Introduction to the CSA 2010 Safety Measurement System

1. CSA 2010 Operational Model TestIntroduction to the Safety Measurement SystemApril 2010

2. Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 What is CSA 2010? CSA 2010 is a pro-active initiative to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of FMCSA’s enforcement and compliance program to achieve the Agency’s mission to reduce commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes, fatalities, and injuries. 2

3. Three Core Components New Safety Measurement System (SMS) Improved ability to identify demonstrated safety problems New interventions process Employs an array of interventions instead of the single option, labor-intensive compliance review New approach to Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) SFD would be tied to current safety performance; not limited to results of acute/critical violations from a Compliance Review 3

4. New Safety Measurement System Assesses safety of carriers and drivers based on unsafe behaviors that lead to crashes Calculates safety performance based on 7 Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) Weights time and severity of violations based on relationship to crash risk Uses crash records and all safety-based violations found roadside. Identifies carriers for interventions Determines what problems need to be addressed by intervention process Monitors carriers on road performance for improvements throughout the process In the future, measurement scores would support future Safety Fitness Determinations New Safety Fitness Determination methodology is currently in rulemaking; initial rollout of CSA 2010 is not dependent on rule 4

5. Methodology Overview Obtain on-road safety data (e.g. inspections, crashes) and attribute to carrier to create a safety event history Place each carrier’s violations/crashes into a BASIC Convert BASIC data to quantifiable measure/rate (in future, Safety Fitness Determination will likely be based on absolute performance) Based on each carrier’s BASIC measure, develop rank and percentile for each entity’s BASIC performance 5

6. Safety Data Safety Data Attributed to Carrier Carrier Safety Measurement System (CSMS) Includes 24 months of carrier on-road safety performance 6.6 Million inspections 290 Thousand crashes 690 Thousand carriers 6

7. BASIC Data Safety Data Sorted by BASIC Unsafe Driving (Parts 392 & 397) Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service) (Parts 392 & 395) Driver Fitness (Parts 383 & 391) Controlled Substances/Alcohol (Parts 382 & 392) Vehicle Maintenance (Parts 393 & 396) Cargo-Related (Parts 392, 393, 397 & HM) Crash Indicator 7

8. BASIC Measures Convert BASIC Data into Quantifiable Measure Factors used in calculating a BASIC measure: Time Weighting/Time Frame - More recent events more relevant Severity Weightings – Increase weighting of violations that have been shown to create a greater risk of crash involvement Normalizing – Based on exposure; use of number of inspections and power units Violation Cap –Cited section number only counts once per inspection BASIC Severity cap –Limits the severity weight applied to a BASIC measure from a single poor inspection. 8

9. Unsafe Driving Measure Operation of Commercial Motor Vehicles (CMVs) in a dangerous or careless manner Examples – speeding, reckless driving, improper lane change Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe Normalized by Average Power Units 9

10. Fatigued Driving (HOS) Measure Operation of CMVs by drivers ill, fatigued or in non-compliance with the hours-of-service (HOS) regulations Examples: HOS, logbook, and operating CMV while ill or fatigued Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight - 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe OOS (+2) Normalized by Relevant Inspections – Levels 1,2,3,6 and any other inspections resulting in related violations 10

11. Driver Fitness Measure Operation of CMVs by drivers who are unfit to operate a CMV due to lack of training, experience or medical qualifications Failure to have a valid and appropriate commercial driver’s license, being medically unqualified to operate a CMV. Factors used in calculating the measure : Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe OOS (+2) Normalized by Relevant Inspections – Levels 1,2,3,6 and any other inspections resulting in related violations 11

12. Controlled Substances/Alcohol Measure Operation of CMVs by drivers who are impaired due to alcohol, illegal drugs, and misuse of prescription or over-the-counter medications Examples: Use or possession of controlled substances or alcohol Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe Normalized by Average Power Units 12

13. Vehicle Maintenance Measure Failure to properly maintain a CMV Examples: brakes, lights, and other mechanical defects, and failure to make required changes Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe OOS (+2) Normalized by Relevant Inspections – Levels 1,2,5,6 and any other inspections resulting in related violations 13

14. Cargo-Related Measure Failure to properly prevent shifting loads, spilled or dropped cargo, and unsafe handling of hazardous materials on a CMV Examples: improper load securement, cargo retention, and hazardous material handling Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Violation Severity Weight Based on crash risk – Range from 1-10, where 10 is the most severe OOS (+2) Normalized by Relevant Inspections – Levels 1,2,5,6 and any other inspections resulting in related violation 14

15. Crash Measure Histories or patterns of high crash involvement, including frequency and severity Based on state-reported crash records Factors used in calculating the measure: Time Weight – 0-6 Months (3), 6-12 Months (2), 12-24 Months (1) Crash Severity Weight Range from 1-3 – Crashes involving injury/fatality or HM release have more weight Normalized by Average Power Units 15

16. Percentile Based on each BASIC measure, develop percentile indicating carrier’s BASIC performance Provides a relative assessment of performance Allows for prioritizing intervention resources by behavior Considerations: Peer Grouping – compare measures of entities with similar levels of exposure Data Sufficiency standards – define events/exposure necessary to generate a robust measure SFD/Intervention standards – define “critical mass” of poor performance necessary for inclusion of entity in intervention process or detrimental SFD Current Inspection and Crash Data – assignment of percentile dependent on age and result of most recent inspection (12 months) 16

17. Peer Grouping BASICs Fatigued Driving (HOS) Peer Unsafe Driving Driver Fitness Group Controlled Substances/Alcohol Vehicle Maintenance Crash Cargo-Related 1 0 < PU<= 5 5 – 10 Inspections; (3-10 Fatigued) 2 5 < PU <= 15 11 – 20 Inspections 3 15 < PU <= 50 21 – 100 Inspections 4 50 < PU <= 500 101 – 500 Inspections 5 500 < PU 501+ Inspections Create percentile based on measure for carrier with similar exposure (same peer group) *PU = Power Unit 17

18. Data Sufficiency Number of BASIC Inspections Unsafe Driving 3 Fatigued Driving (HOS) 3 Driver Fitness 5 Controlled Substances / Alcohol 1 Vehicle Maintenance 5 Cargo-Related 5 Crash 2 Crashes Minimum number of inspections with applicable violations required for percentile to be assigned Assists in identification of patterns of carrier behavior – note safety problems across multiple inspections 18

19. BASIC percentiles trigger Interventions Carriers that meet data sufficiency are assigned a percentile Ex: Driver Fitness BASIC percentile of 85% means the carrier is worse than 85% of its peers Carriers that exceed the BASIC threshold are identified for interventions 19

20. Example of SafeStat vs. SMS Carrier under the Radar with Existing SafeStat System 20

21. Carrier Measurement: SafeStat Results 21

22. Carrier Measurement: SMS Results 22

23. Violation Details Provided in SMS 23

24. Further Drilldown in SMS 24

25. How does a carrier improve and get out of the intervention process? “Good” Inspections “Get Well” Rules Unsafe Driving and Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASICs No percentile assigned if no inspections with a violation in these BASICs in the last year Crash Indicator No percentile assigned if no crashes in last year Fatigued Driving (HOS), Driver Fitness, Vehicle Maintenance and Cargo-Related BASICs No percentile assigned if: No inspections with a violation in that BASIC within the past year; and Most recent relevant inspection does not have a violation of that BASIC 25

26. Carrier Access to Percentiles When will carriers’ SMS results be made available? Currently, only test state carriers have access to SMS results by using the Comprehensive Safety Information (CSI) system FMCSA will provide all carriers an early review of their own safety data by BASIC starting April 12, 2010 Non-test carriers’ SMS results will be available to carriers in August Public will have access to carrier SMS results in the winter of 2010 26

27. New Agency Plans for Drivers The new measurement system provides an internal tool to address CMV drivers: Provides enhanced information on individual drivers to investigators to identify drivers with safety problems Allows for prioritizing driver sampling during carrier investigation Supports investigator follow up on serious violations Under CSA 2010, individual drivers will not be assigned safety ratings or safety fitness determinations 27

28. New Agency Plans for Drivers (cont’d) Other Agency initiatives are underway, including the Pre-employment Screening Program (PSP) PSP was mandated by Congress and is not a part of CSA 2010 “Driver Profiles” from FMCSA’s Driver Information Resource (DIR) will be available to carriers through PSP Driver Profiles will only be released with driver authorization PSP is under development, more information can be found at www.psp.fmcsa.dot.gov 28

29. Roadside Data Uniformity Data collected at the roadside is the foundation of all data driven traffic safety initiatives CSA 2010 relies on roadside data in its SMS Methodology The CSA 2010 SFD methodology would use roadside data as a component of safety fitness determinations 29

30. Roadside Uniformity-Background Effort organized into four core initiatives: Consistent documentation of roadside inspection and violation data Standardized processes for challenging data Increased awareness of high level goals of the inspection program Good inspections can support systematic enforcement program Screening vs. Inspection Uniform inspection selection processes 30

31. SMS and Safety Fitness Determination SFD would: Incorporate on-road safety performance via new SMS which updates on a monthly basis Continue to include major safety violations found as part of CSA 2010 investigations Produce a Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) of Unfit or Marginal or Continue Operation 31 Draft rulemaking is currently in review within DOT; NPRM expected to be published late 2010.

32. Safety Measurement System vs. SafeStat 32

33. What Can Carriers Do To Prepare Now? Educate Yourselves and Your Employees: Understand the SMS Methodology and the BASICs Check the website for information and updates (http://csa2010.fmcsa.dot.gov) Raise awareness that every inspection counts and every violation counts Check and update records: Motor Carrier Census Form (MCS -150) Routinely monitor and review inspection and crash data Question potentially incorrect data (DataQs: https://dataqs.fmcsa.dot.gov) Ensure compliance: Review inspections and violation history over the past 2 years Address safety problems now Educate drivers about how their performance impacts their own driving record and the safety assessment of the carrier 33

34. For more information, visit csa2010.fmcsa.dot.gov