CSA – Improvement or Unreliable?
There has been much talk about CSA and its effectiveness. According to FMCSA one of the principles of CSA is that it can be a predictor of crash risk. However, several studies completed within the last year have found just the opposite to be true. Now there’s a lawsuit that challenges the accuracy of the information that’s in the database. The lawsuit, filed by OOIDA on behalf of four drivers, alleges that FMCSA has violated federal law by allowing inaccurate records of violations to remain in the Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) where it could subsequently be reported to prospective employers when they utilized the Pre-Employment Screening Program.
Federal statute authorizes FMCSA to provide limited access to the MCMIS database to motor carriers under a program known as the-Employment Screening Program. This authorization limits access to:
- Commercial vehicle accident reports
- Inspection reports that contain no driver-related safety violations
- Serious driver-related safety violation reports
The statute defines “serious driver-related violation” to mean “…a violation by an operator of a commercial motor vehicle that the Secretary determines will result in the operator being prohibited from continuing to operate a commercial motor vehicle until the violation is corrected.”
In the suit filed by OOIDA it’s stated that FMCSA refused to expunge information from the MCMIS database after being notified that the affected driver was found “not guilty” by a court after challenging their violation. Also, it is alleged that FMCSA has released information as part of the Pre-Employment Screening Program that did not meet the standard of a serious driver related safety violation. The example cited in the lawsuit was a seatbelt violation issued to one of the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit certainly seems to have merit, especially since three of the defendants were found not guilty by a court yet FMCSA has refused to remove their “violation” from MCMIS. Also in question is whether or not FMCSA is limiting access to MCMIS data or allowing prospective employers access to more than the statutorily required “serious violations”. This case is only beginning but the outcome could very well change how CSA operates, especially with respect to challenges to the data.
FMCSA Viewpoint
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Deputy Administrator Bill Bronrott testified about the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program before the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee on Small Business. Deputy Bronrott’s testimony discussed CSA’s safety benefits and its impact on small businesses. Some of the key points are listed below:
- Independent analysis indicates the CSA Safety Measurement System (SMS) is a significant improvement over prior systems to effectively meet FMCSA’s Congressional mandate to investigate high-risk carriers.
- CSA is effectively monitoring the motor carrier industry. The 200,000 carriers with sufficient data to be scored in the SMS are involved in 93% of the crashes reported to FMCSA.
- Analysis of the CSA interventions model demonstrated an overall 35% increase in the number of carriers reached per Safety Investigator. CSA uses Onsite Focused Investigations and warning letters, which are effective in improving compliance and less intrusive and time-consuming for motor carriers.
- From CSA rollout in December 2010 until the end of 2011, violations per roadside inspection declined by 8% and driver violations per inspection declined by 12%. This the most significant improvement in violation rates in the last 10 years.
FMCSA’s opinions are being hotly debated and even their statistics are open to interpretation. For example, Bronrott stated that 200,000 carriers are responsible for 93% of the crashes. That statistic doesn’t mean much unless you know what percentage of the total truck population is operated by those carriers. If they control about 90% of the trucks then the statistic has no relevance to CSA scores. Also under attack if FMCSA’s reluctance to pursue changes to the CSA metrics that would give a better picture of actual motor carrier performance. For example, incorporating findings of fault into accidents that are recorded on a carrier’s record. Currently, all accidents are treated equally.
What About Accidents?
FMCSA was headed toward incorporating findings of fault into the CSA crash records. However, the same folks who have been opposed to the hours of service changes challenged the accuracy of the police crash reports that would be relied on to determine fault. It’s interesting to note that local, county and state police in every jurisdiction can testify in court about and accident but now we’re suddenly supposed to doubt their competency. Unfortunately, FMCSA was swayed by this argument and backed off. However, they did agree recently to undertake a Crash Weighting Research Plan to determine if crash weighting will help identify crash-risk motor carriers.
A broad study of police accident reports across the Nation will attempt to determine whether they provide sufficient, consistent, and reliable information that can be used to determine the carrier’s role in a given crash and what other information, including input from other entities in the outcome of a crash determination, should be used to supplement police accident reports. FMCSA will conduct analysis to determine if the carrier’s role in a given crash is a better indicator of future crash risk. If so, the analysis will determine the impact of weighting crashes differently in SMS.
FMCSA will be reviewing how Canada has handled the same situation. Actually, Canada decided years ago that the police investigating an accident had appropriate training and on-scene knowledge so their opinion as to fault is utilized.
The results of the study will be released next summer, but that’s only the beginning. After that there will be a long period of debate about what the study actually shows which will be followed by a debate regarding how to incorporate the findings into the CSA metrics. To quote FMCSA: “FMCSA is committed to continually improving SMS, in a thoughtful, methodical and transparent manner, to ensure that it continues to aid in carrying out FMCSA’s critical safety mission.”
Even if accident fault information makes its way into CSA, it’s likely to take several years and may not be in a form that helps motor carriers. Time will tell.
Recent Comments