carrier safety measurement system (csms) methodology

CARRIER SAFETY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM (CSMS)

METHODOLOGY

Version 3.0.1

Methodology Revised August 2013

Prepared for: Prepared by:

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration John A. Volpe National Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Systems Center

Washington, DC 20590 55 Broadway

Cambridge, MA 02142

August 2013 i

Preface

This report is geared towards motor carriers and documents the Carrier Safety

Measurement System (CSMS) methodology developed to support the Compliance,

Safety, Accountability (CSA) program for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration (FMCSA). The SMS has two components. One component measures the

safety of individual motor carriers, CSMS, which is documented in this report. CSMS

results are fully available to the assessed carriers. A subset of the results is publicly

available. The other component is the Driver Safety Measurement System (DSMS),

which measures the safety of individual commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The

methodology for DSMS can be found in separate document at

(http://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/Driver_SMSMethodology.pdf). DSMS results are

strictly used as an investigative tool and are only available to law enforcement (i.e.,

DSMS results are not available to the public, motor carriers, or drivers).

Many of the concepts used to construct the SMS originated from the SafeStat

measurement system. SafeStat was developed at the U.S. Department of Transportation’s

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (the Volpe Center) in Cambridge,

MA, under a project plan agreement with the Federal Highway Administration’s

(FHWA) Office of Motor Carriers, FMCSA’s predecessor. It was designed and tested

under the Federal/State Performance and Registration Information Systems Management

(PRISM) program in the mid-1990s. From the mid-1990s until December 2010, when

FMCSA replaced SafeStat with the SMS, SafeStat was implemented nationally to

prioritize motor carriers for onsite compliance reviews (CRs). SafeStat output has been

made available to the public via the Internet on the Analysis & Information (A&I)

Website at http://www.ai.fmcsa.dot.gov.

Under CSA, the SMS design builds on the lessons learned from developing and

implementing SafeStat for CR prioritization. However, the SMS also incorporates new

CSA requirements for identifying specific types of unsafe behaviors that the entities

exhibit. A more specialized set of interventions will now address these unsafe behaviors

and the system will also expand the use of on-road safety violation data. In January 2008,

FMCSA started an Operational Model Test (Op-Model Test) of the CSA program, which

includes using the SMS to identify and monitor unsafe carrier and CMV driver behavior

in nine states. Version 3.0 of the Methodology incorporates feedback from industry, field

staff, and other subject matter experts, and was implemented in December 2012. A

summary of these methodology changes is presented in Appendix B. Future SMS

development will be part of a continuous improvement process based on results and

feedback.

August 2013 ii

Table of Contents

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iv

Glossary .............................................................................................................................. v

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1-1

2. Design of the SMS ..................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Description of BASICs and Crash Indicator ........................................................ 2-1

2.2 Data Sources ........................................................................................................ 2-2

2.3 Carrier BASICs Rankings in CSMS .................................................................... 2-3

2.4 CSMS Design Features ........................................................................................ 2-4

2.4.1 Violation Severity .......................................................................................... 2-4

2.4.2 Crash Severity ................................................................................................ 2-4

2.4.3 Time Weights ................................................................................................. 2-5

2.4.4 Normalization ................................................................................................ 2-5

2.4.5 Segmentation.................................................................................................. 2-5

2.4.6 Safety Event Groups ...................................................................................... 2-5

2.4.7 Data Sufficiency............................................................................................. 2-6

2.4.8 Percentile Rank .............................................................................................. 2-6

3. CSMS Methodology .................................................................................................. 3-1

3.1 Unsafe Driving BASIC Assessment .................................................................... 3-1

3.1.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ..................................................................... 3-1

3.1.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank.......................................................... 3-4

3.2 HOS Compliance BASIC Assessment................................................................. 3-5

3.2.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ..................................................................... 3-5

3.2.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank.......................................................... 3-7

3.3 Driver Fitness BASIC Assessment ...................................................................... 3-7

3.3.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ..................................................................... 3-8

3.3.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank.......................................................... 3-9

3.4 Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC ............................................................. 3-10

3.4.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ................................................................... 3-10

3.4.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank........................................................ 3-11

3.5 Vehicle Maintenance BASIC Assessment ......................................................... 3-12

3.5.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ................................................................... 3-12

3.5.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank........................................................ 3-13

3.6 HM Compliance BASIC Assessment ................................................................ 3-14

3.6.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure ................................................................... 3-14

3.6.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank........................................................ 3-16

3.7 Crash Indicator Assessment ............................................................................... 3-16

August 2013 iii

3.7.1 Calculation of Crash Indicator Measure ...................................................... 3-17

3.7.2 Calculation of Crash Indicator Percentile Rank........................................... 3-19

4. Sample CSMS Measurement Examples .................................................................... 4-1

Sample CSMS Output ................................................................................................. 4-1

CSMS Measurement Examples .................................................................................. 4-2

HOS Compliance BASIC Example .......................................................................... 4-2

Vehicle Maintenance BASIC Example .................................................................. 4-11

Crash Indicator Example ........................................................................................ 4-21

5. SMS Report – Summary/Next Steps ......................................................................... 5-1

6. Appendix A ............................................................................................................... A-1

7. Appendix B ............................................................................................................... B-1

List of Figures

Figure 2-1. BASICs Ranking Process ............................................................................. 2-4

Figure 4-1. CSMS Screenshot.......................................................................................... 4-2

Figure 4-2. Example: HOS Compliance Inspection/Violation List ................................ 4-3

Figure 4-3. Example: HOS Compliance Detailed Inspection Report ............................. 4-4

Figure 4-4. Example: HOS Compliance Inspection/Violation/ Measure Report ........... 4-5

Figure 4-5. Example: HOS Compliance Inspection #1 .................................................. 4-6

Figure 4-6. Example: HOS Compliance Inspection #2 .................................................. 4-7

Figure 4-7. Example: HOS Compliance Measure Calculation ....................................... 4-8

Figure 4-8. Example: HOS Compliance On-Road Performance Summary ................... 4-9

Figure 4-9. Example: HOS Compliance Measure and Percentile Calculation ............. 4-11

Figure 4-10. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Relevant Inspection List ....................... 4-12

Figure 4-11. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Detailed Inspection Report ................... 4-13

Figure 4-12. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Inspection/Violation/ Measure Report .. 4-14

Figure 4-13. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Inspection # 1 ........................................ 4-15

Figure 4-14. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Inspection # 3 ........................................ 4-16

Figure 4-15. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Inspection #7 ......................................... 4-17

Figure 4-16. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Inspection #5 ......................................... 4-18

Figure 4-17. Example: Vehicle Maintenance On-Road Performance Summary .......... 4-19

Figure 4-18. Example: Vehicle Maintenance Measure and Percentile Calculation ..... 4-21

Figure 4-19. Example: Crash Indicator Applicable Crash List ..................................... 4-22

August 2013 iv

Figure 4-20. Example: Crash Indicator PU Type ......................................................... 4-23

Figure 4-21. Example: Crash Indicator Average Power Unit Calculation ................... 4-24

Figure 4-22. Example: Crash Indicator VMT data ....................................................... 4-24

Figure 4-23. Example: Crash Activity Detail/Crash Measure Report .......................... 4-25

Figure 4-24. Example: Crash Indicator Crash #1 ......................................................... 4-26

Figure 4-25. Example: Crash Indicator Measure Calculation ..................................... 4-27

Figure 4-26. Example: Crash Indicator Crash Activity ................................................ 4-28

List of Tables

Table 3-1. VMT per PU for Combo Segment................................................................. 3-3

Table 3-2. VMT per Average PU for Straight Segment ................................................. 3-3

Table 3-3. Safety Event Groups for Unsafe Driving BASIC: Combo Segment ............ 3-4

Table 4-1. Safety Event Group Categories for HOS Compliance ................................ 4-10

Table 4-2. Safety Event Group Categories for Vehicle Maintenance .......................... 4-20

Table 4-3. VMT per PU for Combo Segment............................................................... 4-24

Table 4-4. Crash Severity Weights for Crash Indicator ................................................ 4-26

Table 4-5. Safety Event Group Categories for Crash Indicator .................................... 4-29

August 2013 v

Glossary

BASIC

Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category

CDL

Commercial Driver’s License

CMV

Commercial Motor Vehicle

Compliance Review

CRWG

Compliance Review Work Group

CSA

Compliance, Safety, Accountability

CSMS

Carrier Safety Measurement System

DIR

Driver Information Resource

DSMS

Driver Safety Measurement System

FMCSA

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

FMCSR

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

Hazardous Materials

HMR

Hazardous Materials Regulations

HOS

IEP

Hours-of-Service

Intermodal Equipment Provider

LTCCS

Large Truck Crash Causation Study

MCMIS

Motor Carrier Management Information System

OOS

Out-of-Service

Power Unit

PRISM Performance and Registration Information Systems

Management

SafeStat

Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement System

SFD

Safety Fitness Determination

SMS

Safety Measurement System

USDOT

U.S. Department of Transportation

VMT

Vehicle Miles Travelled

August 2013 1-1

1. Introduction

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has developed its

Operational Model through its Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program. The

goal of CSA is to implement more effective and efficient ways for FMCSA, its State

Partners, and the trucking industry to prevent commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes,

fatalities, and injuries. CSA helps FMCSA and its State Partners impact the safety

behavior of more motor carriers and drivers, use continually improving data to better

identify high-risk motor carriers and drivers, and apply a wider range of interventions to

reduce high-risk behavior.

As part of this effort, FMCSA has identified the attributes of a model for safety oversight

that it considers ideal: flexibility, efficiency, effectiveness, innovation, and equity. The

CSA Operational Model, shown below, features continuous monitoring and tracking of

entities’ safety performance. Entities may be either motor carriers or CMV drivers. All

entities found with problematic safety behavior will be subject to the Intervention

Process.

Figure 1-1. CSA Operational Model

FMCSA CSA Website, http://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/

August 2013 1-2

The Safety Measurement System

Within the CSA Operational Model, the Safety Measurement System (SMS) quantifies

the on-road safety performance of individual entities to:

• Identify entities for interventions. The SMS is a key component in determining

the inclusion of entities with significant safety problems into the Intervention

Process.

• Determine the specific safety problems an entity exhibits. The SMS allows

enforcement officers to identify the specific safety problems that the system

highlights and to surgically address them through a tailored set of interventions.

• Monitor safety problems throughout the Intervention Process. The SMS will

continuously monitor on-road performance to assess whether an entity’s safety

performance has improved enough for it to exit the Intervention Process, or if

further intervention is warranted.

• Support FMCSA’s proposed Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) process. The

SMS results can be an important factor in determining the safety fitness of

carriers. The SMS identifies the carriers demonstrating the worst safety

performance so that they can be considered for an “Unfit” safety determination.

Details on the proposed process will be available for public comment as part of

the upcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

In addition to supporting the CSA Operational Model, the SMS results can provide

stakeholders with valuable safety information. The SMS results are easily accessible via

the Internet to encourage improvements in motor carrier safety. Findings from the SMS

will allow the evaluated carriers to view an assessment of their weaknesses in various

safety areas. In turn, this information will empower motor carriers and other stakeholders

involved with the motor carrier industry to make safety-based business decisions.

August 2013 2-1

2. Design of the SMS

The SMS is a tool for assessing available roadside performance data. These data are used

to rank an entity’s relative performance in any of six Behavior Analysis and Safety

Improvement Categories (BASICs) as well as crash involvement (Crash Indicator). Law

enforcement will use rankings within these BASICs and the Crash Indicator to select

entities for appropriate interventions.

2.1 Description of BASICs and Crash Indicator

The CSA team developed the BASICs under the premise that CMV crashes can be traced

to the behavior of motor carriers and/or CMV drivers. The behavior categories are

derived based on information from a number of sources: Large Truck Crash Causation

Study (LTCCS);

CSA Driver History Study; the existing FMCSA regulatory structure;

and analysis conducted under FMCSA’s Compliance Review Workgroup (CRWG), the

predecessor to CSA. The BASICs are defined as follows:

• Unsafe Driving BASIC—Operation of CMVs in a dangerous or careless manner.

Example violations: speeding, reckless driving, improper lane change, and

inattention.

• HOS Compliance BASIC—Operation of CMVs by drivers who are ill, fatigued,

or in noncompliance with the Hours-of-Service (HOS) regulations. This BASIC

includes violations

of driving time limitations and of regulations surrounding the

complete and accurate recording of logbooks as they relate to HOS requirements

and the management of CMV driver fatigue. Instances related to the HOS

Compliance BASIC are distinguished from incidents where unconsciousness or

an inability to react is brought about by the use of alcohol, drugs, or other

controlled substances. Example violations: HOS, logbook, and operating a CMV

while ill or fatigued.

• Driver Fitness BASIC—Operation of CMVs by drivers who are unfit to operate a

CMV due to lack of training, experience, or medical qualifications. Example

violations: failing to have a valid and appropriate Commercial Driver's License

(CDL) and being medically unqualified to operate a CMV.

• Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC—Operation of CMVs by drivers who are

impaired due to alcohol, illegal drugs, and misuse of prescription or over-the-

counter medications. Example violations: use or possession of controlled

substances or alcohol.

• Vehicle Maintenance BASIC—Failure to properly maintain a CMV and prevent

shifting loads. Example violations: brakes, lights, and other mechanical defects,

improper load securement, and failure to make required repairs.

Daniel Blower and Kenneth L. Campbell, Large Truck Crash Causation Study Analysis Brief, February

2005. Available at http://www.ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/ltccs/

August 2013 2-2

• HM Compliance BASIC—Unsafe handling of Hazardous Materials (HM) on a

CMV. Example violations: leaking containers, improper placarding, improperly

packaged HM.

Additionally, the SMS evaluates an entity’s crash history. The crash history used by the

Crash Indicator is not specifically a behavior; rather, it is the consequence of behavior

and may indicate a problem that warrants attention. The Crash Indicator is defined as

follows:

• Crash Indicator—Histories or patterns of high crash involvement, including

frequency and severity. It is based on information from State-reported crash

reports.

The SMS focuses on the two types of entities most likely to impact the BASICs and

Crash Indicator: motor carriers and CMV drivers. Therefore, two measurement systems

were designed for CSA: the Carrier Safety Measurement System (CSMS) and the Driver

Safety Measurement Systems (DSMS). The public can obtain a subset of the CSMS

results at the SMS Website (http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/sms/) and each carrier can obtain its

full CSMS results by logging in to the website.

The DSMS is a tool that enables enforcement personnel to assess individual drivers in the

BASICs using 36 months of roadside performance data across employers. At this time,

FMCSA does not use DSMS to assign formal safety ratings or SFDs to individual

drivers. DSMS does not impact a driver's CDL. DSMS results are not available to the

public, motor carriers, or drivers. DSMS results are strictly used as an investigative tool

by law enforcement. The current DSMS methodology can be found in a separate

document at: http://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/Driver_SMSMethodology.pdf.

2.2 Data Sources

CSMS assesses an individual carrier’s performance by BASIC and Crash Indicator

calculated from information collected during on-road safety inspections and State-

reported CMV crash records. These data are recorded in the Motor Carrier Management

Information System (MCMIS). In addition, motor carrier Census data, also recorded in

the MCMIS, are used for the identification and normalization of safety event data. Below

are more detailed descriptions of each data source:

• Roadside Inspections are examinations a Motor Carrier Safety Assistance

Program inspector conducts on individual CMVs and drivers to determine if they

are in compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)

and/or Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs).

• Violations are recorded during inspections and are entered into the MCMIS

database. A subset of these violations results in driver or vehicle out-of-service

(OOS) orders. These OOS violations must be corrected before the affected driver

or vehicle is allowed to return to service. The CSMS assessments are based on the

safety violations listed in Appendix A. These assessments, however, do not

August 2013 2-3

include those violations that are: (1) a result of a crash

or (2) assigned to another

entity such as a shipper or Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP).

Note: Some roadside inspections are performed following a traffic enforcement

stop for a moving violation. Violations reported during such stops do not always

result in the issuance of a citation to the driver, but are used in the CSMS whether

or not a citation is issued.

• State-Reported Commercial Vehicle Crash Data are taken from the MCMIS and

provide information on crashes as reported by State and local police officials.

The reporting of these crashes follows National Governors Association standards.

• Motor Carrier Census Data are first collected when a carrier obtains a U.S.

Department of Transportation (USDOT) number. The Census data are primarily

collected from: (1) Form MCS-150, filled out by the carrier, and (2) Form

MCS-151, filled out by law enforcement as part of an investigation. Carriers are

required to update their MCS-150 information biennially. Carriers domiciled in

States participating in Performance and Registration Information Systems

Management (PRISM) Program update their Census data as part of the CMV

registration process. The CSMS uses Census data for identification and

normalization of safety-related data. Examples of Census data include USDOT

number, carrier name, number and type of Power Units (PUs), annualized vehicle

miles travelled (VMT), physical location, current status, and types of cargo

hauled.

2.3 Carrier BASICs Rankings in CSMS

Four principal steps are used to assess a carrier’s performance in each BASIC and the

Crash Indicator. First, relevant inspection, violation, and crash data obtained from the

MCMIS are attributed to a carrier to create a safety event history for the carrier. Each

carrier’s violations are classified into a BASIC and are then time-weighted, severity

weighted, and normalized to form a quantifiable measure for a carrier in each BASIC.

Based on a comparison of each carrier’s BASIC measure to other carriers with a similar

number of safety events, a rank and percentile are assigned. These steps are illustrated in

Figure 2-1. The CSMS applies similar steps to crash data to calculate carrier Crash

Indicator percentiles.

Only pre-existing violations from post-crash inspections are used in the SMS. Violations recorded in the

MCMIS as being attributed to the crash are not used.

August 2013 2-4

Safety Events

by Entity

BASIC Data

Rank/

Percentile

BASIC

Measures

Figure 2-1. BASICs Ranking Process

2.4 CSMS Design Features

The conversion of a carrier’s safety data into a BASIC measure and rank/percentile

involves the application of several CSMS design features as discussed below.

2.4.1 Violation Severity

All roadside inspection violations that pertain to a BASIC are assigned a severity weight

that reflects its association with crash occurrence and crash consequences. The severity

weights help differentiate the levels of crash risk associated with the various violations

attributed to each BASIC.

The violation severity weights in the tables in Appendix A have been converted to a scale

from 1 to 10 for each BASIC, where 1 represents the lowest crash risk and 10 represents

the highest crash risk relative to the other violations in the BASIC. Since these severity

weights are BASIC-specific, two weights that appear identical but are in different

BASICs do not represent the same crash risk. For example, a 5 in one BASIC is not

equivalent to a 5 in another BASIC. Instead, the 5 represents the midpoint between a

crash risk of 1 and 10 within a BASIC.

A violation’s severity weight is only reflective of crash risk when compared to other

violations within the same BASIC. Severity weights from one BASIC should not be

added, subtracted, equated, or otherwise combined with the severity weight of a violation

from any other BASIC.

Within certain BASICs, additional severity weight is applied to violations that resulted in

driver or vehicle OOS orders. This additional severity weight for OOS conditions, as with

the severity weight assigned to each violation, is based on analysis that quantified the

extent of these associations between violation and crash risk, as well as input from

enforcement subject matter experts. Appendix A describes the severity weights’

derivation and provides the specific weights assigned to each roadside inspection

violation used in the SMS.

2.4.2 Crash Severity

Crashes are assigned severity weights according to their impact. Greater weight is

attributed to crashes involving injuries, fatalities, and/or crashes involving the release of

August 2013 2-5

HM than to crashes only resulting in a vehicle being towed away at the scene of the

crash.

2.4.3 Time Weights

All safety events are assigned a time weight. The time weight of an event decreases with

time. This decline results in more recent events having a greater impact on a carrier’s

BASIC and Crash Indicator measures than older events. When safety events become

older than two years, they are no longer used to assess a carrier’s safety in the CSMS.

2.4.4 Normalization

BASIC and Crash Indicator measures are normalized to reflect differences in exposure

among carriers. The normalization approach varies depending on what is being measured.

The CSMS normalizes for the number of driver inspections with driver-related BASICs,

whereas vehicle inspections are used for normalization within vehicle-related BASICs.

Therefore, the number of driver inspections normalizes the HOS Compliance, Driver

Fitness, and Controlled Substances/Alcohol measures, while the number of vehicle

inspections normalizes the Vehicle Maintenance and HM Compliance BASIC measures.

The HM Compliance BASIC measure is further qualified to use only vehicle inspections

where the carrier was noted as transporting placardable quantities of HM.

While violations of the above BASICs are discovered during an inspection, a distinction

is made for behaviors that usually prompt an inspection. For this reason, the CSMS

normalizes the Unsafe Driving BASIC measure by carrier size (i.e., a hybrid PU and

VMT measure) as this BASIC is largely comprised of violations such as speeding that

initiate an inspection being conducted. Similarly, the Crash Indicator is also normalized

by carrier size.

2.4.5 Segmentation

The Unsafe Driving BASIC and Crash Indicator account for carrier differences by

segmenting the carrier population into two groups based on the types of vehicles

operated. This segmentation ensures that carriers with fundamentally different types of

vehicles/operations are not compared to each other. The two segments are: (1) “Combo”

or combination trucks/motor coach buses constituting 70% or more of the total Power

Units (PUs) and (2) “Straight” or straight trucks/other vehicles constituting more than

30% of the total PUs.

2.4.6 Safety Event Groups

To further account for the differences among carriers, the CSMS places carriers in safety

event groups based on the number of safety events (e.g., inspections, crashes) in which

they have been involved. This tiered approach accounts for the inherent greater

variability in rates based on small samples or limited levels of exposure and the stronger

level of confidence in measures based on higher exposure. The safety event grouping also

allows the CSMS to handle the widely diverse motor carrier population, while ensuring

that similarly situated carriers are treated with the same standards.

August 2013 2-6

2.4.7 Data Sufficiency

The CSMS employs data sufficiency standards to ensure that there are enough

inspections or crashes to produce meaningful measures of safety for carriers. In instances

where the safety performance of a carrier can potentially lead to CSA interventions or a

detrimental SFD, additional data sufficiency tests are employed. These tests ensure that a

carrier has a “critical mass” of poor performance data or a pattern of violations before

adverse action is taken.

2.4.8 Percentile Rank

The CSMS uses the measures to assign a percentile ranking to each BASIC and Crash

Indicator. Each measure is a quantifiable determination of safety behavior. Percentile

ranking allows the safety behavior of a carrier to be compared with the safety behavior of

carriers with similar numbers of safety events. Within each safety event group, a

percentile is computed on a 0–100 scale for each carrier that receives a non-zero measure,

with 100 indicating the worst performance.

Percentiles are generated from measures of U.S.-domiciled interstate and HM carriers.

The remaining carriers, intrastate non-HM and non-US domiciled, are assigned

percentiles afterwards based on the equivalent measures-to-percentile relationship of the

U.S.-domiciled carriers.

Carriers with percentiles above a certain set threshold and meeting minimum data

sufficiency requirements in a BASIC or Crash Indicator will be identified for potential

CSA interventions. The current thresholds can be found on the CSA Website.

August 2013 3-1

3. CSMS Methodology

The following sections describe the CSMS methodology used to calculate the measure

and percentile of each BASIC and the Crash Indicator for individual motor carriers.

3.1 Unsafe Driving BASIC Assessment

This section describes the calculation of carrier measures and percentile ranks in the

Unsafe Driving BASIC. This BASIC is defined as:

Operating a CMV in a dangerous or careless manner. Example violations:

speeding, reckless driving, improper lane change, and inattention. See

Appendix A for a complete list of roadside inspection violations used in the

CSMS.

The CSMS assesses the Unsafe Driving BASIC using relevant violations of FMCSRs

recorded during roadside inspections and reported in the MCMIS. Individual carriers’

BASIC measures also incorporate carrier size in terms of PUs and annual VMT. These

measures are used to generate percentile ranks that reflect each carrier’s driver safety

posture relative to carriers in the same segment with similar numbers of inspections with

violations.

3.1.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure

The BASIC measures for the Unsafe Driving BASIC are calculated as the sum of severity

and time-weighted applicable violations divided by carrier average PUs multiplied by a

Utilization Factor, as follows:

FactornUtilizatioxPUsAverage

violationsapplicableweightedseverityandtimeofTotal

MeasureBASIC =

Equation 3-1

In this equation, the terms are defined as follows:

An Applicable Violation is defined as any violation recorded in any Driver

Inspection (Level 1, 2, 3, or 6) that matches the FMCSR and HMR cites listed for

Unsafe Driving (Table 1, Appendix A) and during the past 24 months. In cases of

multiple counts of the same violation, the CSMS only uses each violation cite

once per inspection.

Note: Some roadside inspections are performed following a traffic enforcement

stop for a moving violation. Violations reported during such stops do not always

result in the issuance of a citation/ticket to the driver, but are used in the CSMS

whether or not a citation/ticket is issued.

August 2013 3-2

A Severity Weight from 1 (less severe) to 10 (most severe) is assigned to each

applicable violation. See the Unsafe Driving Table (Table 1, Appendix A) for the

severity weights corresponding to each violation. The severity weighting of each

violation cite accounts for the level of crash risk relative to the other violation

cites used in the BASIC measurement. The sum of all violation severity weights

for any one inspection in any one BASIC is capped at a maximum of 30. This cap

of 30 is applied before the severity weights are multiplied by the time weight.

Out-of-service (OOS) weights are not assigned for Unsafe Driving violations, as

most violations in this category already are not considered OOS violations.

Note: The severity weights of violations outside of the BASIC being calculated

do not count towards the violation cap.

A Time Weight of 1, 2, or 3 is assigned to each applicable violation based on how

long ago it was recorded. Violations recorded in the past six months receive a

time weight of 3. Violations recorded over six months and up to 12 months ago

receive a time weight of 2. All violations recorded earlier (older than 12 months

but within the past 24 months) receive a time weight of 1. This time-weighting

places more emphasis on recent violations relative to older violations.

A Time and Severity Weighted Violation is a violation’s severity weight

multiplied by its time weight.

Average PUs are used in part to account for each carrier’s level of exposure when

calculating the BASIC measure. The number of owned, term-leased, and trip-

leased PUs (trucks, tractors, hazardous material tank trucks, motor coaches, and

school buses) contained in the Census data are used to calculate the PU totals. The

average PUs for each carrier is calculated using (i) the carrier’s current number of

PUs, (ii) the number of PUs the carrier had six months ago, and (iii) the number

of PUs the carrier had 18 months ago. The average PU calculation is shown

below:

186 Months

Months

Current

AveragePU

Equation 3-2

The Utilization Factor is a multiplier that adjusts the average PU values based on

the utilization in terms of VMT per average PU where VMT data in the past 24

months are available. The primary sources of VMT information in the Census are:

(1) Form MCS-150, filled out by the carrier, and (2) Form MCS-151, filled out by

law enforcement as part of an investigation. Carriers are required to update their

MCS-150 information biennially. In cases where the VMT data has been obtained

multiple times over the past 24 months for the same carrier, the most current

positive VMT figure is used. The Utilization Factor is calculated by the following

three steps:

August 2013 3-3

(i) Carrier Segment

There are two segments into which each motor carrier can be categorized:

• “Combo” – combination trucks/motor coach buses constituting 70% or

more of the total PU

• “Straight” – straight trucks/other vehicles constituting more than 30%

of the total PU

(ii) VMT per Average PU

The VMT per average PU is derived by taking most recent positive VMT data

and dividing it by the average PUs (defined above).

(iii) Utilization Factor

Given the information in (i) and (ii), the Utilization Factor is determined from

the following tables:

Combo Segment

VMT per Average PU

Utilization Factor

< 80,000

80,000 - 160,000

1+0.6[(VMT per PU-80,000) / 80,000]

160,000 - 200,000

1.6

> 200,000

No Recent VMT Information

Table 3-1. VMT per PU for Combo Segment

Straight Segment

VMT per Average PU

Utilization Factor

< 20,000

20,000 - 60,000

VMT per PU / 20,000

60,000 - 200,000

> 200,000

No Recent VMT Information

Table 3-2. VMT per Average PU for Straight Segment

August 2013 3-4

3.1.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank

Based on the BASIC measures, the CSMS applies data sufficiency standards and safety

event grouping to assign a percentile rank to carriers that can then potentially receive a

CSA intervention or detrimental SFD. The calculation is as follows:

A. Determine the carrier’s segment:

• “Combo” – Combination trucks/motor coach buses constituting 70% or

more of the total PU

• “Straight” – Straight trucks/other vehicles constituting more than 30% of

the total PU

B. Determine the number of inspections with at least one BASIC violation and

remove carriers with less than three such inspections. For the remaining

carriers, place each carrier into one of ten groups based on the carrier segment

and the number of inspections with an Unsafe Driving violation:

Unsafe Driving BASIC: Combo Segment

Safety Event

Group

Number of Inspections with

Unsafe Driving Violations

Combo 1

3-8

Combo 2

9-21

Combo 3

22-57

Combo 4

58-149

Combo 5

150+

Table 3-3. Safety Event Groups for Unsafe Driving BASIC: Combo Segment

August 2013 3-5

Unsafe Driving BASIC: Straight Segment

Safety Event

Group

Number of Inspections with

Unsafe Driving Violations

Straight 1

3-4

Straight 2

5-8

Straight 3

9-18

Straight 4

19-49

Straight 5

50+

Table 3-4. Safety Event Groups for Unsafe Driving BASIC: Straight

Segment

C. Within each group, rank all the carriers’ BASIC measures in ascending order.

Transform the ranked values into percentiles from 0 (representing the lowest

BASIC measure) to 100 (representing the highest BASIC measure).

Eliminate carriers whose violations in the BASIC are all older than 12

months. Carriers that remain retain the previously calculated percentile.

3.2 HOS Compliance BASIC Assessment

This section describes the calculation of carrier measures and percentile ranks in the HOS

Compliance BASIC. This BASIC is defined as:

Operation of CMVs by drivers who are ill, fatigued, or in noncompliance with

the HOS regulations. This BASIC includes violations of regulations

surrounding the complete and accurate recording of logbooks as they relate to

HOS requirements and the management of CMV driver fatigue. Instances

related to the HOS Compliance BASIC are distinguished from incidents where

unconsciousness or an inability to react is brought about by the use of alcohol,

drugs, or other controlled substances. Example violations include: HOS,

logbook, and operating a CMV while ill or fatigued. See Appendix A for a

complete list of roadside inspection violations used in the CSMS.

The CSMS assesses the HOS Compliance BASIC using relevant violations recorded

during roadside inspections to calculate a measure for motor carriers. These measures are

used to generate percentile ranks that reflect each carrier’s safety posture relative to

carriers with similar numbers of relevant inspections.

3.2.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure

The equation used for calculating HOS Compliance BASIC measures is as follows:

August 2013 3-6

sinspectionrelevantofweighttimeTotal

violationsapplicableweightedseverityandtimeofTotal

MeasureBASIC =

Equation 3-3

In this equation, the terms are defined as follows:

An Applicable Violation is any violation recorded in any Driver Inspection (Level

1, 2, 3, or 6) that matches the FMCSRs listed for HOS Compliance (Table 2,

Appendix A) during the past 24 months. The CSMS only uses each violation cite

once per inspection in cases of multiple counts of the same violation.

A Relevant Inspection is any Driver Inspection (Level 1, 2, 3, or 6), including

those that do not result in a violation in the BASIC.

A Severity Weight is assigned to each applicable violation, with a value

dependent on two parts: (i) the level of crash risk relative to the other violations

comprising the BASIC measurement, and (ii) whether or not the violation resulted

in an OOS condition.

(i) The level of crash risk is assigned to each applicable violation ranging

from 1 (less severe) to 10 (most severe); see the HOS Compliance table

(Table 2, Appendix A) for the violations’ corresponding severity

weights.

(ii) An OOS weight of 2 is then added to the severity weight of OOS

violations. In cases of multiple counts of the same violation, the OOS

weight of 2 applies if any of the counts of the violation are OOS.

The sum of all violation severity weights for any one inspection in any one

BASIC is capped at a maximum of 30. This cap of 30 is applied before the

severity weights are multiplied by the time weight.

Note: The severity weights of violations outside of the BASIC being calculated

do not count towards the violation cap.

A Time Weight of 1, 2, or 3 is assigned to each applicable violation and each

relevant inspection based on its age. Violations/inspections recorded in the past

six months receive a time weight of 3. Violations/inspections recorded over six

months and up to 12 months ago receive a time weight of 2. All

violations/inspections recorded earlier (older than 12 months but within the past

24 months) receive a time weight of 1. This time-weighting places more emphasis

on results of recent inspections relative to older inspections.

Note: The time weight is applied to all relevant inspections, including those that

do not result in a violation in the BASIC.

A Time- and Severity-Weighted Violation is a violation’s severity weight

multiplied by its time weight.

August 2013 3-7

3.2.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank

Based on the BASIC measures, the CSMS applies data sufficiency standards and safety

event grouping to assign a percentile rank to carriers that can then potentially receive a

CSA intervention or detrimental SFD. The calculation is as follows:

A. Determine the number of relevant inspections and the number of inspections

with at least one BASIC violation. For the HOS Compliance BASIC, remove

carriers with (1) less than three relevant driver inspections or (2) no

inspections resulting in at least one BASIC violation. For the remaining

carriers, place each carrier into one of five groups based on the number of

relevant inspections:

Safety Event Group Number of Relevant

Inspections

3-10

11-20

21-100

101-500

501+

Table 3-5. Safety Event Groups for the HOS Compliance BASIC

B. Within each group, rank all the carriers’ BASIC measures in ascending order.

Transform the ranked values into percentiles from 0 (representing the lowest

BASIC measure) to 100 (representing the highest BASIC measure).

Eliminate carriers that meet both of the following criteria: (1) no violation was

recorded in the BASIC during the previous 12 months, and (2) no violation in

the BASIC was recorded during the latest relevant inspection. For the

remaining carriers with three or more relevant inspections resulting in a HOS

Compliance BASIC violation, assign the percentile values to each carrier’s

BASIC.

3.3 Driver Fitness BASIC Assessment

This section describes the calculation of carrier measures and percentile ranks in the

Driver Fitness BASIC. This BASIC is defined as:

Operation of CMVs by drivers who are unfit to operate a CMV due to lack of

training, experience, or medical qualifications. Example violations: failing to

have a valid and appropriate CDL and being medically unqualified to operate a

CMV. See Appendix A for a complete list of roadside inspection violations

used in the CSMS.

August 2013 3-8

The CSMS assesses the Driver Fitness BASIC using relevant violations recorded during

roadside inspections to calculate a measure for individual motor carriers. These measures

are used to generate percentile ranks that reflect each carrier’s driver safety posture

relative to carriers with similar numbers of relevant inspections.

3.3.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure

The equation used for calculating the BASIC measure for Driver Fitness is as follows:

BASIC Measure =

Totalof timeand severity weightedapplicable violations

Total time weight of relevant inspections

Equation 3-4

In this equation, the terms are defined as follows:

An Applicable Violation is any violation recorded in any Driver Inspection (Level

1, 2, 3, or 6) that matches the FMCSRs and HMRs listed for Driver Fitness (Table

3, Appendix A) during the past 24 months. The CSMS only uses each violation

cite once per inspection in cases of multiple counts of the same violation.

A Relevant Inspection is any Driver Inspection (Level 1, 2, 3, or 6), including

those that do not result in a violation in the BASIC.

A Severity Weight is assigned to each applicable violation, with a value

dependent on two parts: (i) the level of crash risk relative to the other violations

comprising the BASIC measurement, and (ii) whether or not the violation resulted

in an OOS condition.

(i) The level of crash risk is assigned to each applicable violation ranging

from 1 (less severe) to 10 (most severe); see the Driver Fitness table

(Table 3, Appendix A) for the violations’ corresponding severity

weights.

(ii) An OOS weight of 2 is then added to the severity weight of OOS

violations. In cases of multiple counts of the same violation, the OOS

weight of 2 applies if any of the counts of the violation are OOS.

The sum of all violation severity weights for any one inspection in any one

BASIC is capped at a maximum of 30. This cap of 30 is applied before the

severity weights are multiplied by the time weight.

Note: The severity weights of violations outside of the BASIC being calculated

do not count towards the violation cap.

A Time Weight of 1, 2, or 3 is assigned to each applicable violation and each

relevant inspection based on its age. Violations/inspections recorded in the past

six months receive a time weight of 3. Violations/inspections recorded over six

months and up to 12 months ago receive a time weight of 2. All

violations/inspections recorded earlier (older than 12 months but within the past

August 2013 3-9

24 months) receive a time weight of 1. This time-weighting places more emphasis

on results of recent inspections relative to older inspections.

Note: The time weight is applied to all relevant inspections, including those that

do not result in a violation in the BASIC.

A Time- and Severity-Weighted Violation is a violation’s severity weight

multiplied by its time weight.

3.3.2 Calculation of BASIC Percentile Rank

Based on the BASIC measures, the CSMS applies data sufficiency standards and safety

event grouping to assign a percentile rank to carriers that can then potentially receive an

intervention or detrimental SFD. The calculation is as follows:

A. Determine the number of relevant inspections and the number of

inspections with at least one BASIC violation. For the Driver Fitness

BASIC, remove carriers with (1) less than five relevant driver inspections

or (2) no inspections resulting in at least one BASIC violation. For the

remaining carriers, place each carrier into one of five groups based on the

number of relevant inspections:

Safety Event Group Number of Relevant

Inspections

5-10

11-20

21-100

101-500

501+

Table 3-6. Safety Event Groups for the Driver Fitness BASIC

B. Within each group, rank all the carriers’ BASIC measures in ascending

order. Transform the ranked values into percentiles from 0 (representing

the lowest BASIC measure) to 100 (representing the highest BASIC

measure). Eliminate carriers that meet both of the following criteria: (1) no

violation was recorded in the BASIC during the previous 12 months, and

(2) no violation in the BASIC was recorded during the latest relevant

inspection. For the remaining carriers with five or more relevant

inspections resulting in a Driver Fitness BASIC violation, assign the

percentile values to each carrier’s BASIC.

August 2013 3-10

3.4 Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC

This section describes the calculation of carrier measures and percentile ranks in the

Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC. The definition of this BASIC is as follows:

Operation of CMVs by drivers cited in roadside inspections for impairment

due to alcohol, illegal drugs, and misuse of prescription or over-the-counter

medications. Example violations: use or possession of controlled substances or

alcohol. See Appendix A for a complete list of roadside inspection violations

used in the CSMS.

The CSMS assesses the Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC using relevant violations

of FMCSRs recorded during roadside inspections and reported in the MCMIS.

Individual carriers’ BASIC measures also incorporate quantity of relevant roadside

inspections. These measures are used to generate percentile ranks that reflect each

carrier’s driver safety posture relative to carriers with similar numbers of inspections with

violations.

3.4.1 Calculation of BASIC Measure

The BASIC measures for the Controlled Substances/Alcohol BASIC are calculated as the

sum of severity- and time-weighted applicable violations divided by time-weighted

relevant inspections, as follows:

sinspectionrelevant

ofweighttime

Total

violations

applicableweightedseverity

andtimeofTotal

MeasureBASIC

Equation 3-5

In this equation, the terms are defined as follows:

An Applicable Violation is defined as any violation recorded in any Driver

Inspection (Level 1, 2, 3, or 6) that matches the FMCSR cites listed for Controlled

Substances/Alcohol (Table 4, Appendix A) and during the past 24 months. In

cases of multiple counts of the same violation, the CSMS only uses each violation

cite once per inspection.

Note: Some roadside inspections are performed following a traffic enforcement

stop for a moving violation. Violations reported during such stops do not always

result in the issuance of a citation/ticket to the driver, but are used in the CSMS

whether or not a citation/ticket is issued.

A Relevant Inspection is any Driver Inspection (Level 1, 2, 3, or 6), including

those that do not result in a violation in the BASIC, or any other inspection

resulting in an applicable BASIC violation.

A Severity Weight from 1 (less severe) to 10 (most severe) is assigned to each

applicable violation. See the Controlled Substances/Alcohol Table (Table 4,

Appendix A) for the severity weights corresponding to each violation. The

severity weighting of each violation cite accounts for the level of crash risk

August 2013 3-11

relative to the other violation cites used in the BASIC measurement. The sum of

all violation severity weights for any one inspection in any one BASIC is capped

at a maximum of 30. This cap of 30 is applied before the severity weights are

multiplied by the time weight. Out-of-service (OOS) weights are not assigned for

Controlled Substance/Alcohol violations, as most violations in this category

already are considered OOS violations.