Click on the questions below to read the answer.

1. What is the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) process for improving the Safety Measurement System (SMS)?
2. What is the timeline for rolling out the new CSA Safety Measurement System (SMS) changes?
3. Why was the Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) changed?
4. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration come up with this new solution for the Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC)?
5. Why aren't the cargo/load securement violations being moved into the Unsafe Driving Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) since the driver bears primary responsibility for such violations?
6. What changed in the conversion of the Cargo-Related Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) to the Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance BASIC?
7. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) develop the new Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) criteria solution?
8. How will the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) implement the Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC)? What are the changes to Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) violations?
9. Why did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) make changes to Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) violations?
10. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) develop the solution for aligning the Safety Measurement System (SMS) with Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) regulations?
11. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) approach this situation where vehicle violations are found during a Level III driver-only inspection and how they will be used in the Safety Measurement System (SMS)?
12. What are the revised criteria for which carriers are considered Hazardous Materials (HM) carriers in the Safety Measurement System (SMS)?
13. Why is the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) revising the criteria for which carriers are considered Hazardous Materials (HM) carriers?
14. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determine the revised criteria for who is considered a Hazardous Materials (HM) carrier?
15. What are the revised criteria for which carriers are considered passenger carriers in the SMS?
16. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determine the revised definition of passenger carrier?
17. Why did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) revise its terminology on the Safety Measurement System (SMS) Website?
18. What is the revised terminology that will be used on Safety Measurement System (SMS)?
19. How will the Safety Measurement System (SMS) present injuries and fatalities resulting from a crash?
20. Are there additional changes being rolled out in December that were not included in the Safety Measurement System (SMS) Preview?
21. Does the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's effectiveness analysis of the changes include the four changes that are being made but not previewed?

1. How can motor carriers, drivers, and other stakeholders request a review or correction of data in the Safety Measurement System?
2. If the citation I acquired while in my commercial motor vehicle is dismissed in court, can I get the roadside inspection violation that resulted from the same behavior from the same incident removed from my Safety Measurement System (SMS) record? If so, how?

1. What is the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) process for improving the Safety Measurement System (SMS)? 

   CSA, and its Safety Measurement System (SMS), is FMCSA's performance-based, data-driven safety enforcement program.
   
   To make our roads safer and sharpen our focus on truck and bus companies that present a high safety risk, FMCSA periodically introduces safety enhancements to SMS by first previewing them and collecting input from motor carriers, enforcement staff and the public.  Throughout the development and launch of CSA, FMCSA has sought feedback on SMS from stakeholders and partners and continues to collect and analyze input from industry, safety advocates, and other stakeholders for its potential to further enhance effectiveness in identifying patterns of safety violations, before they result in crashes.

2. What is the timeline for rolling out the new CSA Safety Measurement System (SMS) changes?
   • End of Feb 2012 - SMS Changes Preview (available to the field and State enforcement first)
   • March 2012 - Federal Register Notice for SMS Preview
   • March - July 2012 - SMS Changes Preview (available to carriers to see their own data)
   • August 2012 - Announce final SMS Changes
   • December 2012 - SMS Changes will take effect

   

3. Why was the Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) changed?

   The Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program is making the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) work more efficient. Moving cargo/load securement violations into the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC offers three important benefits. By moving load securement violations to the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC and recalibrating the severity weights, FMCSA has mitigated the known bias created by information system limitations; ensured that the carriers with actual load securement violations are still identified; and strengthened the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC by improving the identification of carriers with the highest future crash rates for FMCSA interventions.

4. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration come up with this new solution for the Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC)?

   While cargo/load securement violations comprise 82% of violations in the Cargo-Related BASIC, they comprise just 4% of violations when included in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC. FMCSA compared the “flatbed bias” of the current Cargo-Related BASIC with that of the proposed Vehicle Maintenance BASIC, which incorporates the cargo/securement violations. Currently, the Safety Measurement System identifies carriers with Cargo-Related BASIC percentiles of 80 and higher—the worst 20% of carriers assessed in the Cargo-Related BASIC—for interventions. The analysis determined that while the Cargo-Related BASIC identified 54% of a sample of 77 known flatbed carriers at or above the Intervention Threshold in the Cargo-Related BASIC, the proposed Vehicle Maintenance BASIC identified 23% of these carriers at or above the Intervention Threshold.

   

5. Why aren'’t the cargo/load securement violations being moved into the Unsafe Driving Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) since the driver bears primary responsibility for such violations?

   The Unsafe Driving BASIC is not an appropriate place to house the cargo securement violations. The Vehicle Maintenance BASIC is focused on the physical condition of the truck, and cargo is a part of that condition, whereas the Unsafe Driving BASIC is focused on how the vehicle is being driven (e.g., improper lane change, speeding). Further, the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC is normalized by number of inspections, whereas the Unsafe Driving BASIC is normalized by on-road exposure measured by Power Units and Vehicle Miles Traveled. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration considers the number of inspections to be a more appropriate normalization factor for cargo securement violations and will include the cargo securement violations in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC.

6. What changed in the conversion of the Cargo-Related Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) to the Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance BASIC?

   Concerns were raised that some HM safety issues could be masked due to the inclusion of both HM and load securement violations in the Cargo-Related BASIC. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is implementing the HM Compliance BASIC to specifically address motor carriers that do not comply with Federal safety regulations related to properly packaging and transporting hazardous cargo, or accurately identifying and communicating hazardous cargo in the event of a crash or spill. The HM Compliance BASIC identifies carriers with higher HM violation rates (33.8% versus 29.1%) and HM out-of-service rates (5.4% vs. 4.0%) than does the Cargo-Related BASIC.

   

7. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) develop the new Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) criteria solution?

   FMCSA consulted subject matter experts to identify and apply severity weightings to the 239 HM violations that are contained in the Cargo-Related BASIC and 110 additional HM safety-based violations attributable to the motor carrier. The agency then conducted effectiveness testing to compare the Cargo-Related BASIC with a new BASIC containing only the HM violations to determine which better identified carriers with a high risk of related safety problems. The analysis found that the new BASIC identified carriers with more future violations and with higher violation rates than the current Cargo-Related BASIC.

8. How will the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) implement the Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC)?What are the changes to Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) violations?

   Motor carriers and law enforcement personnel can view data in this new safety category starting December 2012. FMCSA will conduct further study over the next year before this new category becomes public.

   The Safety Measurement System will be updated so that the Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category will include the subset of violations that (1) can be discovered and addressed as part of the driver’s pre-trip inspection on the intermodal equipment and (2) that meet the above criteria where the driver could have or should have conducted a pre-trip inspection on the intermodal equipment. FMCSA worked collaboratively with enforcement and industry to identify the violations. Here is a link to the current list of IEP that can be attributed to the driver’s and carrier’s record: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/rulesregs/IEP/Violation-Attribution-List-12162011_508.pdf.

   

9. Why did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) make changes to Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) violations?

   The Safety Measurement System (SMS) does not currently include any roadside violations associated with an IEP trailer distinct from the motor carrier. Some of these violations, however, should be attributed to the motor carrier. For example, when a motor carrier's driver agrees to haul equipment from an IEP, the driver is required under 49 CFR Part 390.40 to conduct a pre-trip inspection to determine if the IEP trailer is in safe condition. Violations that should be found during the pre-trip inspection are the motor carrier's responsibility and thus should be applied in the SMS.

10. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) develop the solution for aligning the Safety Measurement System (SMS) with Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) regulations?

    FMCSA uses data from the 3.5 million roadside inspections conducted across the country each year to inform decisions about safety. FMCSA evaluated roadside inspection data to confirm that there are data present to discriminate between IEP and carrier/driver responsibility for certain violations related to the condition of the intermodal trailer. FMCSA collects information from inspection reports that indicate, based on an enforcement officer's observation, whether the IEP provided space for a pre-trip inspection and whether the driver performed a pre-trip inspection. FMCSA applied this rule to the past 24 months of roadside inspections, resulting in an increase of approximately 22,000 violations included in the SMS Vehicle Maintenance Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category. A list of IEP violations can be found at https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/IEP_Attributable_Violations.xlsx.

    

11. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) approach this situation where vehicle violations are found during a Level III driver-only inspection and how they will be used in the Safety Measurement System (SMS)?

    FMCSA uses data from the 3.5 million roadside inspections conducted across the country each year to inform decisions about safety. FMCSA evaluated the extent to which inspectors are citing vehicle violations during driver-only inspections to confirm that this problem merits the attention that stakeholders have demanded. Approximately 139,000 violations, or 2.6% of all vehicle violations used in the SMS, are vehicle violations cited during a driver-only inspection. While very few driver violations are ever documented in vehicle-only inspections, this change will also be made to ensure that only violations within the scope of a particular type of inspection are included in the SMS. All violations from roadside inspections will continue to be on a carrier's inspection report, however only violations that fall within the scope of the specific inspections being performed will be used in the SMS.

12. What are the revised criteria for which carriers are considered Hazardous Materials (HM) carriers in the Safety Measurement System (SMS)?

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's criteria for HM carriers has been modified in order to focus intervention resources on those carriers involved in the majority of placardable HM transport. The new inspection-based criteria will include the following:

    • At least two HM placardable inspections within the past 24 months, with one inspection occurring within the past 12 months;
    • At least 5% of total inspections as HM placardable inspections.

    

13. Why is the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) revising the criteria for which carriers are considered Hazardous Materials (HM) carriers?

    In August 2011, the criteria for identifying carriers subject to the placardable HM thresholds was changed to include any carrier with HM activity (i.e., a placarded HM inspection, review, or permit) in the past two years. Previous criteria were based only on HM commodities hauled information provided by carriers in the requisite MCS-150 registration form. Feedback on this change was that certain carriers identified under these new criteria rarely hauled or were mistakenly identified as hauling placardable amounts of HM in the inspection forms.

14. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determine the revised criteria for who is considered a Hazardous Materials (HM) carrier?

    FMCSA conducted an analysis to determine how many carriers would be subject to the HM Intervention Threshold if the agency changed the inspection criteria to require the observation of recent inspections and a certain percentage of inspections where the carrier was designated as hauling placardable quantities of HM. FMCSA determined that tightening HM placardable inspection criteria would exclude approximately 11,500 of the  24,000 carriers currently subject to HM thresholds, while still covering 94% of the placardable HM inspections in the last 24 months.

    

15. What are the revised criteria for which carriers are considered passenger carriers in the SMS?

    Motor carriers subject to the passenger carrier threshold in the Safety Measurement System (SMS) are held to a significantly higher standard than non-passenger carriers. To better ensure the safety of passengers, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) clarified the definition of passenger carrier within the SMS as follows:

    • Add all for-hire carriers with 9—15 passenger capacity vehicles and private carriers with 16-plus passenger capacity vehicles, as these firms are under FMCSA's authority.
    • Remove all carriers with only 1—8 capacity vehicles and private carriers with 1—15 passenger capacity vehicles (effectively removing many limousines, vans, taxis, etc.), as these firms are generally outside most of FMCSA's authority.
    • Remove carriers where less than 2% of their respective fleets are passenger vehicles.

16. How did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determine the revised definition of passenger carrier?

    FMCSA analyzed carriers with passenger carrier thresholds that fall under FMCSA's authority in the development of the Compliance, Safety, Accountability program's Safety Measurement System.  The updated definition will add 5,700 carriers, and 75 of those will have one or more Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) above the threshold.  It would also remove 4,200 carriers, of which 26 no longer have any BASICs above the threshold.

    

17. Why did the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) revise its terminology on the Safety Measurement System (SMS) Website?

    In the Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category summary on the SMS Website, FMCSA uses the term "inconclusive" to describe carriers that have enough inspections but too few violations to warrant being considered for Compliance, Safety, Accountability program interventions and the term "insufficient data" to describe carriers that do not have enough inspections to produce a robust measure to even be assessed. Stakeholders have asked FMCSA to offer more specific descriptions than "inconclusive" and "insufficient data."”

18. What is the revised terminology that will be used on Safety Measurement System (SMS)?

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is giving motor carriers a preview of the revised terminology as well as the crash breakout. FMCSA encouraged feedback on the terms before they are released publicly in December. The table below outlines the terms that will be used for each Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC). Additionally, the crashes category will be broken out from the current "crashes with fatalities and injuries" into two separate categories: "crashes with fatalities" and "crashes with injuries."

    

    On-road Performance Column Information

    BASIC	Pending Values Displayed	Current Value Displayed
    Unsafe Driving	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	No power unit data - No register power unit data recorded in census information	(equivalent did not exist)
    	0% - No inspections with a violation in this BASIC cited	No Violations - No inspections with a violation in this BASIC cited
    	< 3 inspections with violations - Less than 3 inspections with a violation in the BASIC	Inconclusive - Less than 3 inspections with a violation in the BASIC
    	No violations within 1 year - No violations cited in past 12 months	Inconclusive - Violations are older than 12 months
    Controlled Substances and Alcohol	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	0% - No inspections with a violation in this BASIC cited	Inconclusive - When violations are older than 12 months
    	No violations within 1 year - No violations cited in past 12 months	No Violations - No inspections with a violation in this BASIC cited
    Crash Indicator	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	No power unit data - No registered power unit data recorded in census information	(equivalent did not exist)
    	0% - No crashes listed for the motor carrier	No Crashes - No crashes listed for the motor carrier
    	< 2 crashes - One crash	Inconclusive - One crash
    	No crashes within 1 year - No crashes cited within past 12 months	Inconclusive - All crashes older than 12 months
    Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service)1	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	0% - Enough driver inspections (3+ inspections), but no violations in this BASIC cited	No Violations - Enough driver inspections (3+ inspections), but no violations in this BASIC cited
    	< 3 driver inspections - Not enough driver inspections to be assessed (0 to 2 inspections)	Insufficient Data - Not enough driver inspections to be assessed (0 to 2 inspections)
    	< 3 inspections with violations - Enough inspections (+3 driver inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 2 inspections with violations)	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+3 driver inspections), but either (1) not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 2 inspections with violations)
    	No violations within 1 year - Enough inspections, but no violation cited within the past 12 months and the latest driver inspection did not include violation in the BASIC	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+3 driver inspections), but no violation cited within the previous 12 months and the latest driver inspection did not include violation in the BASIC
    Driver Fitness	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	0% - Enough driver inspections (5+ inspections), but no violations in this BASIC cited	No Violations - Enough driver inspections (5+ inspections), but no violations in this BASIC cited
    	< 5 driver inspections - Not enough driver inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)	Insufficient Data - Not enough driver inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)
    	< 5 inspections with violations - Enough inspections (+5 driver inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 driver inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)
    	No violations within 1 year - Enough inspections, but no violation cited within the past 12 months and the latest driver inspection did not include violation in the BASIC	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 driver inspections), but no violation cited within the previous 12 months and the latest driver inspection did not include violation in the BASIC
    Vehicle Maintenance	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	0% - Enough vehicle inspections (5+ inspections), but no violations cited in the BASIC	No Violations - Enough vehicle inspections (5+ inspections), but no violations cited in the BASIC
    	< 5 vehicle inspections - Not enough vehicle inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)	Insufficient Data - Not enough vehicle inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)
    	< 5 inspections with violations - Enough inspections (+5 vehicle inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 vehicle inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)
    	No violations within 1 year - Enough inspections, but no violation cited within the past 12 months and the latest vehicle inspection did not include violation in the BASIC	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 vehicle inspections), but no violations cited within the previous 12 months and the latest vehicle inspection did not include violation in the BASIC
    Hazardous Materials Compliance2	Display Percentile	Display Percentile
    	0% - Enough HM placardable vehicle inspections (5+ inspections), but no HM placardable  violations cited in the BASIC	No Violations - Enough vehicle inspections (5+ inspections), but no violations cited in the BASIC
    	< 5 vehicle inspections - Not enough HM placardable vehicle inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)	Insufficient Data - Not enough vehicle inspections to be assessed (0 to 4 inspections)
    	< 5 inspections with violations - Enough HM placardable vehicle inspections (+5 inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 vehicle inspections), but not enough inspections with BASIC-related violations (1 to 4 inspections with violations)
    	No violations within 1 year - Enough inspections, but no violation cited within the past 12 months and the latest vehicle inspection did not include violation in the BASIC	Inconclusive - Enough inspections (+5 vehicle inspections), but no violations cited within the previous 12 months and the latest vehicle inspection did not include violation in the BASIC
    	No HM placardable vehicle inspections - Does not have any relevant HM placardable vehicle inspections.	NA

    ¹This BASIC will become the HOS Compliance BASIC in December 2012.
    ²The HM BASIC will become the HM Compliance BASIC in December 2012.

    

19. How will the Safety Measurement System (SMS) present injuries and fatalities resulting from a crash?

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is responding to feedback to change how fatalities and injuries caused by crashes are presented in the SMS. Previously, the two were combined. They will now be listed separately.

20. Are there additional changes being rolled out in December that were not included in the Safety Measurement System (SMS) Preview?

    Yes, there are four additional changes:  

    • Removing the 1—5 miles per hour speeding violation from the past 24 months of data;
    • Lowering the severity weight for the generic speeding violation (392.2S) to 1 from 5 (retroactive from January 1, 2011);
    • Lowering of paper form and manner violations to a severity weight of 1 to be consistent with the same violations for electronic logbook violations; and
    • Changing the name of the Fatigued Driving Hours-of-Service (HOS) Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) to the HOS Compliance BASIC. 

    

21. Does the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's effectiveness analysis of the changes include the four changes that are being made but not previewed?

    Only one of the four additional changes impacts the effectiveness analysis, and the impact is very minor, improving the results slightly. Therefore, the effectiveness statistics cited in the foundational document are accurate.

1. How can motor carriers, drivers, and other stakeholders request a review or correction of data in the Safety Measurement System?

   The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has developed a specific mechanism to facilitate data reviews.  Requests for Data Reviews (RDRs) can be made through the DataQs system, an electronic filing system that motor carriers, drivers, and the public use. The first step is to register either at the DataQs Website (https://dataqs.fmcsa.dot.gov/), or via the FMCSA Portal. Instructions for filing an RDR are provided, and include simple forms and the submission of information such as the report number, date and time of the event, State, and explanation. Once filed, the RDR and all relevant documentation are routed to the organization responsible for the data, and electronic correspondence is used to communicate with the requestor. The DataQs Website is open to the public and offers an online help function to walk users through the process.

   Please Note: A carrier can modify registration information (e.g., name, address, or Power Unit data) by updating the MCS-150 form.

2. If the citation I acquired while in my commercial motor vehicle is dismissed in court, can I get the roadside inspection violation that resulted from the same behavior from the same incident removed from my Safety Measurement System (SMS) record? If so, how?

   Federal and State systems are related, but not the same. Reviews of violations that are adjudicated in the State court systems do not automatically result in a change to data that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) released. In order to have a violation removed from the SMS record, a motor carrier or driver must file a request for data review (RDR) in the DataQs system. When an RDR is made through the DataQs system and the request is granted, the organization responsible for the data makes the appropriate changes. The record is then updated in the SMS during the next monthly run. However, users may only use the DataQs system to request a data review on data that FMCSA uses.