Agency Response to Public Comments of Safety Measurement System Changes, 52110-52116 [2012-21196]
Download as PDF
52110
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
Ms.
Vivian Oliver, Transportation Specialist,
Office of Information Technology,
Operations Division, Department of
Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, West Building
6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:
202–366–2974; email Address: vivian.
oliver@dot.gov. Office hours are from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Annual Report of Class I and
Class II Motor Carriers of Property
(formerly OMB 2139–0004).
OMB Control Number: 2126–0032.
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently-approved information
collection.
Respondents: Class I and Class II
Motor Carriers of Property.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
197(per year).
Estimated Time per Response: 9
hours.
Expiration Date: September 30, 2012.
Frequency of Response: Annually.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
1,773 hours [197 respondents x 9 hours
to complete form = 1,773].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
The Annual Report of Class I and
Class II Motor Carriers of Property
(Form M) is a mandated reporting
requirement for all for-hire motor
carriers (See 49 U.S.C. 14123; and
implementing FMCSA regulations at 49
CFR part 369). Motor carriers (including
interstate and intrastate) subject to the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations are classified on the basis of
their gross carrier operating revenues.1
Under the Financial and Operating
Statistics (F&OS) program, FMCSA
collects from Class I and Class II
property carriers balance sheet and
income statement data along with
information on safety needs, tonnage,
mileage, employees, transportation
equipment, and other related data.
FMCSA may also ask carriers to respond
to surveys concerning their operations.
The data and information collected
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1 For
purposes of the Financial and Operating
Statistics (F&OS) program, carriers are classified
into the following three groups: (1) Class I carriers
are those having annual carrier operating revenues
(including interstate and intrastate) of $10 million
or more after applying the revenue deflator formula
as set forth in Note A of 49 CFR 369.2; (2) Class
II carriers are those having annual carrier operating
revenues (including interstate and intrastate) of at
least $3 million, but less than $10 million after
applying the revenue deflator formula as set forth
in 49 CFR 369.2; and (3) Class III carriers are those
having annual carrier operating revenues (including
interstate and intrastate) of less than $3 million
after applying the revenue deflator formula as set
forth in Note A of 49 CFR 369.2.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
would be made publicly available and
used by FMCSA to determine a motor
carrier’s compliance with the F&OS
program requirements prescribed at
chapter III of title of 49 CFR part 369.
The regulations were formerly
administered by the Interstate
Commerce Commission and later
transferred to the Secretary on January
1, 1996, by section 103 of the ICC
Termination Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104–
88, 109 Stat. 803 (Dec. 29, 1995)), now
codified at 49 U.S.C. 14123. On
September 30, 1998, the Secretary
delegated and transferred the authority
to administer the F&OS program to the
former Bureau of Transportation
Statistics (BTS), now part of the
Research and Innovative Technology
Administration (RITA), to former
chapter XI, subchapter B of 49 CFR part
1420 (63 FR 52192).
On September 29, 2004, the Secretary
transferred the responsibility for the
F&OS program from BTS to FMCSA in
the belief that the program was more
aligned with FMCSA’s mission and its
other motor carrier responsibilities (69
FR 51009). On August 10, 2006, the
Secretary published a final rule (71 FR
45740) that transferred and redesignated
certain motor carrier financial and
statistical reporting regulations of BTS,
that were formerly located at chapter XI,
subchapter B of title 49 CFR part 1420,
to FMCSA under chapter III of title 49
CFR part 369.
Public Comments Invited
You are asked to comment on any
aspect of this information collection,
including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the FMCSA to
perform its functions; (2) the accuracy of
the estimated burden; (3) ways for
FMCSA to enhance the quality,
usefulness, and clarity of the collected
information; and (4) ways that the
burden could be minimized without
reducing the quality of the collected
information.
Issued on: August 13, 2012.
Kelly Leone,
Associate Administrator for Office of
Research and Information Technology.
[FR Doc. 2012–20756 Filed 8–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
PO 00000
Frm 00146
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2004–18898]
Agency Response to Public Comments
of Safety Measurement System
Changes
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice; response to comments.
AGENCY:
The Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces changes to the Carrier Safety
Measurement System (SMS). A preview
of the original improvements became
available to motor carriers and law
enforcement on March 27, 2012, and
will remain available until the SMS
changes become operational. The SMS
improvements are now scheduled to be
operational in December 2012.
Comments to the preview were
reviewed and considered. This notice
explains the Agency’s modifications to
the changes announced in March and
describes four additional changes that
will be implemented in December.
DATES: These improvements are
scheduled to be operational in
December 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA–
2004–18898 by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room 12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading under
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for instructions on submitting
comments and additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bryan Price, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, 1000 Liberty
Avenue, Suite 1300, Pittsburgh, PA
15222, Telephone 412–395–4816, EMail: bryan.price@dot.gov. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Privacy Act
Public Participation
All comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. Anyone is able to search the
electronic forum for all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on January 17, 2008 (73 FR
3316), or you may visit https://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8–
785.pdf.
Comments regarding the
improvements outlined in this Notice
were originally collected under Docket
Identification Number FMCSA–2012–
0074. To avoid confusion and ensure
consistency, FMCSA is moving to a
single CSA docket. FMCSA’s CSA
docket (FMCSA–2004–18898) will
remain open to accept comments on the
SMS methodology, and will remain
open when the improvements outlined
in this notice become operational in
December.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include docket number FMCSA–2004–
18898. You may submit your comments
and material online or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. FMCSA recommends
that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a
phone number in the body of your
document so the Agency can contact
you if it has questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comments online, go
to https://www.regulations.gov, enter
‘‘FMCSA–2004–18898’’ in the ‘‘Search’’
box, and click ‘‘Search’’. If you submit
your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail
and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope.
FMCSA will consider all comments
and material received and may
undertake future modifications of SMS
based on your comments.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov and in the
‘‘Search’’ box, enter ‘‘FMCSA–2004–
18898’’, and click ‘‘Search’’. A list of
documents will appear; click on the
hyperlinks to view public submissions
and Agency-provided materials. If you
do not have access to the Internet, you
may view the docket online by visiting
the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12–140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
Background
FMCSA’s enforcement and
compliance programs are making
America’s roads safer. CSA is FMCSA’s
new enforcement and compliance
program and has been operational since
December 2010. An overview of CSA is
available in the March 27, 2012, Federal
Register Notice (77 FR 18298). With
rollout of CSA, commercial motor
vehicle safety awareness is at an all-time
high with 30,000,000 visits to the
Agency’s SMS Web site in its first year
of operation. FMCSA has leveraged its
programs to communicate with the
industry about safety and compliance,
resulting in the most dramatic drop in
safety violations in a decade. In 2011,
violations per roadside inspection were
down by 8%, and driver violations per
inspection were down by 10%.
SMS uses all available inspection and
crash data to prioritize carriers for
interventions. SMS quantifies on-road
safety performance of carriers to identify
the specific safety problems the carrier
exhibits and to monitor whether
performance is improving or worsening.
SMS helps FMCSA more efficiently
apply its resources and to bring carriers
and drivers into compliance with
Federal safety regulations and prevent
crashes, saving lives.
The Agency has found that SMS is an
effective tool for identifying those
carriers with future safety and
compliance issues. For example, the
SMS has sufficient data to assess
200,000 of the 525,000 active carriers in
FMCSA’s data systems in a BASIC.
Those 200,000 carriers are involved in
92% of the crashes reported to FMCSA.
Both FMCSA and an independent
evaluator, the University of Michigan
Transportation Research Institute
(https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/
Evaluation-of-the-CSA-Op-ModelTest.pdf), have confirmed that SMS is
an effective tool in identifying the high
PO 00000
Frm 00147
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52111
risk motor carriers and a significant
improvement over the previous SafeStat
system.
FMCSA’s CSA Web site (https://
csa.fmcsa.dot.gov) is a resource that was
created for all stakeholders to gain a
better understanding of CSA in general,
including SMS. This Web site offers
many educational items including:
• Informational factsheets on various
aspects of CSA, including SMS;
• Presentations used to deliver
information to the industry regarding
CSA in general and the SMS
methodology;
• The operational version of the SMS
Methodology along with the proposed
version released in March 2012;
• Various studies conducted on
SMS’s effectiveness; among other
educational resources.
The original FR Notice posted in March
2012 also includes detailed information
about SMS.
FMCSA is continuously listening to
stakeholder feedback and researching
and analyzing ways to improve its
programs. The SMS changes proposed
in March reflect that work. FMCSA is
committed to a thoughtful, methodical,
and transparent process to ensure that
the SMS continues to support the
Agency’s critical safety mission.
In total, the SMS changes being
implemented in December more
effectively identify and prioritize motor
carriers for intervention to reduce
commercial motor vehicle crashes and
HM incidents. Motor carriers identified
as exceeding the intervention threshold
in any BASIC under the revised
methodology have a 3.9% greater future
crash rate and 3.6% greater future HM
violation rate than those previously
identified for intervention using the
existing SMS methodology. Details
regarding this analysis of motor carriers
exceeding the intervention thresholds as
well as high risk motor carrier
identification is posted on the CSA Web
site at (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/
Documents/
SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf
Proposed SMS Changes From March
2012 Federal Register Notice
FMCSA provided detailed
descriptions of the following planned
changes to the SMS in a Federal
Register Notice published on March 27,
2012 (77 FR 18298) and in a summary
and analysis document posted on the
CSA Web site (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/
Documents/
SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf); these
changes have been available for carriers
and law enforcement to preview since
that date and included the following:
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
52112
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
• Strengthening the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC by incorporating
cargo/load securement violations from
today’s Cargo-Related BASIC;
• Changing the Cargo-Related BASIC
to the Hazardous Materials (HM) BASIC
to better identify HM-related safety and
compliance problems;
• Better aligning the SMS with
Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP)
regulations;
• Aligning violations that are
included in the SMS with Commercial
Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA)
inspection levels by eliminating vehicle
violations derived from driver-only
inspections and driver violations from
vehicle-only inspections;
• More accurately identifying carriers
that transport significant quantities of
HM; and
• More accurately identifying carriers
involved in transporting passengers.
In addition, FMCSA described
changes to the display of information on
the SMS Web site (https://
ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/sms/). Specifically,
FMCSA provided notice of its plan to
modify the SMS Web site display to:
• Change current terminology,
including the terms ‘‘Insufficient Data’’
and ‘‘Inconclusive,’’ to fact-based
definitions that clarify the carrier’s
status in each BASIC; and
• Distinguish between crashes with
injuries and crashes with fatalities.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SMS Changes To Be Implemented
FMCSA is implementing the abovementioned changes to SMS in December
2012, with two notable modifications.
First, in response to public comments
expressing concern about the HM
BASIC, it will not be made available to
the public for one year. Instead, only
motor carriers and law enforcement
personnel that log into FMCSA systems
will be able to view percentile ranks in
the HM BASIC. This one year time
period will allow the Agency to further
study and refine the BASIC prior to
making it available to the public.
Second, the HM BASIC will be named
the HM Compliance BASIC.
Additional Changes
In addition to the changes outlined
above, FMCSA is providing notice of
four more changes based on careful
consideration of comments received and
stakeholder feedback. In short, the
Agency is proposing these changes: to
remove speeding violations that are 1 to
5 miles per hour (mph) over the speed
limit; to lower the severity weight from
5 to 1 for speeding violations that do not
designate MPH range above the speed
limit; to make the severity weights
associated with electronic and paper
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
logbook violations the same; and to
change the name of the Fatigued Driving
(Hours-of-Service (HOS)) BASIC to the
Hours-of-Service (HOS) Compliance
BASIC. Comments to these additional
changes can be made to the original
CSA docket (FMCSA–2004–18898).
Users of the SMS Preview Web site
should be aware the four additional
changes will not be incorporated in the
SMS Preview Web site and will become
visible upon going operational in
December.
Removal of 1 to 5 MPH Speeding
Violations
In the current SMS, the Unsafe
Driving BASIC uses all speeding
violations regardless of the range
exceeding the speed limit. FMCSA is
removing commercial motor vehicle
speeding violations in the 1 to 5 mph
over the speed limit range from SMS.
Current speedometer regulations (49
CFR 393.82) only require accuracy
within 5 mph. This change therefore
aligns SMS with the regulatory
requirement. Once implemented, the
Unsafe Driving BASIC will not include
any speeding violations that fall into the
1 to 5 mph over the speed limit range
regardless of when the inspection
occurred. This change applies to the
prior 24 months of data used by SMS
and all SMS data moving forward.
Lowered Severity Weight for Speeding
Violations That Do Not Designate MPH
Range Above the Speed Limit
In the current SMS, the Unsafe
Driving BASIC applies a severity weight
of 5 to general speeding violations that
do not specify the range exceeding the
speed limit. FMCSA is reducing the
severity weight for general speeding
violations (49 CFR 392.2S) to 1 for those
violations occurring on or after January
1, 2011. This is the date when
inspectors had access to updated
roadside inspection software, ASPEN, to
record violations broken out by mile per
hour categories above the speed limit.
After the changes are implemented in
December, the following severity
weights will apply to recorded speeding
violations:
Specified MPH
range above
speed limit
Not specified .......
1–5 ......................
6–10 ....................
11–14 ..................
PO 00000
Frm 00148
Violation severity weight
1.*
For all recorded violations
with an unspecified
range above the speed
limit occurring after
January 1, 2011.
0
4
7
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Specified MPH
range above
speed limit
15+ ......................
Violation severity weight
10
Alignment of Paper and Electronic
Logbook Violations
In the current SMS, hours-of-service
form and manner violations have
different weights for paper (weight of 2)
and electronic form and manner logbook
(weight of 1) violations. FMCSA is now
equally weighting paper and electronic
logbook form and manner violations
with a severity weight of 1 for
consistency purposes. In addition, the
current SMS assigns a severity weight of
5 to paper log violations having to do
with a driver not having a log book but
only a severity weight of 1 for similar
violations of electronic logbooks. With
these changes, all violations related to
not having a logbook, electronic or
paper, will have a severity weight of 5.
Name Change of the Fatigued Driving
(HOS) BASIC to the HOS Compliance
BASIC
Upon careful review of comments
concerning the proposed SMS changes
and stakeholder feedback, FMCSA is
changing the name of the Fatigued
Driving (HOS) BASIC to the Hours of
Service (HOS) Compliance BASIC. This
action is being taken to reflect that the
BASIC includes violations such as
‘‘form and manner’’ and ‘‘logbook not
current’’ that, by themselves, do not
necessarily indicate fatigued driving or
driving in excess of allowable hours.
Response to Docket Comments on
‘‘Improvements to the Compliance,
Safety, Accountability (CSA) Motor
Carrier Safety Measurement System
(SMS)’’
The Agency received 118 unique
comment submissions to the March
notice, mostly from drivers, carriers,
and industry associations. Of the 118
submissions, no single topic drew
responses from a majority of the
commenters and many of the
submissions addressed more than one
topic. Below is a synopsis of the
comments received and the Agency’s
responses.
Strengthen the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC by moving cargo/load
securement violations from the CargoRelated BASIC to the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC
Comments: Several commenters, such
as Bison Transport, Inc, Q-Line
Trucking, the Western Trucking
Alliance, Vigillo, LLC, the OwnerOperator Independent Driver
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
Association (OOIDA), and B–H Transfer
commented that cargo/load securement
violations do not belong in the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC. Some of those
commenters, such as Bison Transport,
proposed that the Unsafe Driving BASIC
would be more suitable, because the
driver bears primary responsibility for
such violations. Some commenters,
such as Vigillo, are concerned that
cargo/load securement violations would
not receive enough emphasis in the
Vehicle Maintenance BASIC. Some
commenters are of the opinion that
cargo/load securement violations will
still receive too much emphasis. Others,
like Q-Line Trucking, are concerned that
moving the violations to the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC would transfer the
flat-bed bias to that BASIC instead of
addressing the bias directly.
Several commenters, including
OOIDA, Bison Transport, Inc. and QLine Trucking, proposed that cargo/load
securement violations should be
compared by group—flatbed or open
trailer—not all together in the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC.
The American Trucking Association
(ATA) supports the proposed
enhancement but suggested changing
the name of the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC to reflect the additional
violations being included.
Agency Response: FMCSA analysis
indicates the proposed approach of
moving cargo/load securement
violations into the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC identifies carriers with a higher
future crash risk while at the same time
effectively addressing the bias
associated with carriers that haul open
trailers. A detailed description of this
analysis, and the issue associated with
motor carriers that primarily transport
open trailers, is posted on the CSA Web
site at https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/
Documents/
SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf.
By moving load securement violations
to the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC and
recalibrating the severity weights,
FMCSA has mitigated the known bias
created by information system
limitations; ensured that the carriers
with a pattern of load securement
violations are still identified; and
strengthened the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC by improving the identification
of carriers with the highest future crash
rates.
In addition, the FMCSA has
determined that the Unsafe Driving
BASIC is not an appropriate place to
house the cargo securement violations.
The Vehicle Maintenance BASIC is
focused on the physical condition of the
vehicle, of which the cargo is a part,
whereas the Unsafe Driving BASIC is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
focused on how the vehicle is being
driven (e.g. improper lane change,
speeding). Further, the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC is normalized by
number of inspections, whereas the
Unsafe Driving BASIC is normalized by
on-road exposure measured by Power
Units (PU) and Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT). The Agency continues to believe
that the number of inspections is a more
appropriate normalization factor for
cargo securement violations, and,
therefore, will include the cargo
securement violations in the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC. The Agency does
not plan to change the name of the
Vehicle Maintenance BASIC with this
set of enhancements.
FMCSA acknowledges there would be
advantages to comparing cargo/load
securement violations by group, e.g.
flatbed or open trailer. However, at this
time FMCSA does not have access to
reliable, consistent data to allow us to
make these determinations.
Rename the Cargo-Related BASIC the
HM Compliance BASIC
Comments: Many commenters believe
the HM Compliance BASIC should not
be implemented as described.
Commenters, such as Schneider
National, expressed that HM violations
are paperwork violations that do not
correlate with crash risk or severity.
Commenters such as Vigillo feel that
carriers hauling HM infrequently would
be disproportionately affected by the
existence of an HM Compliance BASIC,
regardless of their overall safety. Some
commenters, including Con-way
Freight, suggested separating out
different types of HM operations or
adjusting severity weights for HM
violations by bulk versus non-bulk.
Schneider National’s comments suggest
removing shipper violations from SMS.
Agency Response: The Agency
strongly disagrees with the assertion
that HM regulations are solely
paperwork violations. The basis for the
HM Regulations is twofold—to contain
HM for the protection of life and
property, and to communicate the
inherent risks of hazardous materials to
emergency responders when released.
While violations of shipping papers and
placards do not cause crashes, the
absence of them during mitigation of a
crash where HM is present can result in
injury or death to emergency responders
and the public. FMCSA has the mandate
to enforce the HM Regulations as they
pertain to transportation by highway,
and the HM Compliance BASIC
provides the Agency with the tools
needed to identify trends in noncompliance.
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52113
The first step in the development of
the HM Compliance BASIC was an
examination of carrier and shipper
violations to make a determination of
which violations should be accountable
to the carrier. The Agency, including
subject matter experts, determined that
the violations outlined in Appendix A
of the SMS Methodology are to be
included in the HM Compliance BASIC
https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/
SMS_Methodology_Carrier_V3-0.pdf.
However, based on feedback received
during the preview period, three of the
violations listed in Appendix A of the
preview methodology will not be
included when HM BASIC goes
operational in December on the basis
that they are administrative, rather than
safety based. The three violations that
will not be included are: 49 CFR
107.601 Failing to register with PHMSA
prior to transporting hazardous
materials requiring HM registration; 49
CFR 107.620(b) No copy of US DOT
Hazardous Materials Registration
Number; and 49 CFR 397.3AU Failing to
comply with Alliance for Uniform HM
Registration requirements.
The intervention threshold in this
BASIC will be set at 80% for all carriers.
Analysis done on the effectiveness of
this BASIC shows that carriers above the
intervention threshold have future HM
violation rates more than 15% higher
than carriers above the threshold in the
current Cargo-Securement BASIC.
However, in consideration of the
comments related to the HM
Compliance BASIC FMCSA will refrain
from displaying this BASIC to the
public until December 2013. During this
time, the HM Compliance BASIC will be
utilized as an enforcement prioritization
tool, and its effectiveness in identifying
non-compliant HM carriers will be
further analyzed.
The Agency recognizes that different
carriers haul various quantities of HM.
Therefore, the Agency plans to display
the percentage of HM placardable
inspections for a carrier to provide
context to inspections and violations
displayed on SMS.
Analysis conducted on the HM
Compliance BASIC indicates that the
motor carriers over the 80th percentile
intervention threshold in this BASIC
had slightly fewer inspections where a
placardable quantity of HM was on
board, but more HM inspections with
violations, which means it better
identifies the carriers in noncompliance. A detailed description of
this analysis is also available on the
CSA Web site at https://
csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/
SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
52114
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
By implementing the HM Compliance
BASIC for enforcement purposes,
carriers that are not in compliance by
properly packaging, transporting,
accurately identifying, and
communicating hazardous cargo in the
event of a crash or spill are being
identified.
Each BASIC measures a different area
of performance and compliance.
Substantial compliance and good
performance in the other BASICs does
not necessarily translate into proper
safety management practices and
compliance with the HM Regulations.
Therefore, it is possible for a carrier to
have strong safety management
practices in all other BASICs, while
demonstrating poor performance in the
HM Compliance BASIC. However,
FMCSA analysis indicates that nearly
half of the motor carriers above the 80th
percentile intervention threshold in the
HM BASIC are also above threshold in
at least one other BASIC.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Better Align SMS With IEP Regulations
Comments: Many of the commenters
that addressed this change, such as
Western Trucking Alliance, OOIDA, and
Werner Enterprises, support
implementation. However, some
commenters, including ATA, are
concerned that attributing violations to
a motor carrier that should be found
during a pre-trip inspection, is not
effective in holding IEPs accountable for
maintaining their trailers with
continuous maintenance programs.
Agency Response: In December 2008,
FMCSA adopted regulations to require
IEPs to: register and file with FMCSA an
IEP Identification Report (Form MCS–
150C); establish a systematic inspection,
repair, and maintenance program to
assure the safe operating condition of
each intermodal chassis; maintain
documentation of their maintenance
program; and provide a means to
effectively respond to driver and motor
carrier reports about intermodal chassis
mechanical defects and deficiencies (73
FR 76794 and amended with 74 FR
68703). Roadability reviews are
conducted to ensure compliance with
this rule. Although FMCSA will not
assign a safety rating to an IEP as a
result of a roadability review, it will cite
the IEP for violations found and may
impose civil penalties.
Under 49 CFR Part 390.40, when a
motor carrier’s driver agrees to haul
equipment from an IEP, the driver is
required to determine if the IEP trailer
is in safe condition. With this change
implemented, those violations that
should be found during pre-trip
inspections will be included in a motor
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
carrier’s SMS in order to better identify
carriers with compliance issues.
IEPs are not included in the SMS
because they have different operations
than a motor carrier, and it would not
be accurate to compare them to motor
carrier operations in SMS. FMCSA may
consider a measurement system for IEPs
in the future. Therefore, violation data
collected during inspections performed
today, may eventually be used in a
measurement system for IEPs.
Align Violations That Are Included in
SMS With the CVSA Inspection Levels
by Eliminating the Vehicle Violations
Derived From Driver-Only Inspections
and Driver Violations From VehicleOnly Inspections
Comments: Many commenters, such
as ATA and FedEx, agreed with this
change. OOIDA asked that a list of
violations associated with specific
inspection levels be made public. A few
commenters from the safety advocacy
community, including Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety, strongly
opposed removing any identified
violations from a carrier’s record.
Agency Response: In the current SMS,
a BASIC measure is calculated by
dividing the number of applicable
violations by the number of relevant
inspections. A relevant inspection is
one where either (a) a relevant violation
was found, or (b) the inspection level
requires an examination of areas that
could reveal a violation in the BASIC.
Without the change, vehicle violations
found from driver-only inspections
would be counted in the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC, without giving
credit in that BASIC for clean driveronly inspections. By aligning the
violations used in SMS calculations
with CVSA inspection levels, carriers
will be measured using only violations
that are included in appropriate
inspections without being penalized for
violations cited outside the scope of the
inspection. This change reinforces that
inspectors should report violations
within the scope of the level of
inspections they are certified to
perform. It is also important to note that
though these violations will not be
included in the SMS BASIC measure
calculations, the violations will still
appear on the inspection report, and,
therefore, will still be on the carrier’s
profile.
A description of what is examined for
each inspection level is described on the
FMCSA Web site: https://
www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/
safety-initiatives/mcsap/insplevels.htm.
• Any violation may be cited on a
level 1, 2, 4 or 6 inspection
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Level 3 (driver-only) inspections
only include driver violations, which
are those violations that are included in
the Unsafe Driving, Fatigued Driving
(HOS) (being renamed HOS
Compliance), and Driver Fitness BASICs
• Level 5 (vehicle-only) inspections
only include the violations associated
with Vehicle Maintenance, current
Cargo-Related (changing to HM
Compliance) BASICs
These violations, by BASIC, can be
found in the Version 3.0 SMS
Methodology document, Appendix A
https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/
SMS_Methodology_Carrier_V3-0.pdf/.
More Accurately Identify Carriers That
Transport Significant Quantities of HM
Comments: Schneider National and
FedEx wanted the Agency to implement
either the HM Compliance BASIC or the
HM threshold, but not both. In one of
its comments, Con-Way suggested that
the HM Intervention threshold should
apply to HM Safety Permit carriers only.
Agency Response: The HM
Compliance BASIC and the HM
Intervention threshold are two separate
concepts and cannot be used as a
substitute for each other. The HM
Compliance BASIC allows the Agency
to better identify HM-related
compliance issues in order to mitigate
the consequences of crashes or spills
involving HM. The HM Intervention
threshold applies more stringent
intervention thresholds across all
BASICs for carriers that often haul
placardable quantities of HM due to the
increased potential consequences of a
crash involving placardable quantities
of HM.
The definition of carriers subject to
the lower HM Intervention threshold is
being revised in December to ensure the
carriers are hauling a sizeable amount of
HM placardable quantities before being
subject to the more stringent
intervention thresholds. Under the new
criteria, a motor carrier will be subject
to the lower HM intervention thresholds
when they have:
1. At least two inspections on a
vehicle transporting HM requiring
placards, within the past 24 months,
with one inspection occurring within
the past 12 months; and
2. At least five percent of the motor
carrier’s total inspections involve a
vehicle transporting HM requiring
placards; OR
3. An FMCSA HM safety permit.
FMCSA had originally proposed to
also subject carriers to the lower HM
intervention thresholds if an
investigation within the last 24 months
had identified them as a carrier that
transported placarded quantities.
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
a percentile in SMS and that the carrier
is operating safer than 100% of others
in its safety event group. When the
December 2012 SMS changes are
implemented, carriers with sufficient
data to be assessed and no violations
will be assigned a 0% in that BASIC.
The fact-based descriptions will apply
when a carrier does not receive a
percentile based on the methodology.
More Accurately Identify Carriers
Involved in Transporting Passengers
Comments: No commenters objected
to this change. However, Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety requested that
the analysis behind the change be made
public.
Agency Response: The Agency is
proceeding with the definition change
to the population of carriers subject to
the more stringent Passenger Carrier
intervention thresholds across BASICs.
FMCSA proposed this change based on
a desire to accurately capture passenger
carriers subject to our jurisdiction as
opposed to specific statistical analysis.
This change adds all for-hire carriers
with 9–15 passenger capacity vehicles
and private carriers with 16-plus
passenger capacity vehicles, as these
carriers/entities are under FMCSA’s
authority, removes all carriers with only
1–8 capacity vehicles and private
carriers with 1–15 passenger capacity
vehicles (effectively removing many
limousines, vans, taxis, etc.), as these
carriers/entities are generally outside
most of FMCSA’s authority, and
removes carriers where less than 2% of
their respective fleets are passenger
vehicles to exclude carriers that do not
transport passengers as a significant part
of their businesses. This change
removes 4,200 carriers and adds 5,700
other carriers for a net increase of 1,500
carriers that are identified as
transporting passengers.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
However, that provision is not being
implemented because commenters,
including Werner Enterprises pointed
out that motor carriers that transport as
little as one placarded load per year
could be subject to the lower HM
intervention thresholds primarily
because they received a compliance
review rather than the fact that they
transport significant quantities of HM.
Separate Crashes With injuries and
Crashes With Fatalities in the SMS
Display.
Comments: The majority of
commenters, including ATA, FedEx,
OOIDA, do not want crashes displayed
on the SMS Web site, unless a
preventability determination process is
implemented. Those commenters also
do not want carriers to be prioritized
using the Crash Indicator until a
preventability determination process is
implemented. Two commenters, the
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
and a joint comment from the Truck
Safety Coalition, Parents Against Tired
Truckers, Citizens for Reliable and Safe
Highways and Road Safe America,
support the proposed change and as
well as the use of the Crash Indicator for
prioritization of carriers and cite
research indicating crash involvement is
a good predictor of future crashes. In
addition, these safety advocates want
the Crash Indicator to be available for
the public to view and do not want the
Agency to remove any crashes from a
carrier’s record.
Agency Response: Consistent with the
public display of crash information over
the last 10 years on our Safer Web site
and in the SafeStat system, carrier
crashes reported to MCMIS are
displayed in FMCSA public information
technology (IT) systems. Carrier Crash
Indicator percentiles and measures are
not publicly available. In June 2012,
language was added to various FMCSA
public IT systems, including SMS, and
it explicitly explains that the list of
crashes represents a motor carrier’s
involvement in a crash with no
determination as to responsibility.
FMCSA analysis indicates that prior
crashes, regardless of a carrier’s role in
a crash, are a good predictor of future
crash involvement. Therefore, FMCSA
continues to use the Crash Indicator for
internal prioritization purposes, while
continuing to hide the percentile from
public view. However, FMCSA
recognizes that additional crash data
might further sharpen the ability of the
SMS to identify carriers that pose the
highest risk. Accordingly, on July 23,
2012, the Agency announced it is
conducting a comprehensive analysis to
identify a process for determining a
Change the Current Terminology,
‘‘Inconclusive’’ and ‘‘Insufficient Data,’’
to Fact-Based Descriptions
Comments: No commenters objected
to this change. The Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety wanted the
specific replacement language available
to the public during the preview instead
of the general term ‘‘fact-based
descriptions.’’ ATA stated that the
descriptions are a positive step, but
would like BASIC percentile ranks (i.e.
0%) assigned to carriers that have not
had a violation in a certain number/
percentage of inspections to indicate
their safe operations in addition to the
fact-based descriptions.
Agency Response: In the current SMS,
having a 0% in a BASIC indicates that
the carrier has sufficient information for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00151
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52115
carrier’s role in a crash and including
that determination in the SMS. More
information on this issue is available at
https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/
CrashWeightingResearchPlan_72012.pdf.General.
Comments on SMS Preview
Some commenters, including ATA
and Schneider National, agree with
providing a preview for carriers to
understand how proposed changes will
affect their SMS percentiles and to
address any safety issues that may be
identified before the changes go public.
OOIDA and the Alliance for Safe,
Efficient, and Competitive Truck
Transportation (ASECTT) believe that
the creation of and any changes to SMS
need to go through a notice and
comment rulemaking under 49 U.S.C.
31144(b).
Agency Response: FMCSA uses SMS
to examine roadside and other
inspection data to identify current safety
performance issues and intervene with
carriers when necessary. SMS does not
change any regulation within the
FMCSRs, is not a safety fitness rating,
does not affect the safety fitness rating
of a motor carrier, and does not impact
a carrier’s operating authority.
Accordingly, the Agency’s current use
of SMS data is not subject to notice and
comment rulemaking.
The Agency is, however, developing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that would propose the use of SMS data
in making safety fitness determinations.
The NPRM will solicit comments on
this particular issue.
In order to ensure transparency in the
development and enhancements of
SMS, the Agency plans to issue changes
at periodic intervals and to provide
enforcement personnel and carriers the
opportunity to preview the changes
prior to implementation. FMCSA will
continue to seek comments and
consider them before completing
implementation of changes.
Comments on Other Topics and Agency
Responses
FMCSA received many comments
about aspects of the CSA program that
did not concern the proposed changes to
SMS and are therefore beyond the scope
of this notice. These topics include,
among other things, the general status of
CSA, the correlation between BASIC
scores and future crash risk, a
perception of effects on small
businesses, the Utilization Factor (UF)
that gives carrier credit for the extra
exposure that results from making high
utilization of trucks, training of
enforcement officers, violation
weightings, the Driver SMS (DSMS),
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
52116
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2012 / Notices
severity weighting determinations,
disparities between States, the DataQs
process, and making SMS scores
publicly available.
While these topics are beyond the
scope of this notice, FMCSA intends to
respond to these comments through the
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on
FMCSA’s Web site. FMCSA will provide
also these topics to the MCSAC
subcommittee that will provide the
Agency recommendations on CSA for
their consideration.
the Unified Carrier Registration Plan
and Agreement and to that end, may
consider matters properly before the
Board.
Mr.
Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at
(505) 827–4565.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Issued on: August 24, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator, Office of Policy,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–21296 Filed 8–24–12; 4:15 pm]
Implementation
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
Changes outlined in this notice will
be implemented in December 2012.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Next Steps
As mentioned throughout this notice,
FMCSA plans to periodically develop
enhancements to SMS, make them
available for preview to law
enforcement and motor carriers, and
collect comments. The next set of
packaged enhancements is under
development. The Agency is examining
the following: comprehensive
modifications to roadside violation
severity weights, recalibration of the
Utilization Factor used to incorporate
VMT for the Crash Indicator and Unsafe
Driving BASIC, and adjustments to
safety event groups in all BASICs.
Issued: August 22, 2012.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–21196 Filed 8–24–12; 12:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier
Registration Plan Board of Directors
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Unified Carrier
Registration Plan Board of Directors
Meeting.
AGENCY:
The meeting will be held
on September 6, 2012, from 12:00 noon
to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time.
PLACE: This meeting will be open to the
public via conference call. Any
interested person may call 1–877–820–
7831, passcode, 908048 to listen and
participate in this meeting.
STATUS: Open to the public.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Unified
Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors (the Board) will continue its
work in developing and implementing
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
TIME AND DATE:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Aug 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
Federal Transit Administration
[Docket No. FTA–2011–0054]
Title VI; Final Circular
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of availability of final
Circular.
AGENCY:
The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has placed in the
docket and on its Web site, guidance in
the form of a Circular to assist grantees
in complying with Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. The purpose of this
Circular is to provide recipients of FTA
financial assistance with instructions
and guidance necessary to carry out the
U.S. Department of Transportation’s
Title VI regulations (49 CFR part 21).
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date
of the Circular is October 1, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program questions, Amber Ontiveros,
Office of Civil Rights, Federal Transit
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
SE., Room E54–422, Washington, DC
20590, phone: (202) 366–4018, fax: (202)
366–3809, or email,
Amber.Ontiveros@dot.gov. For legal
questions, Bonnie Graves, Office of
Chief Counsel, same address, room E56–
306, phone: (202) 366–4011, or email,
Bonnie.Graves@dot.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Final Circular
This notice provides a summary of the
final changes to the Title VI Circular
and responses to comments. The final
Circular itself is not included in this
notice; instead, an electronic version
may be found on FTA’s Web site, at
www.fta.dot.gov, and in the docket, at
www.regulations.gov. Paper copies of
the final Circular may be obtained by
contacting FTA’s Administrative
Services Help Desk, at (202) 366–4865.
PO 00000
Frm 00152
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Table of Contents
I. Overview
II. Implementation
III. Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis
A. General Comments
B. Chapter I—Introduction and Background
C. Chapter II—Program Overview
D. Chapter III—General Requirements and
Guidelines
E. Chapter IV—Requirements and
Guidelines for Fixed Route Transit
Providers
F. Chapter V—Requirements for States
G. Chapter VI—Requirements for
Metropolitan Planning Organizations
H. Chapter VII—Effectuating Compliance
With DOT Title VI Regulations
I. Chapter VIII—Compliance Reviews
J. Chapter IX—Complaints
K. Appendices
I. Overview
FTA is updating its Title VI Circular,
last revised in 2007, to clarify what
recipients must do to comply with the
U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT) Title VI regulations. This notice
provides a summary of changes to FTA
Circular 4702.1A, ‘‘Title VI and Title
VI—Dependent Guidelines for FTA
Recipients,’’ addresses comments
received in response to the September
29, 2011, Federal Register notice (76 FR
60593), and provides information
regarding implementation of the final
Circular. The final Circular, 4702.1B,
‘‘Title VI Requirements and Guidelines
for Federal Transit Administration
Recipients’’ becomes effective on
October 1, 2012, and supersedes FTA
Circular 4702.1A.
FTA conducted extensive outreach
related to the proposed circular. FTA
sponsored Information Sessions in five
cities around the country regarding the
proposed revisions to the Title VI
Circular and proposed a new
Environmental Justice Circular (see
docket FTA–2011–0055 for more
information on the proposed and final
Environmental Justice Circular). The
meetings provided a forum for FTA staff
to make presentations about the two
proposed circulars and allowed
attendees an opportunity to ask
clarifying questions. In addition, FTA
participated in various conferences
occurring in October and November
2011, and hosted several webinars. FTA
received approximately 117 written
comments to the docket related to the
proposed Title VI Circular from
providers of public transportation, State
Departments of Transportation,
advocacy groups, individuals,
metropolitan planning organizations,
and transit industry groups. Some
comments were submitted on behalf of
multiple entities.
E:\FR\FM\28AUN1.SGM
28AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52110-52116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21196]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2004-18898]
Agency Response to Public Comments of Safety Measurement System
Changes
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice; response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces changes to the Carrier Safety Measurement System (SMS). A
preview of the original improvements became available to motor carriers
and law enforcement on March 27, 2012, and will remain available until
the SMS changes become operational. The SMS improvements are now
scheduled to be operational in December 2012. Comments to the preview
were reviewed and considered. This notice explains the Agency's
modifications to the changes announced in March and describes four
additional changes that will be implemented in December.
DATES: These improvements are scheduled to be operational in December
2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2004-18898 by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building,
Ground Floor, Room 12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' heading under the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments and
additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan Price, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, 1000 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1300, Pittsburgh, PA
15222, Telephone 412-395-4816, E-Mail: bryan.price@dot.gov. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
[[Page 52111]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation
Comments regarding the improvements outlined in this Notice were
originally collected under Docket Identification Number FMCSA-2012-
0074. To avoid confusion and ensure consistency, FMCSA is moving to a
single CSA docket. FMCSA's CSA docket (FMCSA-2004-18898) will remain
open to accept comments on the SMS methodology, and will remain open
when the improvements outlined in this notice become operational in
December.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include docket number FMCSA-2004-
18898. You may submit your comments and material online or by fax,
mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so the Agency
can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comments online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
enter ``FMCSA-2004-18898'' in the ``Search'' box, and click ``Search''.
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
FMCSA will consider all comments and material received and may
undertake future modifications of SMS based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov and
in the ``Search'' box, enter ``FMCSA-2004-18898'', and click
``Search''. A list of documents will appear; click on the hyperlinks to
view public submissions and Agency-provided materials. If you do not
have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting
the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Privacy Act
All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have
provided. Anyone is able to search the electronic forum for all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit https://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.
Background
FMCSA's enforcement and compliance programs are making America's
roads safer. CSA is FMCSA's new enforcement and compliance program and
has been operational since December 2010. An overview of CSA is
available in the March 27, 2012, Federal Register Notice (77 FR 18298).
With rollout of CSA, commercial motor vehicle safety awareness is at an
all-time high with 30,000,000 visits to the Agency's SMS Web site in
its first year of operation. FMCSA has leveraged its programs to
communicate with the industry about safety and compliance, resulting in
the most dramatic drop in safety violations in a decade. In 2011,
violations per roadside inspection were down by 8%, and driver
violations per inspection were down by 10%.
SMS uses all available inspection and crash data to prioritize
carriers for interventions. SMS quantifies on-road safety performance
of carriers to identify the specific safety problems the carrier
exhibits and to monitor whether performance is improving or worsening.
SMS helps FMCSA more efficiently apply its resources and to bring
carriers and drivers into compliance with Federal safety regulations
and prevent crashes, saving lives.
The Agency has found that SMS is an effective tool for identifying
those carriers with future safety and compliance issues. For example,
the SMS has sufficient data to assess 200,000 of the 525,000 active
carriers in FMCSA's data systems in a BASIC. Those 200,000 carriers are
involved in 92% of the crashes reported to FMCSA. Both FMCSA and an
independent evaluator, the University of Michigan Transportation
Research Institute (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/Evaluation-of-the-CSA-Op-Model-Test.pdf), have confirmed that SMS is an effective
tool in identifying the high risk motor carriers and a significant
improvement over the previous SafeStat system.
FMCSA's CSA Web site (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov) is a resource that
was created for all stakeholders to gain a better understanding of CSA
in general, including SMS. This Web site offers many educational items
including:
Informational factsheets on various aspects of CSA,
including SMS;
Presentations used to deliver information to the industry
regarding CSA in general and the SMS methodology;
The operational version of the SMS Methodology along with
the proposed version released in March 2012;
Various studies conducted on SMS's effectiveness; among
other educational resources.
The original FR Notice posted in March 2012 also includes detailed
information about SMS.
FMCSA is continuously listening to stakeholder feedback and
researching and analyzing ways to improve its programs. The SMS changes
proposed in March reflect that work. FMCSA is committed to a
thoughtful, methodical, and transparent process to ensure that the SMS
continues to support the Agency's critical safety mission.
In total, the SMS changes being implemented in December more
effectively identify and prioritize motor carriers for intervention to
reduce commercial motor vehicle crashes and HM incidents. Motor
carriers identified as exceeding the intervention threshold in any
BASIC under the revised methodology have a 3.9% greater future crash
rate and 3.6% greater future HM violation rate than those previously
identified for intervention using the existing SMS methodology. Details
regarding this analysis of motor carriers exceeding the intervention
thresholds as well as high risk motor carrier identification is posted
on the CSA Web site at (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf
Proposed SMS Changes From March 2012 Federal Register Notice
FMCSA provided detailed descriptions of the following planned
changes to the SMS in a Federal Register Notice published on March 27,
2012 (77 FR 18298) and in a summary and analysis document posted on the
CSA Web site (https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf); these changes have been available for carriers and law
enforcement to preview since that date and included the following:
[[Page 52112]]
Strengthening the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC by
incorporating cargo/load securement violations from today's Cargo-
Related BASIC;
Changing the Cargo-Related BASIC to the Hazardous
Materials (HM) BASIC to better identify HM-related safety and
compliance problems;
Better aligning the SMS with Intermodal Equipment Provider
(IEP) regulations;
Aligning violations that are included in the SMS with
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) inspection levels by
eliminating vehicle violations derived from driver-only inspections and
driver violations from vehicle-only inspections;
More accurately identifying carriers that transport
significant quantities of HM; and
More accurately identifying carriers involved in
transporting passengers.
In addition, FMCSA described changes to the display of information
on the SMS Web site (https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/sms/). Specifically, FMCSA
provided notice of its plan to modify the SMS Web site display to:
Change current terminology, including the terms
``Insufficient Data'' and ``Inconclusive,'' to fact-based definitions
that clarify the carrier's status in each BASIC; and
Distinguish between crashes with injuries and crashes with
fatalities.
SMS Changes To Be Implemented
FMCSA is implementing the above-mentioned changes to SMS in
December 2012, with two notable modifications. First, in response to
public comments expressing concern about the HM BASIC, it will not be
made available to the public for one year. Instead, only motor carriers
and law enforcement personnel that log into FMCSA systems will be able
to view percentile ranks in the HM BASIC. This one year time period
will allow the Agency to further study and refine the BASIC prior to
making it available to the public. Second, the HM BASIC will be named
the HM Compliance BASIC.
Additional Changes
In addition to the changes outlined above, FMCSA is providing
notice of four more changes based on careful consideration of comments
received and stakeholder feedback. In short, the Agency is proposing
these changes: to remove speeding violations that are 1 to 5 miles per
hour (mph) over the speed limit; to lower the severity weight from 5 to
1 for speeding violations that do not designate MPH range above the
speed limit; to make the severity weights associated with electronic
and paper logbook violations the same; and to change the name of the
Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service (HOS)) BASIC to the Hours-of-Service
(HOS) Compliance BASIC. Comments to these additional changes can be
made to the original CSA docket (FMCSA-2004-18898). Users of the SMS
Preview Web site should be aware the four additional changes will not
be incorporated in the SMS Preview Web site and will become visible
upon going operational in December.
Removal of 1 to 5 MPH Speeding Violations
In the current SMS, the Unsafe Driving BASIC uses all speeding
violations regardless of the range exceeding the speed limit. FMCSA is
removing commercial motor vehicle speeding violations in the 1 to 5 mph
over the speed limit range from SMS. Current speedometer regulations
(49 CFR 393.82) only require accuracy within 5 mph. This change
therefore aligns SMS with the regulatory requirement. Once implemented,
the Unsafe Driving BASIC will not include any speeding violations that
fall into the 1 to 5 mph over the speed limit range regardless of when
the inspection occurred. This change applies to the prior 24 months of
data used by SMS and all SMS data moving forward.
Lowered Severity Weight for Speeding Violations That Do Not Designate
MPH Range Above the Speed Limit
In the current SMS, the Unsafe Driving BASIC applies a severity
weight of 5 to general speeding violations that do not specify the
range exceeding the speed limit. FMCSA is reducing the severity weight
for general speeding violations (49 CFR 392.2S) to 1 for those
violations occurring on or after January 1, 2011. This is the date when
inspectors had access to updated roadside inspection software, ASPEN,
to record violations broken out by mile per hour categories above the
speed limit. After the changes are implemented in December, the
following severity weights will apply to recorded speeding violations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specified MPH range above speed limit Violation severity weight
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not specified......................... 1.*
For all recorded violations with
an unspecified range above the
speed limit occurring after
January 1, 2011.
1-5................................... 0
6-10.................................. 4
11-14................................. 7
15+................................... 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alignment of Paper and Electronic Logbook Violations
In the current SMS, hours-of-service form and manner violations
have different weights for paper (weight of 2) and electronic form and
manner logbook (weight of 1) violations. FMCSA is now equally weighting
paper and electronic logbook form and manner violations with a severity
weight of 1 for consistency purposes. In addition, the current SMS
assigns a severity weight of 5 to paper log violations having to do
with a driver not having a log book but only a severity weight of 1 for
similar violations of electronic logbooks. With these changes, all
violations related to not having a logbook, electronic or paper, will
have a severity weight of 5.
Name Change of the Fatigued Driving (HOS) BASIC to the HOS Compliance
BASIC
Upon careful review of comments concerning the proposed SMS changes
and stakeholder feedback, FMCSA is changing the name of the Fatigued
Driving (HOS) BASIC to the Hours of Service (HOS) Compliance BASIC.
This action is being taken to reflect that the BASIC includes
violations such as ``form and manner'' and ``logbook not current''
that, by themselves, do not necessarily indicate fatigued driving or
driving in excess of allowable hours.
Response to Docket Comments on ``Improvements to the Compliance,
Safety, Accountability (CSA) Motor Carrier Safety Measurement System
(SMS)''
The Agency received 118 unique comment submissions to the March
notice, mostly from drivers, carriers, and industry associations. Of
the 118 submissions, no single topic drew responses from a majority of
the commenters and many of the submissions addressed more than one
topic. Below is a synopsis of the comments received and the Agency's
responses.
Strengthen the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC by moving cargo/load
securement violations from the Cargo-Related BASIC to the Vehicle
Maintenance BASIC
Comments: Several commenters, such as Bison Transport, Inc, Q-Line
Trucking, the Western Trucking Alliance, Vigillo, LLC, the Owner-
Operator Independent Driver
[[Page 52113]]
Association (OOIDA), and B-H Transfer commented that cargo/load
securement violations do not belong in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC.
Some of those commenters, such as Bison Transport, proposed that the
Unsafe Driving BASIC would be more suitable, because the driver bears
primary responsibility for such violations. Some commenters, such as
Vigillo, are concerned that cargo/load securement violations would not
receive enough emphasis in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC. Some
commenters are of the opinion that cargo/load securement violations
will still receive too much emphasis. Others, like Q-Line Trucking, are
concerned that moving the violations to the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC
would transfer the flat-bed bias to that BASIC instead of addressing
the bias directly.
Several commenters, including OOIDA, Bison Transport, Inc. and Q-
Line Trucking, proposed that cargo/load securement violations should be
compared by group--flatbed or open trailer--not all together in the
Vehicle Maintenance BASIC.
The American Trucking Association (ATA) supports the proposed
enhancement but suggested changing the name of the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC to reflect the additional violations being included.
Agency Response: FMCSA analysis indicates the proposed approach of
moving cargo/load securement violations into the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC identifies carriers with a higher future crash risk while at the
same time effectively addressing the bias associated with carriers that
haul open trailers. A detailed description of this analysis, and the
issue associated with motor carriers that primarily transport open
trailers, is posted on the CSA Web site at https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf.
By moving load securement violations to the Vehicle Maintenance
BASIC and recalibrating the severity weights, FMCSA has mitigated the
known bias created by information system limitations; ensured that the
carriers with a pattern of load securement violations are still
identified; and strengthened the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC by improving
the identification of carriers with the highest future crash rates.
In addition, the FMCSA has determined that the Unsafe Driving BASIC
is not an appropriate place to house the cargo securement violations.
The Vehicle Maintenance BASIC is focused on the physical condition of
the vehicle, of which the cargo is a part, whereas the Unsafe Driving
BASIC is focused on how the vehicle is being driven (e.g. improper lane
change, speeding). Further, the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC is normalized
by number of inspections, whereas the Unsafe Driving BASIC is
normalized by on-road exposure measured by Power Units (PU) and Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT). The Agency continues to believe that the number
of inspections is a more appropriate normalization factor for cargo
securement violations, and, therefore, will include the cargo
securement violations in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC. The Agency does
not plan to change the name of the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC with this
set of enhancements.
FMCSA acknowledges there would be advantages to comparing cargo/
load securement violations by group, e.g. flatbed or open trailer.
However, at this time FMCSA does not have access to reliable,
consistent data to allow us to make these determinations.
Rename the Cargo-Related BASIC the HM Compliance BASIC
Comments: Many commenters believe the HM Compliance BASIC should
not be implemented as described. Commenters, such as Schneider
National, expressed that HM violations are paperwork violations that do
not correlate with crash risk or severity. Commenters such as Vigillo
feel that carriers hauling HM infrequently would be disproportionately
affected by the existence of an HM Compliance BASIC, regardless of
their overall safety. Some commenters, including Con-way Freight,
suggested separating out different types of HM operations or adjusting
severity weights for HM violations by bulk versus non-bulk. Schneider
National's comments suggest removing shipper violations from SMS.
Agency Response: The Agency strongly disagrees with the assertion
that HM regulations are solely paperwork violations. The basis for the
HM Regulations is twofold--to contain HM for the protection of life and
property, and to communicate the inherent risks of hazardous materials
to emergency responders when released. While violations of shipping
papers and placards do not cause crashes, the absence of them during
mitigation of a crash where HM is present can result in injury or death
to emergency responders and the public. FMCSA has the mandate to
enforce the HM Regulations as they pertain to transportation by
highway, and the HM Compliance BASIC provides the Agency with the tools
needed to identify trends in non-compliance.
The first step in the development of the HM Compliance BASIC was an
examination of carrier and shipper violations to make a determination
of which violations should be accountable to the carrier. The Agency,
including subject matter experts, determined that the violations
outlined in Appendix A of the SMS Methodology are to be included in the
HM Compliance BASIC https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_Methodology_Carrier_V3-0.pdf. However, based on feedback received
during the preview period, three of the violations listed in Appendix A
of the preview methodology will not be included when HM BASIC goes
operational in December on the basis that they are administrative,
rather than safety based. The three violations that will not be
included are: 49 CFR 107.601 Failing to register with PHMSA prior to
transporting hazardous materials requiring HM registration; 49 CFR
107.620(b) No copy of US DOT Hazardous Materials Registration Number;
and 49 CFR 397.3AU Failing to comply with Alliance for Uniform HM
Registration requirements.
The intervention threshold in this BASIC will be set at 80% for all
carriers. Analysis done on the effectiveness of this BASIC shows that
carriers above the intervention threshold have future HM violation
rates more than 15% higher than carriers above the threshold in the
current Cargo-Securement BASIC.
However, in consideration of the comments related to the HM
Compliance BASIC FMCSA will refrain from displaying this BASIC to the
public until December 2013. During this time, the HM Compliance BASIC
will be utilized as an enforcement prioritization tool, and its
effectiveness in identifying non-compliant HM carriers will be further
analyzed.
The Agency recognizes that different carriers haul various
quantities of HM. Therefore, the Agency plans to display the percentage
of HM placardable inspections for a carrier to provide context to
inspections and violations displayed on SMS.
Analysis conducted on the HM Compliance BASIC indicates that the
motor carriers over the 80th percentile intervention threshold in this
BASIC had slightly fewer inspections where a placardable quantity of HM
was on board, but more HM inspections with violations, which means it
better identifies the carriers in non-compliance. A detailed
description of this analysis is also available on the CSA Web site at
https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_FoundationalDoc_Final.pdf.
[[Page 52114]]
By implementing the HM Compliance BASIC for enforcement purposes,
carriers that are not in compliance by properly packaging,
transporting, accurately identifying, and communicating hazardous cargo
in the event of a crash or spill are being identified.
Each BASIC measures a different area of performance and compliance.
Substantial compliance and good performance in the other BASICs does
not necessarily translate into proper safety management practices and
compliance with the HM Regulations. Therefore, it is possible for a
carrier to have strong safety management practices in all other BASICs,
while demonstrating poor performance in the HM Compliance BASIC.
However, FMCSA analysis indicates that nearly half of the motor
carriers above the 80th percentile intervention threshold in the HM
BASIC are also above threshold in at least one other BASIC.
Better Align SMS With IEP Regulations
Comments: Many of the commenters that addressed this change, such
as Western Trucking Alliance, OOIDA, and Werner Enterprises, support
implementation. However, some commenters, including ATA, are concerned
that attributing violations to a motor carrier that should be found
during a pre-trip inspection, is not effective in holding IEPs
accountable for maintaining their trailers with continuous maintenance
programs.
Agency Response: In December 2008, FMCSA adopted regulations to
require IEPs to: register and file with FMCSA an IEP Identification
Report (Form MCS-150C); establish a systematic inspection, repair, and
maintenance program to assure the safe operating condition of each
intermodal chassis; maintain documentation of their maintenance
program; and provide a means to effectively respond to driver and motor
carrier reports about intermodal chassis mechanical defects and
deficiencies (73 FR 76794 and amended with 74 FR 68703). Roadability
reviews are conducted to ensure compliance with this rule. Although
FMCSA will not assign a safety rating to an IEP as a result of a
roadability review, it will cite the IEP for violations found and may
impose civil penalties.
Under 49 CFR Part 390.40, when a motor carrier's driver agrees to
haul equipment from an IEP, the driver is required to determine if the
IEP trailer is in safe condition. With this change implemented, those
violations that should be found during pre-trip inspections will be
included in a motor carrier's SMS in order to better identify carriers
with compliance issues.
IEPs are not included in the SMS because they have different
operations than a motor carrier, and it would not be accurate to
compare them to motor carrier operations in SMS. FMCSA may consider a
measurement system for IEPs in the future. Therefore, violation data
collected during inspections performed today, may eventually be used in
a measurement system for IEPs.
Align Violations That Are Included in SMS With the CVSA Inspection
Levels by Eliminating the Vehicle Violations Derived From Driver-Only
Inspections and Driver Violations From Vehicle-Only Inspections
Comments: Many commenters, such as ATA and FedEx, agreed with this
change. OOIDA asked that a list of violations associated with specific
inspection levels be made public. A few commenters from the safety
advocacy community, including Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
strongly opposed removing any identified violations from a carrier's
record.
Agency Response: In the current SMS, a BASIC measure is calculated
by dividing the number of applicable violations by the number of
relevant inspections. A relevant inspection is one where either (a) a
relevant violation was found, or (b) the inspection level requires an
examination of areas that could reveal a violation in the BASIC.
Without the change, vehicle violations found from driver-only
inspections would be counted in the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC, without
giving credit in that BASIC for clean driver-only inspections. By
aligning the violations used in SMS calculations with CVSA inspection
levels, carriers will be measured using only violations that are
included in appropriate inspections without being penalized for
violations cited outside the scope of the inspection. This change
reinforces that inspectors should report violations within the scope of
the level of inspections they are certified to perform. It is also
important to note that though these violations will not be included in
the SMS BASIC measure calculations, the violations will still appear on
the inspection report, and, therefore, will still be on the carrier's
profile.
A description of what is examined for each inspection level is
described on the FMCSA Web site: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/safety-initiatives/mcsap/insplevels.htm.
Any violation may be cited on a level 1, 2, 4 or 6
inspection
Level 3 (driver-only) inspections only include driver
violations, which are those violations that are included in the Unsafe
Driving, Fatigued Driving (HOS) (being renamed HOS Compliance), and
Driver Fitness BASICs
Level 5 (vehicle-only) inspections only include the
violations associated with Vehicle Maintenance, current Cargo-Related
(changing to HM Compliance) BASICs
These violations, by BASIC, can be found in the Version 3.0 SMS
Methodology document, Appendix A https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/Documents/SMS_Methodology_Carrier_V3-0.pdf/.
More Accurately Identify Carriers That Transport Significant Quantities
of HM
Comments: Schneider National and FedEx wanted the Agency to
implement either the HM Compliance BASIC or the HM threshold, but not
both. In one of its comments, Con-Way suggested that the HM
Intervention threshold should apply to HM Safety Permit carriers only.
Agency Response: The HM Compliance BASIC and the HM Intervention
threshold are two separate concepts and cannot be used as a substitute
for each other. The HM Compliance BASIC allows the Agency to better
identify HM-related compliance issues in order to mitigate the
consequences of crashes or spills involving HM. The HM Intervention
threshold applies more stringent intervention thresholds across all
BASICs for carriers that often haul placardable quantities of HM due to
the increased potential consequences of a crash involving placardable
quantities of HM.
The definition of carriers subject to the lower HM Intervention
threshold is being revised in December to ensure the carriers are
hauling a sizeable amount of HM placardable quantities before being
subject to the more stringent intervention thresholds. Under the new
criteria, a motor carrier will be subject to the lower HM intervention
thresholds when they have:
1. At least two inspections on a vehicle transporting HM requiring
placards, within the past 24 months, with one inspection occurring
within the past 12 months; and
2. At least five percent of the motor carrier's total inspections
involve a vehicle transporting HM requiring placards; OR
3. An FMCSA HM safety permit.
FMCSA had originally proposed to also subject carriers to the lower
HM intervention thresholds if an investigation within the last 24
months had identified them as a carrier that transported placarded
quantities.
[[Page 52115]]
However, that provision is not being implemented because commenters,
including Werner Enterprises pointed out that motor carriers that
transport as little as one placarded load per year could be subject to
the lower HM intervention thresholds primarily because they received a
compliance review rather than the fact that they transport significant
quantities of HM.
More Accurately Identify Carriers Involved in Transporting Passengers
Comments: No commenters objected to this change. However, Advocates
for Highway and Auto Safety requested that the analysis behind the
change be made public.
Agency Response: The Agency is proceeding with the definition
change to the population of carriers subject to the more stringent
Passenger Carrier intervention thresholds across BASICs. FMCSA proposed
this change based on a desire to accurately capture passenger carriers
subject to our jurisdiction as opposed to specific statistical
analysis. This change adds all for-hire carriers with 9-15 passenger
capacity vehicles and private carriers with 16-plus passenger capacity
vehicles, as these carriers/entities are under FMCSA's authority,
removes all carriers with only 1-8 capacity vehicles and private
carriers with 1-15 passenger capacity vehicles (effectively removing
many limousines, vans, taxis, etc.), as these carriers/entities are
generally outside most of FMCSA's authority, and removes carriers where
less than 2% of their respective fleets are passenger vehicles to
exclude carriers that do not transport passengers as a significant part
of their businesses. This change removes 4,200 carriers and adds 5,700
other carriers for a net increase of 1,500 carriers that are identified
as transporting passengers.
Change the Current Terminology, ``Inconclusive'' and ``Insufficient
Data,'' to Fact-Based Descriptions
Comments: No commenters objected to this change. The Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety wanted the specific replacement language
available to the public during the preview instead of the general term
``fact-based descriptions.'' ATA stated that the descriptions are a
positive step, but would like BASIC percentile ranks (i.e. 0%) assigned
to carriers that have not had a violation in a certain number/
percentage of inspections to indicate their safe operations in addition
to the fact-based descriptions.
Agency Response: In the current SMS, having a 0% in a BASIC
indicates that the carrier has sufficient information for a percentile
in SMS and that the carrier is operating safer than 100% of others in
its safety event group. When the December 2012 SMS changes are
implemented, carriers with sufficient data to be assessed and no
violations will be assigned a 0% in that BASIC. The fact-based
descriptions will apply when a carrier does not receive a percentile
based on the methodology.
Separate Crashes With injuries and Crashes With Fatalities in the SMS
Display.
Comments: The majority of commenters, including ATA, FedEx, OOIDA,
do not want crashes displayed on the SMS Web site, unless a
preventability determination process is implemented. Those commenters
also do not want carriers to be prioritized using the Crash Indicator
until a preventability determination process is implemented. Two
commenters, the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety and a joint
comment from the Truck Safety Coalition, Parents Against Tired
Truckers, Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways and Road Safe
America, support the proposed change and as well as the use of the
Crash Indicator for prioritization of carriers and cite research
indicating crash involvement is a good predictor of future crashes. In
addition, these safety advocates want the Crash Indicator to be
available for the public to view and do not want the Agency to remove
any crashes from a carrier's record.
Agency Response: Consistent with the public display of crash
information over the last 10 years on our Safer Web site and in the
SafeStat system, carrier crashes reported to MCMIS are displayed in
FMCSA public information technology (IT) systems. Carrier Crash
Indicator percentiles and measures are not publicly available. In June
2012, language was added to various FMCSA public IT systems, including
SMS, and it explicitly explains that the list of crashes represents a
motor carrier's involvement in a crash with no determination as to
responsibility.
FMCSA analysis indicates that prior crashes, regardless of a
carrier's role in a crash, are a good predictor of future crash
involvement. Therefore, FMCSA continues to use the Crash Indicator for
internal prioritization purposes, while continuing to hide the
percentile from public view. However, FMCSA recognizes that additional
crash data might further sharpen the ability of the SMS to identify
carriers that pose the highest risk. Accordingly, on July 23, 2012, the
Agency announced it is conducting a comprehensive analysis to identify
a process for determining a carrier's role in a crash and including
that determination in the SMS. More information on this issue is
available at https://csa.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/CrashWeightingResearchPlan_7-2012.pdf.General.
Comments on SMS Preview
Some commenters, including ATA and Schneider National, agree with
providing a preview for carriers to understand how proposed changes
will affect their SMS percentiles and to address any safety issues that
may be identified before the changes go public. OOIDA and the Alliance
for Safe, Efficient, and Competitive Truck Transportation (ASECTT)
believe that the creation of and any changes to SMS need to go through
a notice and comment rulemaking under 49 U.S.C. 31144(b).
Agency Response: FMCSA uses SMS to examine roadside and other
inspection data to identify current safety performance issues and
intervene with carriers when necessary. SMS does not change any
regulation within the FMCSRs, is not a safety fitness rating, does not
affect the safety fitness rating of a motor carrier, and does not
impact a carrier's operating authority. Accordingly, the Agency's
current use of SMS data is not subject to notice and comment
rulemaking.
The Agency is, however, developing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that would propose the use of SMS data in making safety fitness
determinations. The NPRM will solicit comments on this particular
issue.
In order to ensure transparency in the development and enhancements
of SMS, the Agency plans to issue changes at periodic intervals and to
provide enforcement personnel and carriers the opportunity to preview
the changes prior to implementation. FMCSA will continue to seek
comments and consider them before completing implementation of changes.
Comments on Other Topics and Agency Responses
FMCSA received many comments about aspects of the CSA program that
did not concern the proposed changes to SMS and are therefore beyond
the scope of this notice. These topics include, among other things, the
general status of CSA, the correlation between BASIC scores and future
crash risk, a perception of effects on small businesses, the
Utilization Factor (UF) that gives carrier credit for the extra
exposure that results from making high utilization of trucks, training
of enforcement officers, violation weightings, the Driver SMS (DSMS),
[[Page 52116]]
severity weighting determinations, disparities between States, the
DataQs process, and making SMS scores publicly available.
While these topics are beyond the scope of this notice, FMCSA
intends to respond to these comments through the Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQs) on FMCSA's Web site. FMCSA will provide also these
topics to the MCSAC subcommittee that will provide the Agency
recommendations on CSA for their consideration.
Implementation
Changes outlined in this notice will be implemented in December
2012.
Next Steps
As mentioned throughout this notice, FMCSA plans to periodically
develop enhancements to SMS, make them available for preview to law
enforcement and motor carriers, and collect comments. The next set of
packaged enhancements is under development. The Agency is examining the
following: comprehensive modifications to roadside violation severity
weights, recalibration of the Utilization Factor used to incorporate
VMT for the Crash Indicator and Unsafe Driving BASIC, and adjustments
to safety event groups in all BASICs.
Issued: August 22, 2012.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-21196 Filed 8-24-12; 12:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P