[allan5oh]

I'm going to attempt to shorten up what CSA2010 means for us drivers.

There are many myths out there about CSA2010, what it is, what the government can do, who is rated etc.. I'm going to attempt to dispel some of those myths and make it as clear as possible to everyone what the program is really about.

The old safersys system was found to be insufficient, data wasn't specific enough(only OOS violations were recorded), and inspectors couldn't easily determine if one area needed improving while others didn't. CSA 2010 will change all of that.

First lets start with a few links:

CSA 2010 - Comprehensive Safety Analysis

The FMCSA CSA 2010 website

http://csa2010.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documen...ethodology.pdf

The methodology used to score and rank carriers as well as drivers (yes both are scored and ranked!). This is where the math hits the road, and severity weighted violations are assigned a number of 1-10.

https://dataqs.fmcsa.dot.gov/login.asp

Link used for DataQ data challenges. More on this later.

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Information on making a FOIA request with the FMCSA.

First what the feds can and cannot do. They can target carriers that are above a certain threshold(percentile) or above a certain score. They can target drivers, but cannot cancel or void their CDL's. However they can certainly declare a carrier "unfit".

Points are assigned to violations found on inspection reports. If you are given a speeding ticket with no inspection report, you will not be assigned any points under CSA 2010. Crash data is also sent in from states, this is the only exception where points will be assigned without an inspection report. It's also important to note that there is no such thing as a warning under CSA 2010. If there's a violation on an inspection report you will be assigned points, citation or not.

Points are assigned to where they happened, a driver does not "bring" points with him to the new carrier. Vice versa is also true, a carrier does not lose points if they get rid of a driver. Not all violations are applicable to the driver. Most however are. All violations stick with the carrier.

The entire CSA system is based upon seven "BASICS"(Behavior analysis and safety improvement categories), and each BASIC has a different calculation for drivers and carriers. I will go over each. It's important to realize that not all BASIC scores can be treated equally, for example a score of 2 in the crash indicator is much more serious than a score of 6 in the cargo securement BASIC. It's also important to realize that most violations stay with drivers for 3 years, but only 2 years with carriers.

To start, I'll explain how the seven BASICS are scored under the driver scoring system:

First it's important to note that drivers are scored AND ranked under this system. However this information is not availabe to you me or carriers. Raw information only will be available to carriers under the pre-employment screening program. Also drivers currently with a carrier will be ranked within the carrier, but not nationwide like the entire driver scoring system. This information is only available to law enforcement. However a FOIA (freedom of information act) request may get you some information. More on that later.

Here is the math used for the DRIVER scoring/ranking system:

FATIGUED DRIVING BASIC AND DRIVER FITNESS BASIC

Score = TIME WEIGHT X SEVERITY WEIGHT / TIME WEIGHTED RELEVANT INSPECTIONS

Violations resulting in OOS give an additional two points. Time weights as follows:

1-12 months 3X
12-24 months 2X
24-36 months 1X

Relevant inspections are any level 1,2,3, or 6 within the past 36 months. These inspections are also multiplied by the time weight.

Ranking:

Any driver with no violation or less than 3 inspections are removed. The remaining drivers are divided up into 3 groups:

1 - 3 inspections
2 - 4-6 inspections
3 - 7+ inspections

From there each driver is assigned a percentile rank from 0-100 with 100 being the person with the highest score.

VEHICLE MAINTENANCE AND CARGO RELATED

Uses exact same methodology as above except level 3's are not relevant inspections

UNSAFE DRIVING AND CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES/ALCOHOL BASICS

Score = total of : TIME WEIGHT X SEVERITY WEIGHT

Each violation is given a severity weight(1-10), the time weight is:

1-12 months 3X
12-24 months 2X
24-36 months 1X

Ranking under these two BASIC's is simple, everyone with no score (no violations) is removed, and everyone else with violations is put in a percentile, with 100 being the worst (most violations).

CRASH INDICATOR

crash indicator = total of time and severity weighted applicable crashes

applicable crashes are crashes that are reportable that occured within the past 36 months. Crashes are severity weighted as follows:

Involves tow away but no injury of fatality = 1
Involves injury or fatality = 2
Involves haz-mat release = Above +1

Time weight:

0-12 months = 3X
12-24 months = 2X
24-36 months = 1X

Ranking:

Remove all drivers with no crash, and rank the remaining drivers on a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the driver with the worst crash indicator score



So there you have it, the simple math that is involved with CSA 2010. Some observations I've made:

-Level 2's are preferable to Level 1's, as they are scored exactly the same yet we all know level 1's will result in more violations.

-Level 3's only affect two basics, if you can get an "upgrade" to level 2 by all means do it!

-The top four BASIC scores are diluted by good inspections, yet the bottom three are not affected by inspections whatsoever

- Multipliers on the bottom three BASICS absolutely kill you! Try not to get any violation in those three.

- Multipliers in the top four don't affect you that much, believe it or not. That's because the inspection is also multiplied. Your score for a severity weighted violation of 5 will be 5 for 0-36 months. However good inspections are multiplied as well, and this can work in your favor

- If you have a bad score in the top four BASICs you want to get as many level 2 inspections as possible. This will dilute your bad score and bring it down quick

After all this I think it's important to talk about two other subjects that most drivers don't know about. One is the DataQ system. This system allows you to challenge violations found on inspection reports, or anything else for that matter (bad crash data, driver records etc..) in the FMCSA database. Even if you think you're guilty, why not try it? I'll be trying a challenge very soon on a 500 lb overweight violation in Minnesota, even though they allow a 400 lb leeway for APU's. I asked the scalemaster about it and he didn't know about it. So I have a feeling I could win the challenge. He also worked hard to convince me it was a "warning" which obviously it was not.

The second important piece of information is that you can make FOIA requests to see your data. I would do this as soon as possible, they may even score you. They may not rank you nationally however. This is important information because if there is bad data on your drivers record you want to start a DataQ as soon as possible to remove any violations. One example is a burnt out side light is 2 points, but a tail light is 6 points. If the officer put you in the wrong category for a burnt out side light, he just tripled your points.

I'm not going to do the carrier score system because it is more complicated, with bigger peer groups etc.. It is simply not as much our concern. A lot of their data(scores and rankings) will be available online anyways.

[Maniac]

Thanks for taking the time to post this, it does explain it more simply.

[solo379]

We've had a safety meeting, and it was explained to us, and we even had some test. The scary thing about this rating, is that you can go from being top of the line, to a bottom of the barrel, in a single occurrence, regardless of decades of a safe driving!

[heavyhaulerss]

the fact that is retroactive to 3 years back, sounds unconstitutional to me.

[GMAN]

Keep in mind that this is not final, as yet. They are still working on how to implement the program. Implementation has been postponed until next year. We won't know the final rules until they actually implement them. Most likely, they will not change much. Like the hours of service, they will likely continue to make changes up until the final rules are settled. We do need to make preparations. Some carriers are already eliminating some drivers due to non compliance with the anticipated rules. You can expect most carriers to be more selective in those whom they retain and hire. If you are a driver you will need to make sure that you do a proper pre trip and keep a closer eye on your equipment. That is a good thing. Many don't even bother to check their oil. It will encourage drivers to act more professionally and hold them responsible for the safety of their equipment. I am not sure that it will have much of an effect on those who are conscientious, watch their speed and check their equipment on a regular basis. One major problem that I have with the the new rules is that a driver is not rewarded for having a clean inspection. We are only penalized for not doing something right. There should be a means to have points reduced when drivers do things correctly. OOIDA was working on trying to get the feds to make changes to reward those drivers who are doing things right.

You could have a light go out at any time. A wire could break or the light could simply fail during the day and the driver not be aware of it until they are pulled in for an inspection. However, in most cases the driver can prevent getting any points if he does his job properly. He can do a proper pre trip. He can check his tire pressure. He can check to see if anything is obviously wrong with his equipment. He can watch his speed.

As a carrier we pay insurance premiums based upon our safety record, credit history and driver history or MVR. This will be another tool to check out a driver to see whether this is someone whom we need to have driving our equipment. I would like to see the bad drivers out of this business. This may be a first step to rid ourselves of some of the bad apples.

[GMAN]

Originally Posted by solo379

We've had a safety meeting, and it was explained to us, and we even had some test. The scary thing about this rating, is that you can go from being top of the line, to a bottom of the barrel, in a single occurrence, regardless of decades of a safe driving!

Unfortunately, you could be right. If we do our job as we are supposed to do then we should not have anything to worry about. I do expect to see states continue to be more aggressive in their enforcement. Companies could base part of the driver's compensation on their personal safety score.

[GMAN]

Originally Posted by heavyhaulerss

the fact that is retroactive to 3 years back, sounds unconstitutional to me.

It would be good if they started this on the day it is actually implemented. Something to remember is that this industry is exempt from some other laws, such as the fair labor rules. We also have many other rules which we must comply that are not effected by the general public. The feds can bend or throw away the rule book and get away with it when they bring up safety. After all, who can argue with safety?

[allan5oh]

One other point that I should make, just because your score stays the same doesn't mean anything. What's important is what everyone else is doing. If everyone else is improving except you, and you start heading north of the 75th percentile, you'll get more attention. This is especially true with carriers.

[allan5oh]

I just challenged that Minnesota "warning" I got. The DataQ system is quick and easy, and most importantly it's free! I'll let you guys know what happens.

I was noted as violating Minnesota statute 169.824. The officer stated Minnesota has no excemption for APU's or anything like that. However the bottom of 169.824 reads:

"(b) Notwithstanding the maximum weight provisions of this section, and in order to promote the reduction of fuel use and emissions, the maximum gross vehicle weight limits and the axle weight limits for any motor vehicle subject to sections 169.80 to 169.88 and equipped with idle reduction technology or emissions-reduction technology must be increased by the amount of weight necessary to compensate for the weight of the idle reduction technology or emissions-reduction technology, not to exceed 400 pounds. At the request of an authorized representative of the Department of Transportation or the Department of Public Safety, the vehicle operator shall provide proof that the vehicle is equipped with this technology through documentation or demonstration. "

So I pointed that out and added documentation is available on request. What's interesting is ANY emissions equipment qualifies. So even if you have an EGR or DPF motor, you may have an exemption.

[Justruckin]

Originally Posted by allan5oh

I just challenged that Minnesota "warning" I got. The DataQ system is quick and easy, and most importantly it's free! I'll let you guys know what happens.

I was noted as violating Minnesota statute 169.824. The officer stated Minnesota has no excemption for APU's or anything like that. However the bottom of 169.824 reads:

"(b) Notwithstanding the maximum weight provisions of this section, and in order to promote the reduction of fuel use and emissions, the maximum gross vehicle weight limits and the axle weight limits for any motor vehicle subject to sections 169.80 to 169.88 and equipped with idle reduction technology or emissions-reduction technology must be increased by the amount of weight necessary to compensate for the weight of the idle reduction technology or emissions-reduction technology, not to exceed 400 pounds. At the request of an authorized representative of the Department of Transportation or the Department of Public Safety, the vehicle operator shall provide proof that the vehicle is equipped with this technology through documentation or demonstration. "

So I pointed that out and added documentation is available on request. What's interesting is ANY emissions equipment qualifies. So even if you have an EGR or DPF motor, you may have an exemption.

You were popped for using your APU? If I missed something you all let me know. I am just damn glad I got out of this racket. Not worth the time to get out of bed.