The chances are reasonably close to 100% that you've heard about the Comprehensive Safety Analysis (otherwise known as CSA 2010) and that it will be bringing some pretty drastic changes to the trucking industry in terms of on-the-road safety and how both drivers and carriers will be looked at for the foreseeable future.

The chances are reasonably close to 100% that you’ve heard about the Comprehensive Safety Analysis (otherwise known as CSA 2010) and that it will be bringing some pretty drastic changes to the trucking industry in terms of on-the-road safety and how both drivers and carriers will be looked at for the foreseeable future. The official document is roughly 100 pages, give or take, so we thought it a good idea to try to break its elements down into somewhat easily digestible pieces so that you’ve got a good primer on what’s going to be required beginning in June of this year.

We’ll be breaking this down into four parts. The first, represented here, will be a brief, general overview of the CSA and how it’s set up, as well as a little information about how it differs from the current safety measurement standards, which are known as SafeStat. The second part will deal specifically with how the standards are applied to drivers, the third will cover how they’re applied to carriers, and the fourth will be dedicated to carrier and driver reactions to the differences between SafeStat and CSA, as well as some talk from them on how they’ll balance following the standards with maintaining their earnings, profits, and productivity.

How CSA 2010 is structured

I wish that the structure of CSA were dead simple, but it isn’t. If anything, it’s a bit more complicated than the system that’s in place, though it is significantly different and measurably more comprehensive as well. There are four separate “phases” to CSA 2010, and each of them work together to assess the level of safety of drivers and carriers and correct issues where they might exist.

In a nutshell, the Safety Measurement System (SMS) portion of the CSA will measure carriers and drivers according to seven categories known as Behavioral Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories, which the FMCSA refers to as BASICS. These categories will be used in measuring the safety of both carriers and drivers. The seven BASICS are as follows, along with FMCSA’s definitions for each:

  • Driver fitness-“Operation of commercial motor vehicles by drivers who are unfit to operate them because they lack training, experience, or medical qualification.”
  • Unsafe driving-“Dangerous or careless operation of commercial motor vehicles.”
  • Fatigued driving-“Driving commercial motor vehicles while fatigued.”
  • Controlled substances/alcohol-“Operation of a commercial motor vehicle while impaired by or in possession of alcohol, illegal drugs, or any other substance that renders the driver incapable of safely operating a motor vehicle.”
  • Crash indicator-“Histories or patterns of high crash involvement, including frequency and severity. Miles carrier logs verses number of accidents.”
  • Vehicle Maintenance-“Failure of commercial motor vehicle due to improper or inadequate maintenance.”
  • Improper loading/Cargo securement-“Shifting loads, spilled or dropped cargo, and unsafe handling of hazardous materials. “

Once the measurement phase of CSA 2010 is complete, interventions will be made where necessary on an event-by-event basis. By “Where necessary,” I mean to say, “Times where you’re not meeting the BASIC standards set by FMCSA.” There are several levels existent in this intervention phase.

They are:

  • Warning letters
  • Targeted roadside inspections
  • Off-site investigations
  • On-site investigations
  • Comprehensive notice of claim/Settlement agreement(s)

The third phase of CSA 2010 is Safety Evaluation, which differs from measurement and intervention in that evaluation provides each carrier and driver with a grade or rating based on their BASIC scores. This evaluation, according to FMCSA, may or may not be tied to any current compliance reviews, and where there is data to be reviewed, these evaluations are to be updated every 30 days. There are three ratings in these evaluations, and it’s reasonably easy to figure out what each means:
Continue to operate; Marginal (these cases are where the above-noted interventions begin); Unfit.

The fourth phase of CSA 2010, though it’s not really a phase, per se, refers to COMPASS, which will track and regulate the information flow of CSA 2010. In essence, it’s a continuance of FMCSA’s IT modernization intiative, and they’re extending it to CSA 2010. In a nutshell, COMPASS is slated to receive safety data, link that data to the proper entities, validate it, and provide the mechanisms for correcting data, as well as providing support for the intervention process of CSA 2010.

Why?

It’s a simple question, but it’s a good one: why is FMCSA doing this now as opposed to ten years from now, or even ten years ago? As far as I can tell, there are two primary elements to the answer to this question. The first is that CSA 2010 is intended to be a better, more efficient use of FMCSA’s resources. With it, they’ll be able to more easily track and regulate the on-road safety of carriers and drivers. The second is that the safety assessment, measurement, and intervention process is much updated and now better reflects the world we’re now living in from top to bottom.

So, what’s the real difference?

So, what we know at this point is that FMCSA is changing to a new safety measurement system and what that new system will look like. But what are the real differences from the old system (SafeStat) and the new one? http://www.csa2010.com lists the differences as such:
SMS is organized by seven specific behaviors (BASICs) while SafeStat is organized into four general Safety Evaluation Areas (SEAs). SMS identifies safety problems in the same structure in which CSA 2010 addresses those problems, while SafeStat prioritizes carriers for a compliance review. SMS uses all safety-based inspection violations while SafeStat uses only out-of-service violations and selected moving violations. SMS uses risk-based violation weightings while SafeStat does not. SMS impacts the safety fitness determination of an entity while SafeStat has no impact on an entity’s safety fitness rating. SMS assesses individual drivers and carriers, while SafeStat assesses only carriers.
So there you have it…

This is, of course, just a quick overview of what you’ll be able to expect with the implementation of CSA 2010. In the next couple installments, we’ll take a closer look at how it will affect drivers and carriers, and we’ll get our hands a little more dirty to that end. In the meantime, if you’ve got any questions about CSA 2010 or would like to learn a bit more about the coming changes, check out http://www.csa2010.com , where you’ll be able to find quick summaries and easily-accessible information about the CSA and its guidelines.