gravity violations are the most serious violations (not contributing to a 

crash or HM incident) and identified as acute (as defined in the FMCSRs, 49 CFR 

Part 385), Fundamental, Severe Level I, and Out-of-Service violations. A current 

list of the Fundamental, Severe Level I, and Out-of-Service violations are 

identified on the Gravity table (Attachment3). This list is periodically reviewed 

and updated.

 

 

2. Medium Gravity 

Medium gravity violations are serious violations (not contributing to a crash or 

HM incident) and identified as critical (as defined in the FMCSRs, 49 CFR Part 

385), Essential Safety Management, and Severe Level II violations. A current list 

of the Essential Safety Management and Severe Level II violations are identified 

on the Gravity Table (Attachment 3). This list is periodically reviewed and 

updated.

Example:

Violation 49 CFR 382.114(a)

Nature of Violation = Non-Recordkeeping –FMCSR

Penalty Range: 1,100 (administrative minimum) - $11,000 (statutory maximum)

The penalty range is available on the UFA Fines Table and also is referred to in 

the UFA report as the “range min” and “range max.”

Example:

49 CFR 177.33(a) – transporting HM in unauthorized 

cargo tank

Severe Level I violation

Gravity = High

Page 15 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

3. Low Gravity 

All other violations are assigned a low gravity if they did not contribute to a 

crash or HM incident.

4. Contributed to Crash and/or HM incident

a. If the violation caused a crash or HM incident, the highest severity point level 

is assigned. 

b. If the violation caused and HM incident which resulted in a fatality, serious 

injury, illness, or destruction of property, a maximum fine of $175,000 may 

be assessed, overriding all other factors otherwise considered by UFA. 

UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the gravity selection as 

follows:

GRAVITY SELECTION GRAVITY

POINTS

Low 10

Medium 25

High 50

Contributed to Crash or HM incident 70

C. Extent of Violations

UFA considers extent by evaluating the magnitude, scope, and frequency of the 

violations. UFA evaluates whether the violation is isolated or widespread. UFA 

measures extent based on the number of violations discovered divided by the number 

of records checked for violations. This number is expressed as a percentage. 

Example: 

49 CFR 395.8(e) – false reports of records of duty 

status 

Critical regulation

 

Gravity = medium

Page 16 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

Extent is expressed as either Low or High. High extent is defined as 10% or greater. 

Low extent is less than 10%.

Individual and single incident violations where 1 violation is discovered out of 1 

record checked, is considered a Low violation rate. However, if the violation arises 

during the investigation of an entity, 1 violation discovered out of 1 checked is 

counted as High extent. For example, a company failing to implement a controlled 

substance and alcohol testing program is represented as 1 violation discovered out 

of 1 checked and would be considered a High extent of violations in UFA. In 

contrast, a driver failing to have 1 record of duty status out of 1 checked during a 

roadside inspection would be considered to have a Low extent of violations.

UFA defaults the number of violations charged to 10% if the extent is “High” unless 

the 10% is greater than the number discovered, in which case the default number 

charged is the number discovered. This also applies to penalties for Section 222 

violations.

If extent is Low, UFA defaults the number of violations charged to 3 unless the 

number discovered is less than 3, in which case 3 violations are charged. This also 

applies to penalties for Section 222 violations.

Certain violations also default to one charged based on the nature of the violation. 

(See Attachment 4 –Extent Default Charged Violations Table). UFA automatically 

maps point assignments based on the extent selection as follows:

EXTENT SELECTION EXTENT 

POINTS

Low 10

High 20

 

D. Circumstances of Violation

UFA considers the circumstances of a violation by evaluating the conditions, factors, 

and events accompanying the violation that, when present, may serve to increase or 

decrease the proposed penalty. Mitigating factors are those actions that reduce the 

safety risk posed by a particular violation. Aggravating factors are those actions 

Example: 49 CFR 395.8(e) – false reports of records of duty status

Violations checked = 250

Violations discovered = 25

Violation percentage = 10%

Page 17 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

that increase the safety risk posed by a particular violation. Any mitigating or 

aggravating circumstance should be outside of any statutory penalty factors already 

considered by UFA and must be explained in the Memo section. For example, UFA 

already considers whether the violation contributed to a crash so the relationship of 

the violation to a crash should not be reported as an aggravating factor. UFA 

automatically maps point assignments based on the circumstances selection as 

follows:

CIRCUMSTANCES OF VIOLATION CIRCUMSTANCES

POINTS

None 0

Aggravating 10

Mitigating -10

E. Harm to Shipper (Household Goods Only)

The degree of harm to a shipper is measured by whether there has been 

inconvenience, e.g. partial or late delivery and/or monetary impact to the shipper. 

UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the harm to shipper selection 

as follows:

HARM TO SHIPPER

HARM TO 

SHIPPER

POINTS

None or Unknown 0

Inconvenience (e.g. late or partial delivery) but NO monetary 

impact

20

Monetary Impact 50

F. Whether Shipper has Been Adequately Compensated (Household Goods 

Only)

Whether the shipper has been adequately compensated is determined by reference 

to whether the carrier has provided compensation and, if so, when the 

compensation occurred. UFA automatically maps point assignments based on the 

harm to shipper selection as follows:

ADEQUATE COMPENSATION TO SHIPPER

ADEQUATE 

COMPENSATION 

TO SHIPPER

No compensation required/not applicable 0

Adequately compensated before institution of civil penalty 

proceedings

10

Not adequately compensated before institution of civil 

penalty proceedings

40

Page 18 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

6. VIOLATION FACTOR CALCULATIONS: UFA REPORT

A. Initial Calculated Fine

UFA generates an initial calculated fine for each violation proposed for enforcement 

based on consideration of the Violation Factors and, if applicable, with a reduction 

for SBREFA. 

Example of Initial Calculated Fine: 

Initial Calculated Fine = [Range Maximum – Range minimum * Violation Factor + 

Range Minimum] * (1 + Subject Factor) * 80% (SBREFA Reduction, if applicable)

49 CFR 382.115(a)

Violation Criteria

 

Violation Factor Selection Points

Circumstances None 0

Gravity High (did not contribute to crash or HM incident 

release)

50

Extent High (1 discovered out of1 checked = 100%) 20

70

 

Range Maximum

$11,000

Range Minimum (From UFA Table)

$1,100

 

Subject Factor = (1 + 35%) 

Step1: Determine Initial Penalty Based on Statutory/Administrative Minimum 

and Maximum Penalty amounts 

Maximum $11,000 (statutory maximum) - $1,100 (administrative minimum) = $9,900

Step 2: Apply Violation Factor to amount determined in Step 1.

$9,900 * 70% = 6,930 + $1,100 (range minimum) = $8,030

Note that range minimum is added to the amount determined so that the penalty is 

within the penalty range.

Step 3. Apply Subject Factor to Amount Determined in Step 2.

$8,030 * (35% +1) = $10,840

Page 19 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

Step 4. Apply SBREFA to Amount Determined in Step 3.

$10,840 * 80% = $8,672 (initial calculated fine before any reductions based on 

consideration of the Subject’s Ability to Continue in Business or Ability to Pay). 

B. Proportional Reductions based on Ability to Continue in Business or 

Ability to Pay

After UFA generates the Initial Calculated Fine, if the total initial calculated fine for 

all violations exceeds the gross revenue cap, then UFA proportionally reduces the 

fine per violation based on any applicable statutory or administrative minimum and 

maximums.

Example: The total initial calculated fine for all violations, $13,844, exceeds the gross 

revenue cap of $2,000. The initial calculated fine for the violation of 49 CFR 

382.115(a) is $8,672. The amount this fine is reduced is determined by the following 

formula:

Initial calculated fine – (initial calculated fine – statutory or administrative minimum) 

* total reduction amount divided by the total reducible amount.

$8,672 – ($8,672 – 0) * $11,844/$13,844 =

$8,672 * .85553 = $7,419.156 (rounded up to $7,420) 

$8,672 - $7,420 = $1,252

$1,252 is the penalty proposed for each charged violation of 49 CFR 382.115(a) in the 

Notice of Claim.

This step is repeated for each charged violation in the Notice of Claim.

C. Rounding Conventions for Penalties

After reducing the penalty per violation based on consideration of the ability to 

continue in business and, if applicable, SBREFA, the total proposed penalty for all 

charged violations is rounded down to the nearest tenth and summed:

Example:

Violation Reduced Penalty Counts

49 CFR 382.115(a) $1,252 1 

49 CFR 391.11(b)(1) $634 1 

49 CFR 396.3(b)(2) $112 1 

 

Page 20 of 21
UFA Methodology 4.0

Effective Date: August 12, 2013

Total for all charged Violations = $1,998 (before rounding)

Total for all charged Violations Rounded = $1,990. This is the total penalty 

proposed. 

Page 21 of 21
For Illustrative Purposes Only

ATTACHMENT 1_UFA Report Example

UNIFORM FINE ASSESSMENT

Subject Information

Name: LIBERTY TRANSPORT

USDOT #: 123456 

Case #: UT-2013-0041-US0001

Gross Revenue: $123,400

Review/Activity: Investigation 

Review/Inspection Date: 6/3/2013

Total Penalty Proposed: $1,990

For a detailed explanation of the calculations that appear on this report, visit our web site 

at www.fmcsa.dot.gov/penaltyassessments. 

Primary #: 382.115(a)

Nature of Violation: Non-Recordkeeping-FMCSR

Penalty per Charge: $1,252 

Number Charged: 1

Total penalty for this violation: $1,252

Description: Failing to implement an alcohol and/or controlled substances testing program on the date the employer begins 

commercial motor vehicle operations.

Circumstances: None

Gravity: Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident – High

Extent: High

Primary #: 391.11(b)(1)

Secondary #: 391.11(a)

Nature of Violation: Non-Recordkeeping-FMCSR

Penalty per Charge: $634

Number Charged: 1 

Total penalty for this violation: $634

Description: Using a driver less than 21 years old. 

Circumstances: None

Gravity: Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident – Low

Extent: High

Violations Charged

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
For Illustrative Purposes Only

UT-2013-0041-US0001

Primary #: 396.3(b)(2)

Nature of Violation: Recordkeeping-FMCSR

Penalty per Charge: $112

Number Charged: 1

Total penalty for this violation: $112

Description: Failing to have a means of indicating the nature and due date of the various inspection and maintenance operations to 

be performed.

Circumstances: None

Gravity: Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident – Low

Extent: High

Violations Charged

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 2 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
For Illustrative Purposes Only

UT-2013-0041-US0001

SUBJECT CALCULATIONS

* Reference Subject Criteria section for all available selections and points associated.

Subject Criteria Points

History Penalized for violation(s) in the same part(s) 35

Culpability Should have known of any discovered violation(s) 0 

Other Matters No corrective action 0 

Subject Factor = 35% 

Gross Revenue Cap = $2,000 

Total Reducible Amount = $13,844 

Total Reduction Amount = $11,844 

Total Penalty Proposed = $1,998 

Total Penalty Proposed (Rounded) = $1,990 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 3 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
For Illustrative Purposes Only

UT-2013-0041-US0001

VIOLATION CALCULATIONS

* Reference Violations Criteria section for all available selections and points associated.

382.115(a)

Violation Criteria Points

Circumstances None 0 

Gravity Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - High 50

Extent High (1 Discovered out of 1 Checked = 100%) 20 

Violation factor = 70% 

Range Max Range Min Violation Factor Calculated Fine Min Fine Reduced Fine

11000 1100 70% 8672 0 $1,252

Calculated Fine = [(11000 - 1100) x 70% + 1100] x (1 + 35%) x 80% = 8672

Penalty Range = 11000 - 1100 = 9900

Violation factor = 9900 x 70% = 6930

Add range minimum = 6930 + 1100 = 8030

Subject factor = 8030 x (1 + 35%) = 10840

Small business factor = 10840 x 80% = 8672

Reduced Fine = 8672 - [(8672 - 0) x 11844 / 13844] = 1252

The proposed penalty has been reduced proportionately based on a consideration of your ability to continue to do business and the 

applicable statutory and/or administrative minimum and statutory maximum civil penalties.

391.11(b)(1)

Violation Criteria Points

Circumstances None 0 

Gravity Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - Low 10 

Extent High (1 Discovered out of 1 Checked = 100%) 20 

Violation factor = 30% 

Range Max Range Min Violation Factor Calculated Fine Min Fine Reduced Fine

11000 1100 30% 4395 0 $634

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 4 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
For Illustrative Purposes Only

UT-2013-0041-US0001

VIOLATION CALCULATIONS

* Reference Violations Criteria section for all available selections and points associated.

Calculated Fine = [(11000 - 1100) x 30% + 1100] x (1 + 35%) x 80% = 4395

Penalty Range = 11000 - 1100 = 9900

Violation factor = 9900 x 30% = 2970

Add range minimum = 2970 + 1100 = 4070

Subject factor = 4070 x (1 + 35%) = 5494

Small business factor = 5494 x 80% = 4395

Reduced Fine = 4395 - [(4395 - 0) x 11844 / 13844] = 634

The proposed penalty has been reduced proportionately based on a consideration of your ability to continue to do business and the 

applicable statutory and/or administrative minimum and statutory maximum civil penalties.

396.3(b)(2)

Violation Criteria Points

Circumstances None 0 

Gravity Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - Low 10 

Extent High (1 Discovered out of 1 Checked = 100%) 20 

Violation factor = 30% 

Range Max Range Min Violation Factor Calculated Fine Min Fine Statutory Max Reduced Fine

1000 600 30% 777 0 10000 $112

Calculated Fine = [(1000 - 600) x 30% + 600] x (1 + 35%) x 80% = 777

Penalty Range = 1000 - 600 = 400

Violation factor = 400 x 30% = 120

Add range minimum = 120 + 600 = 720

Subject factor = 720 x (1 + 35%) = 972

Small business factor = 972 x 80% = 777

Reduced Fine = 777 - [(777 - 0) x 11844 / 13844] = 112 

The proposed penalty has been reduced proportionately based on a consideration of your ability to continue to do business and the 

applicable statutory and/or administrative minimum and statutory maximum civil penalties.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 5 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
For Illustrative Purposes Only

UT-2013-0041-US0001

CRITERIA TABLES

SUBJECT CRITERIA AND POINTS

History Points

0 No enforcement history

20 Penalized for violation(s) in any other part(s) 

35 Penalized for violation(s) in the same part(s)

50 Penalized for two or more prior cases OR prior case for violation of an order

Culpability Points

0 Should have known of any discovered violation(s) 

10 Knew of any discovered violation(s)

25 Intentional for any discovered violation(s)

Other Matters Points 

0 No corrective action

-20 Corrective action before Investigation

-10 Corrective action after Investigation but before NOC 

VIOLATION CRITERIA AND POINTS

Gravity Points

10 Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - Low

25 Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - Medium 

50 Did not contribute to crash and/or HM incident - High

70 Contributed to crash and/or HM incident

Circumstances Points 

0 None

-10 Mitigating

10 Aggravating

Extent Points

20 High (# violations discovered / # records checked >= 10%)

10 Low (# violations discovered / # records checked < 10% OR if Single Incident or Individual case and 1 of 1)

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 6 of 6 Version 4 Printed 7/17/2013
1 

UFA Penalty Provisions 

As of 2018 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (b) Commercial driver’s License (CDL) violations 

CDL Part 383 

(Individual)

E383 $250 - $5,591 N/A $250 Ad

Appendix B (h):* Copying of records and access to equipment, lands, and buildings--maximum penalty per day. 

Denial of access (Individual) 

EDOA $150 - $1,239 N/A $150 Ad

Appendix B (a)(1) Recordkeeping--maximum penalty per day. 

Recordkeeping (Individual) 

EDRK $150 - $1,239 N/A $150 Ad

Appendix B (a)(2)Knowing falsification of records. 

Knowing Falsification of Records (False to Conceal) 

(Individual)

EFTC $200 - $3,760 N/A $200 Ad

Appendix B (e )(4): Violations of Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and Safety Permitting Regulations (compliance with FMCSRs) 

HM Violation (Individual) 

EHMI $250 - $79,976 Yes - HM $250 Ad
2 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (e )(2)*Violations of Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and Safety Permitting Regulations (training)--minimum penalty. 

HM Training (Individual) 

EHTR $481 - $2,500 Yes - HM $2,500 A

Appendix B (a)(4) Nonrecordkeeping violations by drivers. 

Egregious hours of service violation (Individual) 

ENEG $500 - $3,760 Yes - 

Egregious 

Appendix B (a)(4) Nonrecordkeeping violations by drivers. 

Non - recordkeeping (Individual) 

ENRA $250 - $ 3,760 N/A $250 Ad

Appendix B (b)(1) : Special penalties pertaining to violation of out-of-service orders (first conviction). 

OOS CDL (1) (Individual) 

EOCA $3,096 – $5,591 N/A N/A 

Appendix B (b)(1) Special penalties pertaining to violation of out-of-service orders (second or subsequent conviction). 

OOS CDL (2) (Individual) 

EOCB $6,192- $7,000 N/A N/A 

Appendix A IV (a)Out-of-service order (operation of CMV by driver). 

OOS Other than OOS CDL (1) & (2) (Individual) 

EONC $500 - $1,848 N/A $500 Ad
3 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (g)(7): Violations of the CRs (HHG carrier or freight forwarder, or their receiver or trustee). 

Arbitration (HHG) 

GARB $1,604- $5,500 N/A $5,500 A

Appendix B (g)(22): HHG broker estimate before entering into an agreement with a motor carrier. 

Brokering w/o carrier agreement (HHG) 

GBCA $12,383- 

$100,000 

N/A $100,00

Appendix B (h):* Copying of records and access to equipment, lands, and buildings--maximum penalty per day. 

Denial of Access (HHG)

GDAH $600 - $1,239 N/A $600 Ad

Commercial Regulations Part 376 

GEMC $803 N/A 

Appendix B (g)(7): Violations of the CRs (HHG carrier or freight forwarder, or their receiver or trustee). 

110% Rule (HHG) 

GHTN $1,604- $5,500 N/A $5,500 A

Appendix B (g)(7): Violations of the CRs (HHG carrier or freight forwarder, or their receiver or trustee). 

Loss & Damage (HHG) 

GLAD $1,604 - $5,500 N/A $5,500 A
4 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (g)(7): Violations of the CRs (HHG carrier or freight forwarder, or their receiver or trustee). 

Other Non - recordkeeping (HHG) 

GNRO $1,604 - $5,500 N/A $5,500 A

Appendix B (g)(23): HHG transportation or broker services--registration requirement. 

Operating Authority (HHG Carrier/Broker) 

GOAH $30,956- $30,956 N/A $100,00

Appendix B (g)(21)(i): Knowingly and willfully fails to deliver or unload HHG at destination. 

Hostage Load (HHG) 

GOLD $16,048- 

$100,000 

N/A $100,00

Appendix B (a)(1) Recordkeeping--maximum penalty per day. 

Recordkeeping and reporting (HHG) 

GRKA $1,239 N/A 

Appendix B (h):* Copying of records and access to equipment, lands, and buildings--maximum penalty per day. 

Service Delay (HHG) 

GSDL $1,239 N/A 
5 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (g)(10) Violation of the CRs (weight of HHG shipment, charging for services)-- 

Tariff (HHG) 

GTRF $1,604 - $8,025 N/A $8,025 A

Appendix B (g)(8) Violation of the CRs (weight of HHG shipment, charging for services)--minimum penalty for first violation. 

Weight (HHG) – 1st Offense 

GWHT $3,210- $5,500 N/A $5,500 A

Appendix B (g)(8) Violation of the CRs (weight of HHG shipment, charging for services)—minimum penalty for subsequent violations. 

Weight (HHG) – 2nd Offense 

GWH2 $8,025 - $10,000 N/A $10,000 

 Communication(HM) HMCO $3,061 - $10,000 Yes - HM $3,061 A

Appendix B (h):* Copying of records and access to equipment, lands, and buildings--maximum penalty per day. 

Denial of Access (HM)

HMDA $600 - $1,239 N/A $600 Ad

Appendix B (e )(4) ): Violations of Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and Safety Permitting Regulations (compliance with FMCSRs) 

Operations (HM) HMOP $25,000 - $79,976 Yes - HM $25,000 
6 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B(e)(1) Packaging(HM) HMPG $5,000 - $79,976 Yes - HM $5,000 AAppendix B(e)(1) Recordkeeping 

(HM) 

HMRK $250 - $3,000 Yes - HM $250 Ad

$3,000 A

Appendix B (e )(2)*Violations of Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and Safety Permitting Regulations (training)--minimum penalty. 

Training (HM) 

HMTR $481 - $25,000 Yes - HM $25,000 

Appendix B (a)(3)Nonrecordkeeping violations. Egregious hours of service violation (Safety) NHEG $5,000 - $15,040 Yes - Egregious Appendix B(g)(2)- Brokering violations 

Commercial brokering without authority and/or financial security*** 

NRCC $2,500 - $10,663 $2,500 A

Appendix B (h):* Copying of records and access to equipment, lands, and buildings--maximum penalty per day. 

Denial of Access (Safety)

NRDA $600 - $1,239 N/A $600 Ad

Appendix B (i)(2): Evasion of regulations under 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B--minimum penalty for first violation. 

Commercial Evasion of regulations related to operating authority (1st

offense) 

NRE1 $2,133 - $5,332 N/A $5,332 A
7 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (i)(2): Evasion of regulations under 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B--minimum penalty for subsequent violation(s). 

Commercial Evasion of the regulations related to operating authority (2nd offense) 

NRE2 $5,332- $25,000 N/A $25,000 

Appendix B (i)(1): Evasion of regulations under 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B--minimum and maximum penalty for first violation. 

Evasion of the Regulations (Safety) 

NRE3 $2,133 - $5,332 N/A $5,332 A

Appendix B (i)(1)M: Evasion of regulations under 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B--minimum and maximum penalty for subsequent violation. 

Evasion of the Regulations (Safety) 

NRE4 $2,665 - $7,997 N/A N/A 

Appendix B (d) Financial responsibility violations. 

Financial Responsibility (Safety) 

NRFA $1,454 - $16,499 N/A 

Appendix B (a)(3)Nonrecordkeeping violations. Nonrecordkeeping (Safety) NRKA $1,100 - $15,040 N/A Appendix B (b) Commercial driver’s license (CDL) violations. 

CDL  (Safety) 

NRKC $682 - $5,591 N/A 
8 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix A II Subpoena Disobeying a subpoena NRSU $1,066 - $10,663 N/A N/A Appendix A IV (b)Out-of-service order (requiring or permitting operation of CMV by driver.) 

Notices and Orders OOS 392.5 (Safety) 

O392 $5,000 - $18,447 N/A $5,000 A

Appendix B (g)(4) Violations of the CRs (foreign motor carriers, foreign motor private carriers). 

Commercial Operating Authority U.S. and Foreign Property Brokers and Carriers (other than MX beyond the CZ)

OAM1 $10,663- $10,663 N/A $10,663 

Appendix B (g)(5) Violations of the CRs (foreign motor carriers, foreign motor private carriers before implementation of North American Free Trade Agreement land transportation provisions)--maximum penalty for intentional violation. 

Commercial Operating Authority Foreign motor carrier or foreign private motor carrier intentionally operating outside CZ without authority

OAM2 $10,000 - $14,664 N/A $10,000 
9 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (g)(5) Violations of the CRs (foreign motor carriers, foreign motor private carriers before implementation of North American Free Trade Agreement land transportation provisions)--maximum penalty for a pattern of intentional violations. 

Commercial Operating Authority Foreign motor carrier or foreign private motor carrier intentionally operating outside CZ without authority - Pattern of violations

OAM3 $10,282 - $36,662 N/A

Appendix B (g)(6) Violations of the CRs (motor carrier or broker for transportation of hazardous wastes)-- penalty. 

Commercial Operating Authority carrier or broker of Hazardous Waste**

OAM4 $21,327- $42,654 N/A N/A

Appendix B (g)(3) Violations of the CRs (passenger carriers). 

Commercial Operating Authority U.S. and Foreign Passenger Carriers

OAPA $26,659- $26,659 N/A $26,659 

Appendix B (g)(1) Appendix B (g)(1) : Violations of the commercial regulations (CR) (property carriers). 

Operating Authority (Property Non - HHGs) 

OAPR $10,663 - $10,663 N/A $10,663 
10 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (b)(2) Employer violations pertaining to knowingly allowing, authorizing employee violations of out-ofservice order (maximum penalty). 

Notices and Orders OOS CDL (Safety) 

OCDL $5,591 - $30,956 N/A N/A

Appendix B (f)(1) Operating after being declared unfit by assignment of a final “unsatisfactory” safety rating (generally). 

Notices and Orders Imminent Hazard OOS Order (Safety) 

OIMM $5,000 - $26,659 N/A $5,000 A

Appendix A IV (b)Out-of-service order (requiring or permitting operation of CMV by driver.) 

Notices and Orders OOS Non - CDL (Safety) 

ONCD $5,000 - $18,477 N/A $5,000 A

Appendix B (a)(3)Nonrecordkeeping violations. Notices and Orders OOS New Entrant Failure 

(Safety)

ONEF $1,100 -$15,040 N/A $1,100 A

Appendix B (a)(3)Nonrecordkeeping violations. Notices and Orders OOS New Entrant No Show/Refusal 

(Safety)

ONEN $1,100 - $15,040 N/A $1,100 A

Appendix A IV (i) Out-of-service order (conducting operations during suspension or revocation for failure to pay penalties.) 

Notices and Orders OOS No Pay (Safety) 

ONOP $5,000 - $15,040 N/A $5,000 A
11 

Civil Penalty Location 

Nature of the Violation 

(Violation Category) 

Violation 

Category 

Code 

Per Count* 

Contributed 

to crash 

and/or HM 

Incident**

Adm

M

(per v

c

Appendix B (f)(2) Violations of the CRs (Hazmat ). 

Notices and Orders OOS Unfit (Hazmat 

OUNF $5,000 - $186,610 N/A $5,000 A

Appendix B (a)(1) Recordkeeping--maximum penalty per day. 

Recordkeeping (Safety) 

RKCL $600 - $1,239 N/A 

Appendix B (a)(2)Knowing falsification of records. 

Knowing Falsification of Records Recordkeeping (False to Conceal - Can prove hiding other violation) 

(Safety)

RKDL $1,214 - $12,383 N/A 

Appendix B (g)(16): Reporting and recordkeeping under 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B (except 13901 and 13902(c)--minimum penalty. 

Recordkeeping related to operating authority registration 

RKOP $1,066 - $8,025 N/A 

*Penalty amounts that are bolded and underlined are statutory minimums and/or maximums.

** If the column has “Yes	‐	HM”: If the user selects the Gravity="Contributed to crash and/or HM Incident" AND the violation has this violation cate

up box will appear to ask the user "Did this violation contribute to death, severe injury, serious illness, or property destruction?" Yes/No. If the use

user answers Yes, then they will receive another message that “You must contact your Service Center to determine the appropriate penalty assess

If the column has “Yes – Egregious”: If the user selects the Gravity="Contributed to crash and/or HM Incident" AND the violation has this violation 

then UFA will apply the maximum fine for that violation category.

***This is a violation of 49 CFR 387.307.
UFA METHODOLOGY EXPLANATION

GRAVITY TABLE

FUNDAMENTAL AND ESSENTIAL SAFETY MANAGEMENT VIOLATIONS

Type Violation Description

Essential safety 

management 172.200(a) Transporting a hazardous material (HM) without preparing a shipping paper (no shipping paper at all)

Essential safety 

management 172.704(a) Failing to train hazardous material employees as required 

Essential safety 

management 173.24b(d)(2) Loading a cargo tank with an HM which exceeds the maximum weight of lading marked on the specification plate 

Essential safety 

management 173.3 Loading HM not in accordance with the segregation table 

Essential safety 

management 173.33(a)(1) Transporting HM in an unauthorized cargo tank

Essential safety 

management 173.33(a)(2) Transporting or loading two or more materials in a cargo tank motor vehicle which resulted in an unsafe condition 

Essential safety 

management 173.33(b)(1) Transporting a hazardous material in a cargo tank motor vehicle which has a dangerous reaction when in contact with the tank 

Essential safety 

management 177.834(i) Failing to attend a cargo tank during loading/unloading 

Essential safety 

management 177.848(d) Loading HM not in accordance with the segregation table 

Essential safety 

management 180.407(b)(2) Failing to test and inspect a cargo tank which has been in an accident and has been damaged 

Essential safety 

management 180.407(b)(3) Failing to conduct a pressure test on a cargo tank which has been out of HM service for 1 year or more 

Essential safety 

management 180.407(b)(4) Failing to test and inspect a cargo tank which has been modified 

Essential safety 

management 180.407(b)(5) Failing to conduct a test or inspection on a cargo tank when required by DOT 

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 1 of 9
Type Violation Description

Essential safety 

management 391.23(a) Failing to investigate a driver’s background 

Fundamental 391.11(b)(5) Using a driver without a currently valid motor vehicle operator’s license or permit 

Fundamental 395.13(c)(1) Knowingly requiring or permitting a driver declared out of service to operate a commercial motor vehicle 

before that driver may lawfully do so under the rules of Part 395

Page 2 of 9
Severe Level I and II Violations

Severity Level Violation Description

I 107.504(c) Failing to properly renew registration for cargo tanks and/or cargo tank motor vehicles.

I 172.200(a) Offering a hazardous material for transportation without proper description of material on shipping paper.

I 172.203(m) Failing to properly describe poisonous materials on hazardous material shipping paper.

I 172.203(o) Failing to properly describe organic peroxide or self-reactive materials on hazardous material shipping paper.

I 172.205(a) Offering, transporting, transferring or delivering hazardous waste without a manifest.

I 172.313(a) Failing to mark a package of hazardous material defined as poisonous by inhalation per 49 CFR 171.8 with 

"Inhalation Hazard" as required.

I 173.21(a) Offering a forbidden hazardous material for transportation.

I 173.21(e) Offering for transportation or transporting hazardous materials, which if combined, would likely cause a

dangerous evolution of heat, flammable or poisonous gas or vapor, or a corrosive material.

I 173.22(a)(2) Offering a hazardous material in an unauthorized package or container.

I 173.24(b)(2) Offering for transportation a hazardous material in a package that conditions normal to transportation resulted 

in the effectiveness of the package being substantially reduced.

I 173.24b(d)(2) Loading a cargo tank with a hazardous material which exceeds the maximum weight of lading marked on the 

specification plate.

I 173.3 Loading hazardous materials not in accordance with the segregation table contained in 49 CFR Part 177.

I 173.33(a) Transporting hazardous materials in an unauthorized cargo tank.

I 173.33(a) Offering or accepting for transportation a hazardous material in an unauthorized cargo tank motor vehicle.

I 173.33(a)(2) Loading or transporting two or more materials in a cargo tank motor vehicle which resulted in an unsafe 

condition (fire, explosion, excessive increase in pressure or heat/or release of toxic vapors).

I 173.33(b)(1) Transporting hazardous material in a cargo tank motor vehicle which caused a dangerous reaction when the 

hazardous material that came in contact with the cargo tank wall.

I 173.33(c)(5) Loading or transporting a 6.1 PG I or PG II material in a cargo tank having a maximum allowable working 

pressure (MAWP) of less than 25 psig

I 173.33(e) Transporting (Division 6.1 material, oxidizer liquid, liquid organic peroxide, or corrosive liquid) in cargo tank 

piping without bottom damage protection devices meeting the requirements of Part 178.337-10 or 178.345-8.

I 173.33(e) Transporting (Division 6.1 material, oxidizer liquid, liquid organic peroxide, or corrosive liquid) in cargo tank 

piping while using a sacrificial device to satisfy accident damage protection requirements.

Page 3 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

I 173.40(d) Offering a cylinder or cylinder overpack combination charged or filled with a Division 2.3 or 6.1 Hazard Zone A 

or B without conforming to cylinder performance requirements (toxic materials).

I 173.301(h) Offering or transporting a charged/filled UN or DOT cylinder without a prescribed valve protection device.

I 173.301(j) Offering or transporting a cylinder filled with hazardous material that was not manufactured in accordance 

with prescribed DOT/UN specifications, DOT exemptions or a special permit.

I 173.315(j)(2)

Offering or transporting a non-specification consumer storage tank charged with liquefied petroleum gas 

(hazardous material) to more than 5% of their water capacity without conforming to conditions listed in 

173.315(j)(2).

I 173.413 Using Type B(U) or B(M) packaging not properly designed or constructed (radioactive materials).

I 173.447(a) Storing in one area packages of radioactive material bearing FISSILE labels that exceed a total Transportation 

Index of 50.

I 177.834(i) Failing to attend a cargo tank during loading or unloading.

I 177.834(j) Transporting a hazardous material in a cargo tank while failing to have all manhole closures closed and secured 

and/or all valves and other closures in the liquid discharge system closed and free of leaks.

I 177.848(d) Transporting, loading or storing hazardous materials not in accordance with the segregation table.

I 177.848(f) Transporting, loading or storing Class 1 (explosive) materials not in accordance with the compatibility table.

I 180.405(a) Using an unauthorized cargo tank in that the tank fails to meet the specification in effect at the time of the date 

of initial construction and subsequent mandated retrofitting.

I 180.405(c) Marking or certifying a cargo tank to an unauthorized specification.

I 180.405(g) Failing to equip a cargo tank with manhole assemblies conforming with 178.345-5.

I 180.407(a)(2) Subjecting a cargo tank to a pressure greater than its design pressure or maximum allowable working pressure 

(MAWP).

I 180.407(a)(3) Performing or witnessing a test or inspection on a cargo tank without meeting the minimum qualifications 

prescribed in 180.409.

I 180.407(b)(1) Failing to test and inspect a cargo tank which shows evidence of bad dents, corroded or abraded areas, leakage, 

or any other condition that might render it unsafe for transportation.

I 180.407(b)(2) Failing to pressure test a cargo tank which has sustained damage to the extent that its lading retention 

capability may be adversely affected.

I 180.407(b)(3) Failing to conduct a pressure test in accordance with section 180.407(g) on a cargo tank which has been out of 

hazardous materials transportation service for a period of one year or more.

I 180.407(b)(4) Failing to test and inspect a cargo tank that has been modified from its original design specification.

Page 4 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

I 180.407(b)(5) Failing to conduct a test or inspection on a cargo tank when the Department so requires, based on the existence 

of probable cause, that the cargo tank is in an unsafe operating condition.

I 180.407(d) Failing to perform an external visual inspection as prescribed.

I 180.407(e) Failing to perform an internal visual inspection as prescribed.

I 180.407(f) Failing to perform a lining inspection as prescribed.

I 180.407(g) Failing to perform a pressure retest as prescribed.

I 180.407(g)(3) Failing to perform a wet fluorescent magnetic particle test on an MC330/331 cargo tank.

I 180.407(h) Failing to perform leakage test as prescribed.

I 180.407(i) Failing to perform a thickness test as prescribed.

I 180.413(a)(1) Performing a repair, modification, stretching or rebarrelling of an ASME U Stamped cargo tank without holding 

a valid National Board R Stamp.

I 180.413(a)(1)(i) Performing a repair, modification, stretching or rebarrelling of a non-ASME cargo tank without holding a valid 

ASME U Stamp or National Board R Stamp.

I 180.413(b) Failing to verify the suitability of a repair affecting the structural integrity of the cargo tank by testing as 

prescribed in the applicable specifications or in 180.407(g)(1)(iv).

I 180.413(d)(3)(iv) Failing to verify the suitability of a modification affecting the structural integrity of the cargo tank with respect 

to pressure by testing as prescribed in the applicable specification or in Section 180.407(g)(1)(iv).

I 180.413(f) Owner fails to retain records of repair, modification, stretching, or rebarrelling made to each tank, as required.

I 180.416(f) Failing to properly test a new or repaired delivery hose assembly at a minimum of 120 percent of the hose 

maximum working pressure.

I 180.416(f)(2) Failing to permanently mark a new or repaired delivery hose assembly with the month and year of the pressure 

test.

I 180.417(b) Failing to include the information required by 180.417(b)(1) or 180.417(b)(2) of this section on the test and 

inspection reports as required.

I 180.417(b)(3) Failing to retain a copy of test and inspection reports as required.

I 180.417(c)(2) Failing to properly prepare and maintain the report on an MC330 or MC331 cargo tank that has been used in 

anhydrous ammonia, liquefied petroleum gas or any other service that may cause stress corrosion cracking.

I 375.211(a) Failing to participate in an arbitration program.

I 375.213(b)(1) Failing to furnish shippers with DOT publication entitled, "Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move".

I 375.215 Failing to charge applicable tariff rate.

I 375.403(a)(6) Failing to reaffirm or negotiate the written binding estimate listing the additional household goods or services.

Page 5 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

I 375.403(a)(7) Collecting more than the original amount of the binding estimate.

I 375.403(a)(9) Failing to relinquish possession of a household goods shipment if the shipper offers to pay the original binding 

estimated price.

I 375.405(b)(8) Collecting more than 110 percent of the original non-binding estimate at destination.

I 375.407(a) Failing to relinquish possession of a household goods shipment if the shipper pays at least 110 percent of the 

approximate costs of a non-binding estimate.

I 375.407(b) Failing to relinquish possession of a household goods shipment after the shipper offers to pay or pays at least 

110 percent of a non-binding estimate (Hostage Load).

I 375.507(a) Failing to weigh a shipment for each move transported on a non-binding estimate.

I 375.507(b) Failing to weigh shipments on certified scale.

I 375.513 Refusing to allow shippers to view the re-weigh of their shipment.

I 375.519(a) Failing to prepare a weight ticket in the form and manner prescribed.

I 375.519(b) Failing to obtain a separate weight ticket for each weighing, if not in accordance with Part 375.519(b).

I 375.519(c) Failing to retain the original copy of the weight tickets for each shipment weighed as part of the file.

I 375.519(d) Making, or causing to make fraudulent or intentionally false weight tickets and/or reproducing fraudulent 

weight tickets.

I 385.403 Transporting a type and quantity of hazardous material requiring a hazardous materials safety permit in 

commerce when the motor carrier does not hold a safety permit, as required.

I 385.419 Transporting a hazardous material requiring a safety permit with an expired safety permit.

II 107.502(b) Failing to properly register before engaging in the manufacture, assembly, certification, inspection or repair of a 

specification cargo tank or cargo tank motor vehicle.

II 107.608(b) Offering a hazardous material for transportation without having registered with the Department of 

Transportation, under Subpart G of Part 107.

II 107.608(b) Transporting a hazardous material without having registered with the Department, under Subpart G of Part 

107.

II 13702(a)(2) Failing to have a tariff in effect or charging or receiving a different rate that specified in the tariff (HHG)

II 13702(c)(1) Failing to properly maintain and/or make available a published tariff (HHG)

II 172.201(e) Failure to properly retain and/or make available hazardous material shipping paper in proper form.

II 172.203(a) Failing to properly notate special permit or exemption number on hazardous material shipping paper.

II 172.203(c)(1) Failing to properly enter hazardous substance by name on hazardous material shipping paper.

II 172.203(n) Failing to properly describe elevated temperature materials on hazardous material shipping paper.

Page 6 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

II 172.205(a) Offering or transporting a hazardous waste without a properly prepared hazardous waste manifest.

II 172.205(b) Failure of a shipper (generator) to properly prepare hazardous waste manifest.

II 172.301(a)(1) Failure to properly mark shipping name and identification number on non-bulk hazardous material package.

II 172.320(a) Failure to properly mark EX-number on package of Class 1 (Explosive) hazardous materials.

II 172.326(a) Offering for transport or transporting a portable tank without properly marking shipping name.

II 172.326(c)(2) Failing to provide motor carrier proper identification number markings and signage when offering portable 

tanks containing hazardous material for shipment (shipper violation).

II 172.328(a)(1) Failing to provide to a motor carrier the required identification numbers for a cargo tank.

II 172.328(a)(2) Offering a cargo tank containing hazardous material that has not been marked with the required identification 

number.

II 172.400(a) Failing to properly label a container or package of hazardous material.

II 172.403 Failing to properly label to a package of Class 7 (radioactive) material.

II 172.506(a) Offering hazardous materials without proper placarding.

II 172.600(c)(1) Failing to have proper emergency response information immediately available for use at all times with 

hazardous materials.

II 172.600(c)(1) Failing to provide emergency response information.

II 172.604(a) Failing to properly provide an emergency response telephone number when offering a hazardous material for 

transportation.

II 172.604(a)(1) Failing to provide an emergency response telephone number which is monitored at all times that a hazardous 

material is in transit or in storage incidental to transportation.

II 172.604(a)(2)

Failing to provide the 24-hour emergency response telephone number of a person who is knowledgeable of the 

hazards and characteristics of the hazardous materials being shipped, and has comprehensive emergency 

response and incident mitigation information o

II 172.704(a) Failing to train hazardous materials employees as required.

II 173.25(a)(2) Failing to properly mark an overpack with the proper shipping name and identification number for hazardous 

materials.

II 173.25(a)(2) Failing to properly label an overpack with the proper labels for the materials contained within.

II 173.25(a)(3) Failing to properly orient packages subject to the marking requirements of 172.312 in an overpack.

II 173.3 Failing to brace containers of hazardous materials to prevent relative motion between containers.

II 173.3 Loading into or on, or unloading a Class 1 (explosive) material from a motor vehicle with the engine running.

Page 7 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

II 173.301(a)(8) Offering or transporting a charged/filled cylinder that has a container pressure at 55 degrees C (131degrees F) 

which exceeds 5/4 times its marked or designated service pressure.

II 173.301(e) Offering a charged/filled cylinder that has been filled by someone other than the owner or without the owner's 

consent.

II 173.301(f) Offering a charged/filled cylinder that is not equipped with the appropriate pressure relief devices.

II 173.301(g) Offering manifolded (interconnected) cylinders except as authorized.

II 173.421 Offering a radioactive material for transportation not in proper condition for shipment.

II 173.442(b)(2) Offering a package of radioactive material exceeding 185 degrees Fahrenheit on the external surface of the 

package. (Exclusive Use).

II 173.443(b) Offering a package of radioactive material with removable contamination in excess of 220 dpm/square cm. 

(exclusive use).

II 177.817(f) Failing to maintain a copy of the hazardous material shipping paper as prescribed for 365 days after the date 

accepted by the motor carrier. (Three years for a Hazardous Waste)

II 177.834(a) Failing to brace containers of hazardous materials to prevent relative motion between containers.

II 180.405(h) Failing to replace a reclosing pressure relief device with a valve meeting the requirements of 178.345-10(b)(3).

II 366.2 Failing to have on file Designation of Agent for Service of Process (Form BOC-3) with the Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration.

II 370.7(a) Failing to promptly and thoroughly investigate each claim.

II 371.105 Failing to arrange transportation for a HHG motor carrier that has a valid USDOT number and valid HHG motor 

carrier authority.

II 371.107 Failing to prominently display the required information on all advertisements including the homepage of its 

Internet website.

II 371.109 Failing to provide required information on motor carriers used to potential individual shippers.

II 371.113 Failing to provide an estimate as required.

II 371.115 Providing estimates on behalf of a HHG motor carrier without a written agreement.

II 371.117(a) Failure to display cancellation, deposit, and refund policies on its internet website or agreements with 

individual shippers.

II 371.117(b) Failure to maintain records of canceled shipments and refunds to individual shippers.

II 375.211(a) Using an arbitration program that does not meet the requirements of Section 375.211.

II 375.221(a) Refusing to accept a particular form of credit for payment if this form of payment was identified as an 

acceptable form of payment in tariff.

Page 8 of 9
Severity Level Violation Description

II 375.221(d) If the carrier accepts charge or credit plans, failing to identify in the tariff the charge or credit card plans you 

participate in.

II 375.303(c) Failing to furnish proof of insurance coverage.

II 375.401(a)(2) Failing to prepare a written non-binding estimate for each move performed.

II 375.401(b) Failing to specify on the binding and/or non-binding estimate, the form of payment you and your agent will 

honor at delivery.

II 375.403(a)(5) Failing to reaffirm or negotiate the written binding estimate listing the additional household goods or services.

II 375.403(c) Failing to retain a copy of the binding estimate for each move performed for one year as an integral part of the 

bill of lading.

II 375.405(b)(7) Failing to reaffirm or negotiate the written non-binding estimate listing the additional household goods or 

services.

II 375.405(d) Failing to retain a copy of the non-binding estimate for each move performed for one year as an integral part of 

the bill of lading.

II 375.501(a) Failing to prepare a written order for service for each move performed

II 375.501(g) Failing to retain a copy of the order for service for each move performed for one year as an integral part of the 

bill of lading.

II 375.503(a) Failing to prepare a written inventory for each shipment of household goods transported.

II 375.503(e) Failing to retain a copy of an inventory for each move performed for one year as an integral part of the bill of 

lading.

II 375.505(d) Failing to retain a copy of a bill of lading for each move performed for one year from the date it is created.

II 375.515(b) Failing to obtain a written waiver from shippers who waive their right to observe the re-weighing of their 

shipment.

II 385.415(c)(1) Transporting a hazardous material requiring a safety permit and failing to follow the communications plan as 

required.

II 385.415(c)(1) Transporting a permitted material without maintaining a record of communication for six months as required.

II 387.301(a) Failing to file evidence of public liability insurance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

II 387.301(b) Failing to file evidence of cargo insurance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Page 9 of 9
Violation Categories that 

Default to “1” for the Number Charged

Violation 

Category Violation Type

EHMI HM Violation (Individual)

EHTR HM Training (Individual)

GARB Arbitration - Household Goods

GBCA Brokering w/o carrier agreement - Household Goods

GEMC 376 Commercial Violations

GHTN 110% Rule - Household Goods

GLAD Loss and Damages - Household Goods

GNRO Other Non-Record Keeping - Household Goods

GOAH Operating Authority (Property HHGs)

GOLD Hostage Load - Household Goods

GRKA Recordkeeping - Household Goods

GSDL Service Delay - Household Goods

GTRF Tariff – Household Goods

GWHT Weight - Household Goods

HMCO Communication (HM)

HMOP Operations (HM)

HMPG Packaging (HM)

HMRK Recordkeeping (HM)

HMTR Training (HM)

NRCC Commercial brokering without authority and/or financial security

NRE1 Evasion of the Regulations (1)- Commercial

NRE2 Evasion of the Regulations (2)- Commercial 

OAM1 Operating Authority (MX MC & Broker)

OAM2 Operating Authority (MX MC beyond CZ)

OAM3 Operating Authority (MX MC beyond CZ Pattern of Violation)

OAM4 Operating Authority (MX MC & Broker of Hazardous Waste)

OAPA Operating Authority (Passenger)

OAPR Operating Authority (Property Non-HHGs)

ATTACHMENT 4