FMCSA issues 11 changes to Safety Measurement System

Maria

Diet Coke
Staff member
WASHINGTON — The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Monday implemented 11 new improvements to its Safety Measurement System (SMS).

The SMS is one of the key elements of the agency’s overall safety measurement system better known as Compliance Safety Accountability.

The changes, developed over several months with feedback from the public and stakeholders throughout the industry, will enhance the agency’s ability to identify and take action against trucks and buses with safety and compliance concerns, according to FMCSA Administrator Anne S. Ferro.

The 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 bring carriers and drivers into compliance with Federal safety regulations in order to prevent crashes and save lives, Ferro said.

The enhancements, first announced in August and implemented Monday include:

• Changing the Cargo-Related BASIC (Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category) to the Hazardous Materials (HM) Compliance BASIC to better identify hazmat-related safety and compliance problems. Motor carriers and law enforcement can view this new BASIC now; however, FMCSA will conduct further monitoring before this BASIC is made public.

• Strengthening the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC by including cargo and load securement violations that were previously in the Cargo-Related BASIC.

• Counting intermodal equipment violations found during drivers’ pre-trip inspections.

• Aligning speeding violations to be consistent with current speedometer regulations that require speedometers to be accurate within 5 mph. The change applies to the prior 24 months of data used by the SMS and all SMS data moving forward.

• Changing the name of the Fatigued Driving BASIC to the Hours of Service (HOS) Compliance BASIC to more accurately reflect violations contained within the BASIC, and

• Aligning the severity weight of paper and electronic logbook violations equally on the SMS for consistency purposes.

FMCSA provided a four-month preview period to give the public and industry ample opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes to FMCSA's SMS. Overall, more than 19,000 companies and 2,900 law enforcement personnel participated in the public preview.

“These SMS enhancements reflect FMCSA’s commitment to listening to our stakeholders and researching and analyzing enhancements in the name of safety,” said FMCSA Administrator Anne S. Ferro. “By strengthening our cornerstone enforcement program, we are continuing to raise the bar for truck and bus safety.”

Motor carriers are encouraged to check their safety data at SMS - Safety Measurement System to see how the SMS changes may have affected their SMS results.

full story
 
Wonder how many lawsuits this will spawn?

Glad to see they are adjusting it though.
 
Another government agency running rogue with no other entity available to reign it in.

Still think "less gov't" will work?
 
[MENTION=8411]DubbleD[/MENTION], are you saying "more" guv'mint is a better answer?
 
@DubbleD, are you saying "more" guv'mint is a better answer?


Not at all.

The problem is;

Government Mandates happen all the time but financing the mandate is forgotten. States continuously have to request funding for federally mandated programs that "The People" (i.e. Big Business) want and demand.

Now we have this agency called F.M.C.S.A. running it's own agenda for lack of oversight.

Why?

No money for an oversight committee and Repub's won't greenlight more gov't. So who's gonna stop LaHood? Just figures... the guys from IL. (Prolly taught "Buy a Senator Seat from ME" Blago how to run a tight ship.)
 
Maybe they won't "greenlight" more guv'mint because we can't afford it. I don't know whether you've noticed the national debt or not, but it's pretty big.

The oversight for agencies like this is supposed to be Congress itself, not yet another bureaucracy that will cost money we don't have.
 
Not at all.

The problem is;

Government Mandates happen all the time but financing the mandate is forgotten. States continuously have to request funding for federally mandated programs that "The People" (i.e. Big Business) want and demand.

Now we have this agency called F.M.C.S.A. running it's own agenda for lack of oversight.

Why?

No money for an oversight committee and Repub's won't greenlight more gov't. So who's gonna stop LaHood? Just figures... the guys from IL. (Prolly taught "Buy a Senator Seat from ME" Blago how to run a tight ship.)

So why not cut the funding back from the FMCSA? Once they have less funds they wont have the resources to try and test more reg's.

Oh and LachicagoHood is with the DOT......another agency that needs defunding.
 
Sounds like actual improvements are being made to the system, at least to me.

Do you think the changes are good or bad? And why?

And let's leave the political agendas for the political forum.
 
.....
The oversight for agencies like this is supposed to be Congress itself, not yet another bureaucracy that will cost money we don't have.

You probably noticed they're kinda busy with more 'portant things.

Look.. I don't have issue with GOOD change. Point by point however, is it really necessary for gov't to be involved in "speedometer readings, changing names to better group offenses or aligning severity ratings from paper to electronic"? Which begs the question, "who says the severity for log violation varies?"

Maybe state by state but .......

Where is the Benefit to safety here? Isn't that the sole role of the agency? Now states must spend time and money they don't have to re-write enforcement codes and THEN you know what happens.
 
FMCSA said:
Counting intermodal equipment violations found during drivers’ pre-trip inspections.

What the hell does that mean?

If a driver finds a problem during his pre-trip, how is it any of the feds' business, assuming he does as required & gets it fixed before heading out on the road? And was intermodal equipment previously exempt from inspections or something???





To answer [MENTION=2]Mike[/MENTION]'s question, no. I don't think it's a good thing, simply because:

DubbleD said:
Point by point however, is it really necessary for gov't to be involved in "speedometer readings, changing names to better group offenses or aligning severity ratings from paper to electronic"? Which begs the question, "who says the severity for log violation varies?"

Maybe state by state but .......

Where is the Benefit to safety here? Isn't that the sole role of the agency? Now states must spend time and money they don't have to re-write enforcement codes and THEN you know what happens.

They had years to figure all this crap out, long before it was implemented in 2010. They obviously didn't get it right the first time, and I'm beginning to think they never will.

I say they ought to just de-fund FMCSA and scrap that whole CSA program. It'll save everyone a hell of a lot of hassle & expense. They've done nothing to improve "safety". All they do is waste taxpayer money operating & perpetually changing these idiotic programs that do nothing for safety, but create hassles & needless expenses for the trucking industry.
 
Tracking violations is about safety. The adjustments being made are to adress problems they had that the original 13 states(?) Ran the pilot program. Just like changing the crash indicator so the" Not at Fault" can be removed.

Not sure what they meant on the Intermodal stuff Duck. I think it has to do with the regulation they passed awhile back about equipment providers being held more responsible and I think the pre-trip goes with the chassis. Don't we have a couple can haulers on here? They probably no more about it.

And political bs aside the oversight for the DOT and FMCSA is congress. They were directed to create CSA by congress, same as MAP 21(the new highway authorization bill) mandates EOBR's.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top