Methodology

Quick Answer

The methodology is simple: rule statements need reliable sources, operational notes need clear boundaries, and low-confidence pages stay cautious or noindex.

Source registry

Each important source is tracked with publisher, type, reliability, URL, notes, and last checked date. The registry gives editors a place to verify whether a claim has a source.

Official and regulation sources support rule summaries. Internal sources support site policy, workflow notes, disclaimers, and editorial process; they do not create federal requirements.

Source-gated rule writing

When a page states a federal requirement, the statement must be tied to FMCSA or eCFR material. When the source is weaker or the cargo category is not exact, the page uses general considerations instead of hard rules.

Commodity pages use stricter mapping. A specific eCFR commodity section can support an indexable commodity rule summary; a general securement source usually supports only a general reference.

Confidence and index decisions

High confidence requires a close fit between the page and the controlling source. Medium confidence is used when general securement rules support the topic but the page is not a precise commodity-section summary.

Low confidence pages stay narrow and usually noindex. They may still help navigation or explain why a topic needs manual review, but they should not compete with stronger source-gated pages.

Review cadence

Sources should be rechecked when a page is edited, when an audit flags an issue, when a source URL changes, or when a rule-sensitive page is prepared for publication.

The reviewed date is an editorial marker. It does not mean a page is permanently current, and it does not replace checking the live source before relying on a rule.

Corrections process

Corrections should include the page URL, the sentence or section at issue, and the source that should control. If a page cannot be supported, it may be narrowed or marked noindex.

Possible outcomes include revised wording, a new source link, a removed claim, a stronger disclaimer, a noindex decision, or no change when the existing wording remains supported.

Source-gated writing

Every page that makes a claim about a federal cargo securement requirement must be traceable to a specific eCFR section, FMCSA publication, or another identifiable official source. Paraphrasing from memory, repeating industry conventions without a citation, or writing as if a requirement exists without finding it in the current rule are all reasons to revise or remove a claim.

The standard is not perfection — it is traceability. If a reader asks 'where does that come from,' the answer should be a specific page on ecfr.gov or fmcsa.dot.gov, not 'that's what everyone does' or 'that's what I was trained to believe.'

Pages with safety implications, claim implications, or regulatory content carry a disclaimer and a last-reviewed date. If a sentence cannot be sourced or reframed as a clearly-labeled operational note, it is removed.

Rule summaries versus operational notes

A rule summary explains what a cited regulation says — it names the source, describes the scope of the requirement, and does not add thresholds, exceptions, or standards that are not in the source. It also does not simplify the rule to a single number if the actual rule has conditions.

An operational note is a practical prompt for a driver or safety person doing their job — for example, 'check whether dunnage has shifted after the first major grade change' or 'photograph the seal before and after a stop.' Operational notes can be useful, but they must be clearly labeled as planning guidance, not compliance requirements, unless a source specifically supports the claim.

Mixing these categories — writing an operational habit as if it were a federal requirement, or describing a federal requirement as if it were an optional best practice — is the most common type of error this site tries to prevent.

Confidence levels and search indexing

High confidence means the page has a direct source fit: a specific eCFR commodity section maps to the exact cargo type being discussed, or a named eCFR or FMCSA section directly governs the topic. High-confidence pages are eligible for search indexing and appear in the sitemap.

Medium confidence means general federal securement sources support the discussion, but no single commodity section controls the page. These pages may still be indexed but carry stronger disclaimers and broader limitations.

Low confidence means the page is a general reference, a taxonomy entry for a cargo type that lacks a specific federal section, or a topic where the available sources do not closely match the page's scope. Low-confidence pages stay noindex until source support improves. Being honest about source gaps is more useful to readers than indexing a page that overstates its regulatory basis.

Source selection

The preferred source hierarchy starts with the current eCFR text (ecfr.gov), then FMCSA official publications and guidance documents, then other federal agency materials, then industry bodies and trade associations for non-regulatory operational notes.

Commercial training materials, private carrier policies, and trade publications are not used as sources for regulatory claims. They may be relevant to understanding common practice, but 'common practice' is not the same as 'federal requirement.'

Internal pages — the methodology page, editorial policy, disclaimer, and corrections page — are used as sources only for process descriptions, not for regulatory statements. The internal editorial policy source ID in the source registry reflects process documentation, not regulatory backing.

Review cadence

Pages are reviewed against their listed sources when content is edited, when an audit flags a source issue, when a source URL changes, when a regulation is known to have been amended, or when a correction request points to a change.

A last-reviewed date on a source means the listed source was checked on that date and the page content was consistent with the source at that time. It does not mean the site will catch a regulatory amendment automatically — users should verify the current eCFR text when the regulation matters for a live decision.

The source registry at /sources/ tracks last-checked dates for each source in the registry. When a source is re-verified, the date is updated so the review history is visible.

What changes after a correction

A successful correction leads to one of the following: a wording change to bring the page in line with the source, a source link update to point to the current regulation, a confidence level change that results in the page moving to noindex, a disclaimer being added or strengthened, a sentence or section being removed because it cannot be supported, or no change if the existing source and wording are still appropriate after review.

The site does not soften or hedge inaccurate content to avoid changing it. If a claim is wrong, it is corrected or removed. If a claim cannot be verified, it is narrowed or removed. Accuracy is more important than keeping the original phrasing.