The U.S. Supreme Court’s May 14, 2026 decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC has put renewed attention on a question the trucking industry has wrestled with for years: What should brokers, shippers, insurers, and motor carriers make of a carrier’s FMCSA safety rating? The answer requires more nuance than simply sorting carriers into “safe” and “unsafe” categories.
In Montgomery, the Supreme Court held that a negligent-hiring claim alleging that a broker negligently selected a motor carrier to transport goods was not preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), because the claim fell within the Act’s safety exception preserving state safety regulatory authority “with respect to motor vehicles.” The underlying complaint alleged, among other things, that the selected carrier had a Conditional FMCSA safety rating and that the broker knew or should have known about safety concerns associated with the carrier.
The decision is important, but it should not be overstated. The Supreme Court decided the federal preemption question. It did not establish that a broker is negligent whenever it selects a Conditional carrier, create a federal carrier-vetting checklist, or decide that FMCSA safety ratings alone determine whether a carrier should be hired. What the decision does make clear is that carrier-selection practices and available safety information can matter in litigation.
That makes understanding FMCSA data more important—not just for brokers and shippers, but for motor carriers whose public records may influence whether they get the load, retain the customer, satisfy an insurer, or face additional questions. The starting point is understanding what an FMCSA safety rating actually means.
FMCSA Safety Ratings: What They Actually Measure
FMCSA describes a safety rating as an evaluation of a motor carrier’s compliance with the federal safety fitness standard. Under the current framework, FMCSA may assign one of three formal ratings following a Rated Investigation, commonly referred to as a compliance review:
- Satisfactory
- Conditional
- Unsatisfactory
FMCSA also uses the category, Unrated, when a safety rating has not been assigned to the motor carrier. Importantly, not every FMCSA investigation results in a safety rating. That distinction matters. A safety rating is not the same thing as a continuously updated score of everything happening inside a carrier’s operation. It results from FMCSA’s safety-fitness process and reflects findings associated with a rated investigation.
Meanwhile, other FMCSA systems may contain more recent information involving inspections, violations, crashes, operating information, investigations, and other compliance data. For that reason, a safety rating is an important data point—but it should not be mistaken for the carrier’s entire safety profile.
What Does “Unrated” or “No Rating” Mean?
This may be the most misunderstood carrier status. FMCSA defines Unrated simply to mean that a safety rating has not been assigned to the motor carrier. That is fundamentally different from a Conditional or Unsatisfactory rating. An Unrated carrier has not necessarily failed a safety review. In many cases, the carrier simply has not received a Rated Investigation resulting in a formal safety rating. Therefore, Unrated does not automatically mean unsafe.
But the opposite is equally important: Unrated does not automatically mean that a carrier has been affirmatively determined to be safe. It means there is no assigned FMCSA safety rating, making any additional information important. Depending on who is conducting the review and what information is lawfully available to that party, relevant data may include:
- USDOT registration status
- Operating authority, when required
- Required insurance filings
- MCS-150 information and update history
- Roadside inspection history
- Driver and vehicle inspection violations
- Out-of-service information
- Publicly available crash information
- SMS/BASIC information that FMCSA makes public
- Operating classifications and cargo information
- Reported power units, drivers, and mileage
- Authority age and operating history
- Consistency and accuracy of public FMCSA records
FMCSA itself cautions users against drawing conclusions about a carrier’s overall safety condition solely from SMS data. SMS and an FMCSA safety rating are related to federal motor-carrier oversight, but they are not interchangeable systems. The practical lesson is straightforward: No Rating should not end a carrier review. It means the review needs context.
What Does a Conditional Rating Mean?
A Conditional rating deserves substantially more attention than an Unrated status. FMCSA defines a Conditional safety rating as meaning that the motor carrier does not have adequate safety management controls in place to ensure compliance with the safety fitness standard, under circumstances that could result in the occurrences identified in 49 CFR § 385.5.
That is a formal FMCSA finding—not merely the absence of a rating. A Conditional rating does not, by itself, mean that every carrier is immediately prohibited from operating. But it is a significant public compliance signal and can create real business consequences. Those may include:
- Greater scrutiny from brokers and shippers
- Insurance concerns
- Contracting difficulties
- Customer questions
- Increased attention to inspection and violation history
- Potential regulatory follow-up
- Greater litigation attention following a serious accident
The facts alleged in Montgomery illustrate why this matters. The plaintiff alleged that Caribe Transport had a Conditional FMCSA safety rating and that FMCSA had identified deficiencies involving areas including driver qualification, hours of service, inspection, repair and maintenance, and crash rate. Those allegations became part of the plaintiff’s negligent-hiring theory against the broker.
That does not mean every Conditional carrier presents the same risk or that selecting one automatically constitutes negligence. It does mean a Conditional rating should be taken seriously. For a carrier, the appropriate response is to understand the basis for the rating, address the underlying deficiencies, preserve documentation of corrective actions, and determine what steps are available under FMCSA procedures to seek an improved rating when appropriate.
What Does a Satisfactory Rating Mean?
FMCSA defines a Satisfactory rating as meaning that a motor carrier has functional and adequate safety management controls to meet the safety fitness standard in 49 CFR § 385.5. Those controls must be appropriate for the size and type of the carrier’s operation. That is positive. But it should not be turned into something it is not.
A Satisfactory rating is not a permanent federal guarantee that a carrier is risk-free. Consider a carrier that received a Satisfactory rating several years ago. Since that investigation, it may have:
- Added drivers
- Expanded its fleet
- Changed routes
- Entered new types of operations
- Changed safety personnel
- Experienced new roadside violations
- Developed maintenance problems
- Experienced crashes
- Changed its mileage substantially
- Failed to keep registration information current
The historical Satisfactory rating remains relevant, but current operating data can provide additional information about what has happened since the rated investigation. For brokers and shippers, that means “Satisfactory” should not necessarily be the only carrier-selection question. For motor carriers, it means earning a Satisfactory rating does not eliminate the need for ongoing safety and compliance management.
What Does an Unsatisfactory Rating Mean?
An Unsatisfactory rating is the most serious of FMCSA’s three formal safety-rating categories. FMCSA defines it as meaning that a motor carrier lacks adequate safety management controls to meet the safety fitness standard and that this inadequacy has resulted in occurrences identified in 49 CFR § 385.5.
Federal regulations impose significant consequences on carriers with a final Unsatisfactory safety rating, including prohibitions on operating commercial motor vehicles after the applicable regulatory period unless the carrier obtains appropriate relief or an improved rating. For compliance purposes, the essential point is simple:
- An Unsatisfactory rating is fundamentally different from being Unrated.
- An Unrated carrier has not been assigned a formal safety rating.
- An Unsatisfactory carrier has undergone the federal safety-fitness process and received FMCSA’s most serious formal rating.
Those statuses should never be treated as equivalent.
Why “No Rating” Is Not the Same as a “Bad Rating”
The distinction becomes clearer when the four statuses are viewed together.
- Satisfactory: FMCSA determined through its rating process that the carrier had functional and adequate safety management controls to meet the applicable safety fitness standard.
- Conditional: FMCSA determined that adequate safety management controls were not in place to ensure compliance with the safety fitness standard under the applicable criteria.
- Unsatisfactory: FMCSA determined that inadequate safety management controls resulted in the safety-fitness occurrences identified by the regulations.
- Unrated: FMCSA has not assigned the carrier a safety rating.
That is why simple industry rules can create problems. Statements such as “only Satisfactory carriers are safe,” “Unrated means unsafe,” or “Satisfactory means there is nothing else to review” confuse different types of information. A better question is: What does the available information, taken together, tell us about this carrier?
Safety Ratings vs. Current Operational Data
FMCSA’s Safety Measurement System uses roadside inspection, investigation, and crash information to help the agency identify carriers for intervention. SMS BASIC performance is based in significant part on a rolling 24-month period of roadside data, subject to the methodology and data-availability rules applicable to each BASIC.
That creates an important distinction. A carrier could have an older Satisfactory safety rating but more recent inspection problems. Another carrier could be Unrated but have an established operating history and relatively strong inspection performance. Another could have very little inspection data, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions from the absence of violations alone.
This is why carrier data should be interpreted carefully rather than converted into an unofficial pass/fail system. FMCSA expressly warns SMS users not to draw conclusions about a carrier’s overall safety condition simply from the data displayed in SMS. FMCSA further notes that, absent an Unsatisfactory rating or another FMCSA order requiring the carrier to discontinue operations, the carrier remains authorized from the safety-rating standpoint to operate on the nation’s roadways. That warning is especially important after Montgomery. More scrutiny does not necessarily mean more simplistic screening. It may mean more disciplined, documented, context-sensitive review.
Public Data and Internal Compliance Data Are Not the Same Thing
Motor carriers should also distinguish between information available publicly and information maintained internally. For example, FMCSA’s Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse is an important compliance system, but individual driver Clearinghouse records are not a general public carrier-vetting tool. Employers subject to the Clearinghouse requirements must conduct required queries, including pre-employment queries and at least annual queries for CDL drivers they employ.
Similarly, a carrier’s driver qualification files, maintenance documentation, drug and alcohol program records, and corrective-action documentation may be central to the carrier’s internal compliance program even though those records are not generally available to a broker conducting an ordinary public-record review. The distinction matters because carriers and third parties are not necessarily reviewing the same information.
A motor carrier should maintain a strong internal compliance system. A broker or shipper should develop an appropriate carrier-selection process using information lawfully available to it and consistent with its legal and contractual obligations. Those are related responsibilities, but they are not identical.
Clean Records Start With Strong Compliance Processes
The best response to increased scrutiny is not to chase a particular label. It is to build a disciplined compliance operation. For motor carriers, that includes keeping foundational federal registration and compliance requirements current. FMCSA requires entities under its jurisdiction to update their MCS-150 information every two years, even when company information has not changed. Certain changes can require updates sooner.
Carriers that require operating authority should also verify that the appropriate authority remains active and that required financial responsibility filings remain in place. FMCSA states that regulated entities required to maintain proof of insurance must keep the necessary filings on file to avoid revocation proceedings. A disciplined carrier compliance program should regularly address areas such as:
- Accurate MCS-150 information
- Timely biennial updates
- USDOT registration status
- Required operating authority
- Required insurance filings
- UCR registration, when applicable
- Public SAFER information
- Roadside inspection results
- Recurring driver or vehicle violations
- Vehicle inspection, repair, and maintenance
- Driver qualification files
- Hours-of-service compliance
- Drug and alcohol testing requirements
- Clearinghouse registration and required queries
- Corrective-action documentation
- Responses to FMCSA notices and investigations
- Changes in operations that may affect compliance obligations
A clean public profile is only one result of this work. The larger goal is a compliance system that identifies problems early, corrects them, documents the response, and reduces the chance that the same problems continue.
Why Montgomery Changes the Conversation
The Supreme Court summarized its holding in Montgomery this way: a claim that one company negligently hired another to transport goods is not preempted by the FAAAA because states retain safety regulatory authority “with respect to motor vehicles” under 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(2)(A). That resolves an important preemption question.
But Montgomery should not be read as a Supreme Court-created carrier-vetting standard. The Court did not decide whether C.H. Robinson was ultimately negligent. It did not hold that a broker must reject every Conditional carrier. It did not hold that selecting an Unrated carrier is negligent. And it did not declare that a Satisfactory rating eliminates potential carrier-selection risk.
Those questions can depend on the facts, applicable state law, the information available at the time of selection, and the circumstances of the transportation. The practical consequence is nevertheless significant. Carrier safety and compliance information may receive more attention during contracting, insurance review, litigation, and business relationships. For motor carriers, public compliance records are therefore not only a regulatory concern. They can become a commercial concern as well.
Practical Compliance Guidance for Motor Carriers
Carriers should not wait for a broker, customer, insurer, plaintiff’s attorney, or FMCSA investigator to identify discrepancies. A recurring internal review should ask:
- Is our USDOT registration active and accurate?
- Is our MCS-150 information current?
- Have we completed the required biennial update?
- Does our public SAFER information accurately reflect the operation?
- What does our recent roadside inspection history show?
- Are the same violations appearing repeatedly?
- Are vehicle maintenance problems being corrected and documented?
- Is required operating authority active?
- Are required insurance filings current?
- Is UCR registration complete when applicable?
- Are driver qualification files complete and current?
- Are hours-of-service controls functioning?
- Are drug and alcohol testing obligations being met?
- Are required Clearinghouse queries being completed?
- Have we documented corrective action following violations, investigations, or enforcement notices?
- If we have a Conditional or Unsatisfactory rating, have we identified the underlying findings and taken appropriate corrective action?
- Does our current public profile accurately represent the business we operate today?
The objective should not be simply to “look good” in SAFER. The objective is to maintain an operation in which the public record is supported by strong internal safety and compliance practices.
Practical Considerations for Brokers and Shippers
Montgomery also reinforces the importance of avoiding overly simplistic carrier-selection rules. Depending on the circumstances and applicable legal requirements, a documented carrier-review process may consider information such as:
- FMCSA safety rating, if one exists
- Whether the carrier is Unrated
- USDOT registration information
- Required operating authority
- Required insurance filings
- Roadside inspection information
- Out-of-service information
- Publicly available SMS information
- Public crash information, with appropriate context
- Length and nature of operating history
- Operating classifications and cargo
- Accuracy and consistency of MCS-150 information
- Recent changes or inconsistencies in carrier information
- Known corrective actions or other relevant information available during the selection process
No single factor necessarily answers the entire carrier-selection question. An Unrated carrier should not be converted into an Unsatisfactory carrier by assumption. A Satisfactory carrier should not be considered permanently risk-free. A Conditional rating deserves serious attention, but the existence of the rating does not by itself answer every legal question about whether a particular carrier may be used. A defensible process begins with understanding what each data point actually means.
The Takeaway: Look Beyond the Label
After Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, the trucking industry has another reason to pay close attention to carrier safety and compliance information. But more attention should not mean less nuance.
- Satisfactory is not a guarantee.
- Conditional is a meaningful FMCSA warning that requires attention.
- Unsatisfactory is the most serious formal safety-rating category and carries significant regulatory consequences.
- Unrated simply means FMCSA has not assigned a safety rating.
For carriers, the larger lesson is that compliance cannot be reduced to one field on a SAFER profile. Accurate registrations, active authority, required insurance filings, sound driver qualification practices, vehicle maintenance, hours-of-service compliance, drug and alcohol program management, Clearinghouse compliance, inspection performance, and documented corrective actions all contribute to the broader picture. The carriers best positioned in this environment will be the ones that can show not merely a favorable label, but a disciplined compliance process behind it.
Sources
- Supreme Court of the United States, Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, No. 24-1238 (May 14, 2026). The Court held that the negligent-hiring claim before it was not preempted by the FAAAA because it fell within the statutory safety exception.
- Supreme Court of the United States, Opinions of the Court, 2025 Term. Official docket and opinion publication information for Montgomery, decided May 14, 2026.
- Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Motor Carrier Safety Planner — Safety Ratings. FMCSA definitions of Satisfactory, Conditional, Unsatisfactory, and Unrated and explanation of Rated Investigations.
- Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Compliance, Safety, Accountability / Safety Measurement System. FMCSA information concerning SMS methodology, BASICs, roadside performance data, and limitations on interpreting SMS information.
- Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, CSA FAQs — MCS-150 Biennial Update. FMCSA guidance regarding the requirement to update registration information every two years and certain updates following changes.
- Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Insurance Filing Requirements. Current FMCSA guidance concerning required financial-responsibility filings associated with operating authority.
- Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse — Query Plans and Query Requirements. FMCSA requirements concerning pre-employment and annual Clearinghouse queries by covered employers.
- 49 CFR Part 385 — Safety Fitness Procedures. Federal regulatory framework governing motor-carrier safety fitness, safety ratings, corrective action, and consequences associated with final Unsatisfactory ratings.
- 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c). FAAAA motor-carrier preemption provision and statutory safety exception addressed by the Supreme Court in Montgomery.
Dakota Group Can Help
If you are searching for DOT number renewal, USDOT renewal, MCS-150 update, MCS-150 Biennial Update, FMCSA registration update, SAFER update, DOT reactivation, or DOT deactivation, Dakota Group can help review what your business actually needs.
Dakota Group helps motor carriers, owner-operators, private fleets, brokers, freight forwarders, and commercial vehicle businesses manage MCS-150 filings, USDOT biennial updates, MOTUS support, UCR, SAFER review, DOT activation, DOT deactivation, Drug and Alcohol Management, Clearinghouse support, Driver Qualification File review, and broader trucking compliance paperwork.
No AI chatbots. Talk to our team.
Dakota Group’s U.S.-based compliance specialists are available live Monday through Friday to help operators understand the filing, prepare the paperwork, and reduce the risk of penalties, public record issues, and paused operations.
Follow Dakota Group for weekly DOT and FMCSA updates, and call (800) 500-9295 to work with our team.
Thank you for reading. Click here to follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to our blog for new content created by logistics experts for logistics experts, created weekly.
- Call our team M-F @ (800) 500-9295 or
- Reach, Canaan Cossu-Fredericks, our Director of Sales, directly at (212) 540-5235
- Schedule a Video Call with Our Director of Sales, Canaan
- Use Our Self-Filing Portal
At Dakota Group, we offer end-to-end solutions to each and every logistics need you have. We complete all of our filings 100% in-house with our expert US-based team, transforming your relationship with DOT regulations & driver compliance. No AI, no portals, just you and your dedicated industry specialist. Delivering for those who deliver.
We’re a team of compliance specialists and industry experts headed by a former trucker who understands the realities of running an owner-operator business. We’ve built our practice around real-world experience and a deep care to help professionals who deserve it.
