1 / 22

Compliance, Safety, Accountability CSA A New Way To Measure and Address Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Industry Br

hateya
Download Presentation

Compliance, Safety, Accountability CSA A New Way To Measure and Address Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Industry Br

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) A New Way To Measure and Address Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Industry Briefing December 2010 CSA started out as Comprehensive Safety Analysis. New name was introduced during this briefing.CSA started out as Comprehensive Safety Analysis. New name was introduced during this briefing.

    2. What Is CSA? 2

    3. Op-Model: Three Core Components Measuring Carrier Safety Improved ability for earlier identification of demonstrated safety problems by specific Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) from: Safety Measurement System results (on-road performance), and/or Investigation Findings Intervention Process Employs an array of interventions instead of the previous principal option ? a labor-intensive compliance review Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) SFD to be tied to current safety performance; not limited to results of acute/critical violations from a compliance review 3 The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR. The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR.

    4. BASICs BASICs focus on behaviors linked to crash risk 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 4 This slide lists the seven BASICs The methodology is designed to weight on-road safety data based on its relationship to crash risk and focuses on behaviors that lead to crash risk. The data is also time-weighted over a 24-month time period so that it reflects current on-road safety performance. If a carrier’s performance improves over time, the safety performance score improves. HM regulation violations (171, 172, 173, 177, 178, 180) may also be found /included in other BASICs such as driver fitness, but the most concentrated BASIC for these is Cargo-Related so they are listed there.This slide lists the seven BASICs The methodology is designed to weight on-road safety data based on its relationship to crash risk and focuses on behaviors that lead to crash risk. The data is also time-weighted over a 24-month time period so that it reflects current on-road safety performance. If a carrier’s performance improves over time, the safety performance score improves. HM regulation violations (171, 172, 173, 177, 178, 180) may also be found /included in other BASICs such as driver fitness, but the most concentrated BASIC for these is Cargo-Related so they are listed there.

    5. CSMS BASIC Thresholds

    6. Carrier Measurement: SMS Results 6 This slide shows the carrier who was under the radar in SAFESTAT. Here the carrier is shown under SMS to have a serious safety alert related to Driver Fitness; the early identification of the problem is good news for both the carrier and the public. The carrier’s rating is worse than 95% of the carriers evaluated in this BASIC in this peer group. The next screen shows the detailed information resulting in that percentile. From a carrier’s perspective, as well as the public’s perspective, identifying this safety problem early and putting actions in place to fix it before a crash occurs, increases safety for everyone, and in the long run saves the carrier money, the government time, and most important, saves lives. Such specific safety alerts may not warrant a full CR, but may indicate the need for a focused review which in turn can save carriers time while allowing the agency to effectively correct the specific safety problem. This slide shows the carrier who was under the radar in SAFESTAT. Here the carrier is shown under SMS to have a serious safety alert related to Driver Fitness; the early identification of the problem is good news for both the carrier and the public. The carrier’s rating is worse than 95% of the carriers evaluated in this BASIC in this peer group. The next screen shows the detailed information resulting in that percentile. From a carrier’s perspective, as well as the public’s perspective, identifying this safety problem early and putting actions in place to fix it before a crash occurs, increases safety for everyone, and in the long run saves the carrier money, the government time, and most important, saves lives. Such specific safety alerts may not warrant a full CR, but may indicate the need for a focused review which in turn can save carriers time while allowing the agency to effectively correct the specific safety problem.

    7. Carrier Measurement: SMS Results 7 This slide shows the carrier who was under the radar in SAFESTAT. Here the carrier is shown under SMS to have a serious safety alert related to Driver Fitness; the early identification of the problem is good news for both the carrier and the public. The carrier’s rating is worse than 95% of the carriers evaluated in this BASIC in this peer group. The next screen shows the detailed information resulting in that percentile. From a carrier’s perspective, as well as the public’s perspective, identifying this safety problem early and putting actions in place to fix it before a crash occurs, increases safety for everyone, and in the long run saves the carrier money, the government time, and most important, saves lives. Such specific safety alerts may not warrant a full CR, but may indicate the need for a focused review which in turn can save carriers time while allowing the agency to effectively correct the specific safety problem. This slide shows the carrier who was under the radar in SAFESTAT. Here the carrier is shown under SMS to have a serious safety alert related to Driver Fitness; the early identification of the problem is good news for both the carrier and the public. The carrier’s rating is worse than 95% of the carriers evaluated in this BASIC in this peer group. The next screen shows the detailed information resulting in that percentile. From a carrier’s perspective, as well as the public’s perspective, identifying this safety problem early and putting actions in place to fix it before a crash occurs, increases safety for everyone, and in the long run saves the carrier money, the government time, and most important, saves lives. Such specific safety alerts may not warrant a full CR, but may indicate the need for a focused review which in turn can save carriers time while allowing the agency to effectively correct the specific safety problem.

    8. Further Drilldown in SMS 8 SMS Facilitates Problem Identification The SMS Website allows us to drill down to see further details related to this high driver fitness BASIC. It is clear that various drivers are having the same medical certificate issues and these reports are coming in on multiple drivers from multiple states; the problem is not limited to one problem driver and indicates a process breakdown that the carrier is now in a position to fix. SMS Facilitates Problem Identification The SMS Website allows us to drill down to see further details related to this high driver fitness BASIC. It is clear that various drivers are having the same medical certificate issues and these reports are coming in on multiple drivers from multiple states; the problem is not limited to one problem driver and indicates a process breakdown that the carrier is now in a position to fix.

    9. Carrier Access to Data Carriers have access to full SMS results and BASIC measurements Public has access to SMS results and BASIC measurements except for percentile scores for the Crash Indicator and Cargo-Related BASIC Cargo-Related violations are available to the public Decision regarding what to display was based on feedback through out the field test and data preview List of Crashes are available to the public Similar to the Accident SEA in SafeStat 9 Clear understanding that data collected at the roadside is a critical component of all traffic safety initiatives. For example, CSA, TACT etc… Important note to bring up: ONLY information on inspection reports get to FMCSA, an inspection has to take place. For example, if a driver receives a speeding ticket but no inspection is performed, that will not show up in the measurement system. So for both the carriers and the enforcement agencies that use this data it’s importance cannot be underestimated. During the summer of 2008 ,FMCSA and its State Partners working on the Op -Model Test (FSWG) identified a need to enhance the uniformity and quality of roadside violation data. During discussions, the consensus was that the data in its current form is fundamentally sound, valid ,and useable. However, opportunities exist to enhance the quality of data and in turn, improve the integrity of all traffic safety programs. Clear understanding that data collected at the roadside is a critical component of all traffic safety initiatives. For example, CSA, TACT etc… Important note to bring up: ONLY information on inspection reports get to FMCSA, an inspection has to take place. For example, if a driver receives a speeding ticket but no inspection is performed, that will not show up in the measurement system. So for both the carriers and the enforcement agencies that use this data it’s importance cannot be underestimated. During the summer of 2008 ,FMCSA and its State Partners working on the Op -Model Test (FSWG) identified a need to enhance the uniformity and quality of roadside violation data. During discussions, the consensus was that the data in its current form is fundamentally sound, valid ,and useable. However, opportunities exist to enhance the quality of data and in turn, improve the integrity of all traffic safety programs.

    10. Op-Model: Three Core Components Measuring Carrier Safety Improved ability for earlier identification of demonstrated safety problems by specific Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) from: Safety Measurement System results (on-road performance), and/or Investigation Findings Intervention Process Employs an array of interventions instead of the previous principal option ? a labor-intensive compliance review Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) SFD to be tied to current safety performance; not limited to results of acute/critical violations from a compliance review 10 The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR. The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR.

    11. The Interventions Process The Interventions Process addresses the… WHAT Discovering violations and defining the problem WHY Identifying the cause or where the processes broke down HOW Determining how to fix it/prevent it through use of Safety Management Cycle and Safety Improvement Resources 11 The Interventions Process provides more tools to reach more carriers and influence safety compliance before crashes occur. The SMS alerts FMCSA agents when an intervention is needed and recommends the appropriate type based on the safety problems. The focus of the process is on changing behavior – For example: If a carrier has a particular problem, SIs look at WHY that carrier has that problem, providing carriers insight and guidance to take corrective action. In the CSA model, FMCSA works with carriers to take real corrective action, while NOCs continue to be an important part of the process. SIs use the Safety Management Cycle to walk carriers through their operations and to identify process breakdowns likely to result in safety problems. Safety Improvement Resources (SIRs) are a part of the new model and used to guide carriers in improving their operations. The Interventions Process provides more tools to reach more carriers and influence safety compliance before crashes occur. The SMS alerts FMCSA agents when an intervention is needed and recommends the appropriate type based on the safety problems. The focus of the process is on changing behavior – For example: If a carrier has a particular problem, SIs look at WHY that carrier has that problem, providing carriers insight and guidance to take corrective action. In the CSA model, FMCSA works with carriers to take real corrective action, while NOCs continue to be an important part of the process. SIs use the Safety Management Cycle to walk carriers through their operations and to identify process breakdowns likely to result in safety problems. Safety Improvement Resources (SIRs) are a part of the new model and used to guide carriers in improving their operations.

    12. Intervention Tools 12 This slide lists the interventions in increasing order of severity. While a progressive process is in place a carrier will enter the process anywhere from WL to onsite comprehensive investigation, depending on the nature and severity of the problems. Warning letters The CSA warning letters are sent to a larger number of carriers, nationwide. This is likely to be some carriers’ first contact with FMCSA enforcement. It is a strong warning that the carrier is now on FMCSA’s radar and must improve its safety practices and results to get off of the radar. If a carrier continues with poor performance, it will be identified for an investigation. Offsite investigations are used when a carrier passes the threshold of certain BASICs but an onsite intervention is not yet dictated. This intervention allows carriers and SIs to work together over the phone and computer to conduct the investigation and provide results. If a carrier doesn’t improve with this intervention, it will be identified for a focused or comprehensive onsite investigation. Onsite focused investigations occur at a carrier’s place of business and are focused on specific problems. Onsite comprehensive investigations are most similar to CRs. Cooperative Safety Plans are voluntary and may be used in conjunction with an NOV. They are NEVER used in lieu of an NOC. If an NOC is required, it is given. NOVs are not an intervention and are the only follow-up action that compels a carrier to do a corrective plan. NOCs and OOSs are the same as previous NOCs and OOSs. This slide lists the interventions in increasing order of severity. While a progressive process is in place a carrier will enter the process anywhere from WL to onsite comprehensive investigation, depending on the nature and severity of the problems. Warning letters The CSA warning letters are sent to a larger number of carriers, nationwide. This is likely to be some carriers’ first contact with FMCSA enforcement. It is a strong warning that the carrier is now on FMCSA’s radar and must improve its safety practices and results to get off of the radar. If a carrier continues with poor performance, it will be identified for an investigation. Offsite investigations are used when a carrier passes the threshold of certain BASICs but an onsite intervention is not yet dictated. This intervention allows carriers and SIs to work together over the phone and computer to conduct the investigation and provide results. If a carrier doesn’t improve with this intervention, it will be identified for a focused or comprehensive onsite investigation. Onsite focused investigations occur at a carrier’s place of business and are focused on specific problems. Onsite comprehensive investigations are most similar to CRs. Cooperative Safety Plans are voluntary and may be used in conjunction with an NOV. They are NEVER used in lieu of an NOC. If an NOC is required, it is given. NOVs are not an intervention and are the only follow-up action that compels a carrier to do a corrective plan. NOCs and OOSs are the same as previous NOCs and OOSs.

    13. Op-Model: Three Core Components Measuring Carrier Safety Improved ability for earlier identification of demonstrated safety problems by specific Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) from: Safety Measurement System results (on-road performance), and/or Investigation Findings Intervention Process Employs an array of interventions instead of the previous principal option ? a labor-intensive compliance review Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) SFD to be tied to current safety performance; not limited to results of acute/critical violations from a compliance review 13 The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR. The three main components of FMCSA’s approach to CMV safety address HOW we extend our reach beyond the population of carriers we addressed in the past The Safety Measurement System is the methodology used nationwide. The intervention process provides an array of tools that can be used depending on the specific safety problems of the carrier . This includes an “early warning” in the form of a warning letter. The proposed approach to Safety Fitness Determination will be in rulemaking in the future. The proposed rule ties fitness to current on-road safety performance with a rating not limited to acute/critical regulation violations from a CR.

    14. Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) SFD would: Incorporate on-road safety performance via the new SMS, which is updated on a monthly basis Continue to include major safety violations found as part of CSA investigations Produce an SFD of Unfit or Marginal or Continue Operation 14 It is important to note that this is a proposed rule and that the success of CSA is not reliant on this proposed rule. What is really important is that there is a process that is used today for rating carriers under the existing regulations. The next slide describes the current rating process under CSA.It is important to note that this is a proposed rule and that the success of CSA is not reliant on this proposed rule. What is really important is that there is a process that is used today for rating carriers under the existing regulations. The next slide describes the current rating process under CSA.

    15. Limitations of Current Rating Process Current Ratings: Can only be issued or downgraded with an on-site review – resource intensive Represent a snapshot of carrier compliance at the moment of the most recent compliance review Do not consider roadside driver inspection performance Are based only on violations deemed “critical” or “acute” and vehicle out-of-service violations Generally require multiple areas of deficiency for adverse rating Only issued to small portion of carrier population

    16. Objectives of Proposed CSA 2010 SFD Methodology Make carriers accountable for sustained unsafe operations and performance Assess larger portion of carrier population Move away from agency “seal of approval” Carrier can continue to operate until deficiency identified, focus is on removing high risk carriers from road vs. identifying “good” carriers Maximize use of data collected by inspection program ~3 million inspections performed annually

    17. SFD – Roadside Data Role of On Road Performance 24 months of violation data used to evaluate a carrier in the following BASICs: Unsafe Driving Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service) Driver Fitness Vehicle Maintenance Cargo Related (1) Crash Indicator and (2) Controlled Substances /Alcohol BASICs cannot fail based on roadside data alone Measure exceeding established “absolute” thresholds – results in failed BASIC

    18. CSMS BASIC Thresholds

    19. CSA 2010 Safety Fitness Determination Methodology Being Considered

    20. New Agency Plans for Drivers (cont’d) Pre-employment Screening Program (PSP) PSP was mandated by Congress and is not a part of CSA “Driver Profiles” from FMCSA’s Driver Information Resource (DIR) are available to carriers through PSP Driver Profiles will only be released with driver authorization PSP is currently available, access and additional information can be found at www.psp.fmcsa.dot.gov 20

    21. 21

    22. 22

More Related