SafeStat

Motor Carrier

  ----------------------- ------------- -------------------- --------------
  Safe                    ty            Stat                 us

  ----------------------- ------------- -------------------- --------------

Measurement System

** **

**Methodology: Version 8.6**

**January 2004**

![](media/image1.wmf){width="6.0in" height="3.1979166666666665in"}

  ------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
  **Prepared for:**               **Prepared by:**

  **Federal Motor Carrier Safety  **John A. Volpe National Transportation
  Administration**                Systems Center**

  **400 Seventh Street SW**       **Motor Carrier Safety Assessment
                                  Division, DTS-47**

  **Washington, D.C. 20590**      **Kendall Square**

                                  **Cambridge, MA 02142**
  ------------------------------- ---------------------------------------

#  {#section .unnumbered}

# Preface  {#preface .unnumbered}

This report documents the Motor Carrier Safety Status (SafeStat)
Measurement System analysis methodology developed to support an improved
process for motor carrier safety fitness determination for the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). It provides a complete
description of the SafeStat methodology as of January 2004 (SafeStat
Version 8.6).

The concept of SafeStat originated from a research project at the U.S.
Department of Transportation's John A. Volpe National Transportation
Systems Center (the Volpe Center) in Cambridge, MA, under a project plan
agreement with the FMCSA. The goal of the project was to define an
improved process for motor carrier safety fitness determination.
SafeStat was defined as one of the major components of a proposed
improved process.

SafeStat was first implemented as part of the federal/state Performance
& Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM) (formerly the
Commercial Vehicle Information System (CVIS)) program, which was
authorized under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
(ISTEA) of 1991. PRISM provided the opportunity to develop and test the
SafeStat concept, and satisfy that program's requirement for a motor
carrier safety fitness test. The Volpe Center designed, developed and
implemented SafeStat for PRISM in a succession of improved versions.
Since 1995 SafeStat has been implemented in approximately six-month
cycles to identify carriers for PRISM. With each cycle of PRISM, the
algorithm has been revised and improved, thereby leading to successive,
improved versions of SafeStat. Also, starting in March 1997, concurrent
with the fourth cycle of PRISM and continuing with succeeding SafeStat
runs, the FMCSA implemented SafeStat nationally to prioritize motor
carriers for on-site compliance reviews (CRs). Since December 1999,
SafeStat results have been made available to the public via the Internet
on the Analysis & Information (A&I) website at
[**www.ai.volpe.dot.gov/**](http://www.ai.volpe.dot.gov/on). This
document presents the methodology for the latest version of SafeStat,
Version 8.6, implemented in January 2004. Improvements made in Version
8.6 and earlier versions are shown in Appendix C. Further improvements
may be defined in future versions of SafeStat.

Ongoing evaluation of the SafeStat methodology has been provided by the
Volpe Center, the PRISM Federal/State Working Groups, the motor carrier
industry, and other stakeholders in the process. A formal evaluation of
SafeStat for the CVIS/PRISM program has been conducted by the Volpe
Center with the assistance of Dr. Thomas Corsi, Transportation and
Logistics Department, Robert Smith School of Business, at the University
of Maryland. An evaluation of SafeStat effectiveness in identifying
carriers most likely to have crashes was also performed and is described
in Chapter 7 of this document.

The Volpe Center technical project manager is Donald Wright of the Motor
Carrier Safety Assessment Division in the Office of System and Economic
Assessment. The design and analysis leading to the SafeStat methodology
was performed by Donald Wright and David Madsen. Systems development
support is being led by Dennis Piccolo of EG&G Services, under contract
to the Volpe Center. Implementation of SafeStat at the FMCSA is under
the direction of Linda Giles of the Information Systems Division, with
support from Allan Day of Dayco Systems, Inc. Technical writer Robert
Marville of EG&G Services assisted in the preparation of this report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

**[1 Introduction]{.smallcaps}**

1.1 SafeStat Concept 1-2

1.2 SafeStat Roles 1-2

1.3 Organization of this Report 1-3

2 SafeStat Design Overview

2.1 Computation of the SEA Values 2-2

2.2 SafeStat Score 2-4

2.3 Categories 2-5

2.4 Weighting 2-5

2.5 Percentile Ranking 2-6

3 Accident SEA

3.1 Accident Involvement Indicator (AII) 3-1

3.2 Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI) 3-4

3.3 Calculation of the Accident SEA Value 3-5

4 Driver SEA

4.1 Driver Inspections Indicator (DII) 4-1

4.2 Driver Review Indicator (DRI) 4-4

4.3 Moving Violations Indicator (MVI) 4-5

4.4 Calculation of the Driver SEA Value 4-7

5 Vehicle SEA

5.1 Vehicle Inspections Indicator (VII) 5-1

5.2 Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI) 5-4

5.3 Calculation of the Vehicle SEA Value 5-4

6 Safety Management SEA

6.1 Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) 6-1

6.2 HM Review Indicator (HMRI) 6-3

6.3 Safety Management Review Indicator (SMRI) 6-3

6.4 HM Inspections Indicator (HMII) 6-3

6.5 Calculation of the Safety Management SEA Value 6-4

7 SafeStat Evaluation

7.1 Description of the Effectiveness Study 7-1

7.2 Results 7-3

7.3 Conclusions 7-5

Appendix

**[A SafeStat Reports]{.smallcaps}**

A.1 Field Definitions for the *SafeStat Analysis Report* A-2

A.2 Field Definitions for the *SafeStat Analysis Report \-- Supplemental
List* A-5

A.3 Field Definitions for the *Motor Carrier Safety Record Report* A-8

Appendix B Calculating Review Measures

Appendix C Improvements for SafeStat C.1 Changes for Version 8.6
(January 2004) C-1

C.2 Changes for Version 8.5 (January 2003) C-1

C.3 Changes for Version 8.4 (March 2002) C-1

C.4 Changes for Version 8.3 (September 2001) C-2

C.5 Changes for Version 8.2 (March 2001) C-2

C.6 Changes for Version 8.1 (September 2000) C-2

C.7 Changes for Version 8 (March 2000) C-3

C.8 Changes for Version 7 (September 1999) C-5

C.9 Changes for Version 6.1 (September 1998) C-6

C.10 Changes for Version 6 (March 1998) C-6

C.11 Changes for Version 5 (September 1997) C-7

**LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS**

Figures

2-1. SafeStat Score Computational Hierarchy. 2-1

2-2. Generic SEA Value Computational Hierarchy 2-2

2-3. SafeStat Score Calculation 2-5

3-1. Accident SEA Value Computational Hierarchy 3-1

4-1. Driver SEA Value Computational Hierarchy 4-1

5-1. Vehicle SEA Value Computational Hierarchy 5-1

6-1. Safety Management SEA Value Computational Hierarchy 6-1

7-1. Effectiveness Analysis Timeline 7-2

7-2. Crash Rates for the Three Groups of Carriers 7-3

Tables

2-1. CFR Parts Reviewed During a Compliance Review 2-3

2-2. SafeStat Categories 2-5

2-3. SafeStat Categories for Carriers with no SafeStat Score 2-5

7-1. Post-Selection Crash Rates 7-3

7-2. Crash Rates of Carriers with and without High SEAs 7-4

#  Glossary  {#glossary .unnumbered}

  ------------ ----------------------------------------------------------
  AII          Accident Involvement Indicator

  AIM          Accident Involvement Measure

  CR           Compliance Review

  CVIS         Commercial Vehicle Information System

  DII          Driver Inspections Indicator

  DIM          Driver Inspections Measure

  DRI          Driver Review Indicator

  DRM          Driver Review Measure

  DOT          Department of Transportation

  EHI          Enforcement History Indicator

  ESM          Enforcement Severity Measure

  FMCSA        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

  FMCSR        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

  HAZMAT       Hazardous Materials

  HMR          Hazardous Material Regulations

  HMRI         Hazardous Material Review Indicator

  HMRM         Hazardous Material Review Measure

  ISS          Inspection Selection System

  ISTEA        Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

  JOOM         Jumping Out-of-Service Multiplier

  MCMIS        Motor Carrier Management Information System

  MCSAP        Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program

  MCSIP        Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Process

  MVI          Moving Violation Indicator

  MVM          Moving Violations Measure

  NGA          National Governors Association

  OOS          Out-of- Service

  PCAP         Progressive Compliance Assurance Program

  PRISM        Performance & Registration Information Systems Management

  PU           Power Unit

  RC           Recordable Crash

  RAI          Recordable Accident Indicator

  RAR          Recordable Accident Rate

  RSPA         Research and Special Programs Administration

  SafeStat     Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement System

  SEA          Safety Evaluation Area

  SMRI         Safety Management Review Indicator

  SMRM         Safety Management Review Measure

  VII          Vehicle Inspection Indicator

  VIM          Vehicle Inspection Measure

  VMT          Vehicle Miles Traveled

  VRI          Vehicle Review Indicator

  VRM          Vehicle Review Measure
  ------------ ----------------------------------------------------------

# [  ]{.underline}Number range chapterNumber range figsNumber range tablesIntroduction

In 1993, the U.S. Department of Transportation's Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center (the Volpe Center) began a multi-year
research effort to define and propose an improved process to assess
motor carrier safety fitness for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA). The objectives of the research project included
the development of a single methodology of measuring motor carrier
safety fitness and the definition of a comprehensive process to improve
the safety status of unsafe carriers. The intent of the FMCSA was to
better utilize the improved safety data reporting and information
systems technologies not previously available and to take advantage of
prior Volpe Center experience in developing safety measurement
methodologies for regulated carriers.

As part of this research effort, many ideas, concerns, and suggestions
were collected in a series of stakeholder meetings and direct
discussions with individuals and organizations that are affected by
and/or have an interest in the process. These stakeholders included
motor carriers, the insurance industry, FMCSA field staff, state
enforcement agencies, and Canadian federal and provincial officials. At
these meetings and discussions, stakeholders were asked to describe the
criteria they considered to be most important in assessing motor carrier
safety fitness, the strengths and weaknesses of the safety-fitness
determination process that was in use by the FMCSA, and their reactions
to the emerging Volpe Center proposals for an improved process,[^1]
which included an automated safety performance monitoring system.

In defining the improved process and eventual SafeStat methodology, the
shortcomings in the safety-fitness determination process in use at the
time were addressed. Several of these limitations were the result of
determining safety fitness and carrier safety ratings based solely upon
one-time on-site safety audits, called compliance reviews (CRs), which
used a three-tiered safety rating scheme (Satisfactory, Conditional, and
Unsatisfactory). These limitations included:

-   [Lack of Coverage of the Motor Carrier Population]{.underline} -
    Only reviewed carriers are issued safety ratings. Compliance reviews
    are performed on a small percentage of the motor carrier population
    (roughly 10,000 reviews annually out of over 500,000 carriers).

-   [Obsolete Safety Ratings]{.underline} -- The safety rating remains
    in effect until another compliance review is performed, regardless
    of the carrier's safety performance after the compliance review was
    conducted.

-   [Low Performance Data Utilization]{.underline} - The process was
    compliance-oriented and had limited or no use of data on
    state-reported crashes, roadside inspections, enforcement actions,
    or moving violations.

-   [Labor Intensive Manual Process]{.underline} - Compliance reviews
    often require several days to conduct, as opposed to a
    computer-performed analysis based on an algorithm and databases of
    safety information.

## SafeStat Concept

As a result of the research into designing an improved process for
safety fitness determination, SafeStat was conceived. SafeStat (short
for Motor Carrier [Safe]{.underline}ty [Stat]{.underline}us Measurement
System) is an automated, data-driven analysis system designed to
incorporate current on-road safety performance information on all
carriers with on-site compliance review and enforcement history
information, when available, in order to measure relative motor carrier
safety fitness. The system allows the FMCSA to continuously quantify and
monitor changes in the safety status of motor carriers, especially
unsafe carriers. This allows FMCSA enforcement and education programs to
efficiently allocate resources to carriers that pose the highest risk of
crash involvement.[^2]

The concept of SafeStat departs significantly from the previous approach
employed by the FMCSA, which relied on the on-site compliance review to
provide the only means of assessing safety fitness. This previous
approach incorporated only the limited amount of safety performance data
that was available at the time of the on-site review with the on‑site
review findings, to generate one of three safety ratings. This rating
did not change until another compliance review was performed, regardless
of safety performance after the compliance review. Conversely, SafeStat
accesses all current safety performance data to continuously assess the
safety status of carriers, rather than limiting the use of safety
performance data to selected data that are available at the time of a
compliance review. SafeStat treats the results from a compliance review
as a source of information (albeit a very important source), but
emphasizes safety performance data (e.g., crashes, roadside inspections,
enforcement actions, etc.) to assess a carrier\'s overall safety status.

SafeStat has been designed to maximize the use of state-reported data
and centralized federal data systems. SafeStat is also designed to be
improved through version upgrades that can accommodate additional data
sources and indicators as they are developed. The expansion of SafeStat
to include these additional data sources will allow the coverage of more
carriers and strengthen the results for the carriers covered.

## SafeStat Roles

The primary use of SafeStat is to identify and prioritize carriers for
FMCSA and state safety improvement and enforcement programs. Currently,
SafeStat plays an important role in determining motor carrier safety
fitness in several FMCSA/state programs including the Performance &
Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM), National CR
Prioritization, and the roadside Inspection Selection System (ISS).

-   **Performance & Registration Information Systems Management
    (PRISM)**

    PRISM is a federal/state program that ties motor carrier safety
    fitness to state commercial vehicle registration. PRISM places
    carriers with poor safety performance into a sanctioning process
    that can ultimately lead to unsafe carriers being placed out of
    service with their commercial vehicle registrations suspended or
    revoked. SafeStat is currently being used to identify poorly
    performing carriers and monitor their status while in the program.
    Since PRISM has been operational, it has relied on SafeStat and
    acted as a \"laboratory\" in which to improve the SafeStat
    methodology through successive versions corresponding to the PRISM
    cycles.

-   **National Prioritization for FMCSA Compliance Reviews**

    In the FMCSA's current effort to become a more data- and
    analysis-driven organization focusing on performance, the FMCSA is
    using SafeStat biannually to identify and prioritize carriers to
    receive compliance reviews. Starting in March 1997, concurrent with
    the PRISM cycle, the FMCSA has used SafeStat to identify and
    prioritize carriers for compliance reviews nationwide.

-   **Inspection Selection System (ISS)**

    The ISS was designed to aid roadside inspectors by recommending
    driver and vehicles for inspections based primarily on the safety
    status of the responsible motor carrier. Therefore, the main goal of
    the ISS is to prioritize and target carriers with poor safety
    performance. SafeStat provides the ISS with the safety status
    information needed to achieve this goal.

##### Potential Roles {#potential-roles .unnumbered}

Potential additional applications of SafeStat by the FMCSA include
carrier safety rating and unfit determination. Also, SafeStat can
provide focused safety performance assessments of specific carrier
groups, such as hazardous material carriers, new entrant carriers, and
foreign carriers operating in the U.S. Additional uses include carrier
safety screening and monitoring by other Federal agencies that employ
motor carriers, such as the Department of Energy (transport of
radioactive hazardous materials) and the Department of Defense
(transport of munitions and other goods).

##### Other Roles {#other-roles .unnumbered}

SafeStat results are available to the public via the Internet on the
Analysis & Information (A&I) website at **www.ai.volpe.dot.gov**. Easy
access to SafeStat results encourages improvements in motor carrier
safety by:

-   Providing carriers (that have sufficient safety data) with a
    quantified measure of their current relative safety status broken
    out by Safety Evaluation Area (SEA). This breakdown will enable
    carriers to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the their own
    safety status.

-   Assisting firms that are involved with carriers (e.g., shippers,
    insurers, and lessors, etc.) in making certain business decisions in
    which the safety status of a carrier is a factor.

##  Organization of this Report

The remainder of this report describes the design of SafeStat and
documents the algorithms used in the SafeStat methodology. It is divided
into the following sections:

-   **Section 2** provides an overview of SafeStat methodology. It
    describes the overall design of SafeStat, including the four Safety
    Evaluation Areas (SEAs) and the computational logic used to combine
    the SEA values and arrive at the SafeStat score.

-   **Sections 3 through 6** detail the specific algorithms used in the
    calculations in each of the four SEAs.

-   **Section 7** describes an evaluation of SafeStat.

-   **Appendix A** contains examples of lists generated by SafeStat.

-   **Appendix B** provides details on calculating measures from
    violations of acute and critical regulations in compliance reviews.

-   **Appendix C** shows the incremental improvements made to SafeStat.

# Number range figsNumber range tables[  ]{.underline}SafeStat Design Overview

SafeStat is designed to maximize the use of available federal motor
carrier safety data to measure the *relative* safety status of motor
carriers overall and in four Safety Evaluation Areas (SEAs). The four
analytical SEAs are:

-   Accident SEA

-   Driver SEA

-   Vehicle SEA

-   Safety Management SEA

All four evaluation areas serve to measure the carrier\'s past safety
performance and assess its risk of having future crashes (See Section 7,
SafeStat Evaluation, for a discussion of SafeStat\'s ability to identify
carriers with higher than normal crash risk). Carriers with the worst
records (being in the worst quartile in two or more SEAs) are given
SafeStat scores, which represent the carriers\' overall safety statuses
in relation to their peers.

The four-SEA framework evaluates the SEA-specific strengths and
weaknesses of each individual carrier's safety performance and
compliance. This design also provides the flexibility to assign higher
or lower relative emphasis (weight) to each SEA. For example, since
accident history and driver factors have emerged as the SEAs most
associated with future crash risk, these SEAs are given additional
weight in determining a carrier\'s overall safety status. In addition to
producing an overall safety fitness status, SafeStat ranks carriers in
each SEA to focus FMCSA and state safety improvement efforts. Figure 2-1
shows the computational hierarchy used to calculate a SafeStat score.

![](media/image2.wmf){width="5.99375in" height="3.4458333333333333in"}

**Figure 2‑1. SafeStat Score Computational Hierarchy**

## Computation of the SEA Values

For each SEA, SafeStat proceeds from data to the SEA value in the
following stages:

-   **Data** \-- Both safety-event (such as crashes and safety
    regulation violations) and carrier-descriptive data are at the
    foundation of the computation hierarchy. Carrier-descriptive data,
    such as the number of power units or number of roadside inspections,
    are used to normalize a carrier\'s safety-event data.

-   **Measures** \-- The data are used to calculate weighted, normalized
    safety measures, each of which summarizes some aspect of a
    carrier\'s performance in a single number.

-   **Indicators** \-- Carrier measures are ranked relative to those of
    other carriers, producing indicator percentiles of the carrier\'s
    standing within the peer group, and allowing direct comparison of a
    carrier with others in the group.

-   **SEA Values** -- Related indicators are used to compute SEA values,
    which are also percentiles assessing the carrier\'s performance in
    the four SEAs.

Figure 2-2 shows a hypothetical computational hierarchy used to
calculate a SEA value. The SEA value shown here is based on three
indicators, A, B, and C. Indicators A, B, and C are based on measures
derived from data sources A, B, and C. Sections 3 through 6 of this
document contain the specific diagrams for each of the four SEAs,
followed by discussions of the computations for each measure and
indicator within the SEA.

![](media/image3.wmf){width="4.334027777777778in"
height="3.2506944444444446in"}

**Figure 2-2****. Generic SEA Value Computational Hierarchy**

#####  {#section-1 .unnumbered}

##### Data {#data .unnumbered}

SafeStat currently uses five sources of data. The first four sources
listed below provide the carrier\'s actual performance and compliance
data, while census data are used only for identification and
normalization of safety-event data.

-   **State-Reported Commercial Vehicle Crash Data** provide information
    on [reportable]{.underline} crash involvement from crash reports
    filled out by state and local police officials according to the
    standards prescribed by the National Governors' Association (NGA).

-   **Compliance Reviews** **(CRs)** performed on-site by FMCSA safety
    investigators and their state counterparts determine carriers'
    compliance with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR)
    (and compliance with Hazardous Material Regulations (HMR), for HM
    carriers). The number and extent of violations of acute, critical,
    and severe regulations discovered are used by SafeStat in the three
    SEAs to which they are related.[^3] Table 2-1 shows the parts of the
    FMCSR used in conducting compliance reviews.

**Table 2‑1**. CFR Parts Reviewed During a Compliance Review

  ------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------
  ***Part***   ***Title***

  382          Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing

  383          Commercial Driver's License Standards

  387          Minimum Levels of Financial Responsibility for Motor Carriers
               (Insurance)

  390          General

  391          Qualifications of Drivers

  392          Driving of Commercial Motor Vehicles

  393          Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operations

  395          Hours of Service for Drivers

  396          Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance

  397          Transportation of Hazardous Materials; Driving and Parking Rules
  ------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------

The safety investigators also obtain data (number of
[recordable]{.underline} crashes and number of vehicle-miles traveled in
the 12 months preceding the review) to compute a crash rate, which is
used to compute the Recordable Accident Indicator in the Accident SEA.

-   **Closed Enforcement Cases** result in penalties (e.g., fines,
    sanctions) based on major violations of the FMCSR and/or HMR. These
    violations are discovered during CRs and terminal audits. Closed
    enforcement case history may show a pattern of violations indicating
    a carrier management's serious lack of commitment to safety, and is
    used in the Safety Management SEA.

-   **Roadside Inspections** performed by Motor Carrier Safety
    Assistance Program (MCSAP) inspectors on individual commercial motor
    vehicles and drivers provide data on FMCSR and HMR violations.
    Serious violations result in driver or vehicle out‑of‑service (OOS)
    orders, which must be corrected before the affected driver or
    vehicle can return to service. Drivers that ignore existing OOS
    orders (returning to service without taking the proper corrective
    action) are issued OOS order violations. [Moving
    violations]{.underline} also may be recorded in conjunction with a
    roadside inspection. These data are the basis for measures and
    indicators in the Driver and Vehicle SEAs.

-   **Motor Carrier Census Data** (identification, size, operations) are
    initially gathered when carriers obtain USDOT Numbers. The FMCSA
    records this information (including number of power units, number of
    drivers, types of cargo carried) in the Motor Carrier Management
    Information System (MCMIS) and updates data during compliance
    reviews, during commercial vehicle registration in states
    participating in PRISM, and upon request of the motor carrier.

***Measures***

SafeStat uses normalized safety-event data to measure safety compliance
and performance of individual carriers. It uses carrier-descriptive
data, such as the number of power units or number of roadside
inspections, to normalize a carrier\'s safety-event data by carrier size
or amount of exposure. For example, when using crash data, the crash
[rate]{.underline} takes into account differences in exposure, making it
possible to compare the safety of carriers relative to each other,
rather than just comparing numbers of events.

***Indicators***

SafeStat uses the measures to calculate indicators. Whereas a measure,
such as a recordable crash rate of .XXX crashes per million
vehicle-miles traveled, quantifies the performance of a carrier, an
indicator ranks that performance relative to the carrier's peers.
SafeStat ranks each carrier\'s measure relative to its peers on a
percentile (0-100) scale. This percentile number is assigned to the
indicator.

Additional decision rules addressing data-sufficiency issues are applied
before an indicator is assigned a percentile number. This ensures that
the measure is based on enough data so that the corresponding indicator
is statistically meaningful in terms of carrier safety status. For
example, a minimum number of roadside inspections is required before an
inspection indicator can be used.

***SEA Values***

Indicators within the same SEA are combined to generate a SEA value. For
each SEA, values ranging from 0-100 are determined for all carriers with
sufficient safety data related to that SEA. Each carrier\'s SEA value
approximates the carrier\'s percentile rank relative to all other
carriers with sufficient data to be assessed within that same SEA. By
using the percentile rank for each SEA, SafeStat avoids using arbitrary
predetermined levels or scoring thresholds, while providing an easily
understandable value for each SEA.

The higher a carrier\'s SEA value, the worse its safety status.
Therefore, an Accident SEA Value of 80 indicates that approximately 80%
of the carrier population with sufficient data had better safety
performance than that carrier with respect to crashes and 20% had worse.

## SafeStat Score

A primary purpose of SafeStat is to identify carriers for safety
improvement programs. For this purpose, SafeStat does not give overall
SafeStat scores to all carriers. To obtain a SafeStat score, a carrier
must be deficient in at least two different SEAs. A SEA with a value
from 75 to 100 is defined as deficient. This range approximates the
worst 25% of the carriers assessed within a particular SEA. Therefore,
SafeStat requires a \"critical mass\" of poor performance data before a
carrier is scored.

Carriers that meet the criterion of two deficient SEAs are given a
SafeStat score that is equal to the sum of the deficient SEA values for
the Vehicle and Safety Management SEAs, plus 2 times the deficient
Accident SEA Value plus 1.5 times the deficient Driver SEA value. SEA
values that are less than 75 are not used by SafeStat in calculating the
SafeStat score. Figure 2-3 shows this calculation in diagram form.
SafeStat ranks SafeStat-scored carriers in descending order by their
score, starting with the carrier with the worst safety status (i.e., the
highest SafeStat score). The SafeStat score is only relevant to
identifying and ranking carriers with safety deficiencies.

![](media/image4.wmf){width="5.924305555555556in"
height="1.7993055555555555in"}

**Figure 2-3. SafeStat Score Calculation**

## Categories

Categories also pertain to carriers with safety deficiencies. SafeStat
assigns each scored carrier into Category A, B, or C, as defined by the
SafeStat score ranges shown in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2. SafeStat Categories

+----------+--------------+--------------------------------------------+
| ***Cat   | ***SafeStat  | ***Includes SEA Values of 75 or Higher***  |
| egory*** | Score        |                                            |
|          | Range***     |                                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------------------------------------+
| ***A***  | > [\>]{.u    | > All 4 SEAs                               |
|          | nderline}350 | >                                          |
|          | > to         | > 3 SEAs that result in a Weighted Score   |
|          | > [\<]{.u    | > of 350 or more                           |
|          | nderline}550 |                                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------------------------------------+
| ***B***  | > [\>]{.u    | > 3 SEAs that result in a Weighted Score   |
|          | nderline}225 | > of less than 350                         |
|          | > to \<350   | >                                          |
|          |              | > 2 SEAs that result in a Weighted Score   |
|          |              | > of 225 or more                           |
+----------+--------------+--------------------------------------------+
| ***C***  | > [\>]{.u    | > 2 SEAs that result in a Weighted Score   |
|          | nderline}150 | > of less than 225                         |
|          | > to \<225   |                                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------------------------------------+

SafeStat computes an overall SafeStat score [only for carriers with poor
safety status]{.underline} so that these carriers can be identified and
monitored for various safety programs.

SafeStat also assigns categories to carriers that did not receive a
SafeStat score, but had enough information on bad safety events to be
evaluated as deficient in one SEA. These categories, D to G, help to
prioritize carriers for roadside inspections in the ISS. Carriers that
are deficient in one SEA, either Accident, Driver, Vehicle, or Safety
Management, are ranked in Categories D, E, F, and G, respectively, as
shown in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3. SafeStat Categories for Carriers with no SafeStat Scores

+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| ***Single  | ***Specific SEA***       | ***SEA Value***             |
| SEA        |                          |                             |
| C          |                          |                             |
| ategory*** |                          |                             |
+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| ***D***    | > Accident               | 75-100                      |
+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| ***E***    | > Driver                 | 75-100                      |
+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| ***F***    | > Vehicle                | 75-100                      |
+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| ***G***    | > Safety Management      | 75-100                      |
+------------+--------------------------+-----------------------------+

## Weighting

SafeStat uses weighting at various stages to improve the accuracy of the
safety status assessment. As previously mentioned, deficient Accident
SEA and Driver SEA Values are given more weight in the SafeStat Score
calculation than deficient Vehicle and Safety Management SEA Values,
because problems with accident history and driver factors were shown to
be most closely associated with future crash risk. (See Chapter 7 for
details). Weighting is also applied to the data to account for the
timeliness and severity of certain safety events.

***Time Weighting***

SafeStat applies time weighting to all of the safety-event data; more
importance is given to the results of recent safety events than to the
results of older safety events. For instance, the results of a vehicle
roadside inspection performed within the past six months have three
times more influence on a carrier's safety status in the Vehicle SEA
than a vehicle inspection that was done two years ago. Safety events
\"age to zero\" after thirty months.

Safety events must occur within certain periods of time (depending on
the source data) to be considered in the SafeStat calculation. Each time
window moves with each calculation of SafeStat. For example, the results
of a compliance review (CR) have a time window of 18 months, which means
that SafeStat uses the results only if the compliance review occurred
within the last 18 months. If a carrier has a compliance review that is
17 months old, SafeStat will use it in its calculations. When SafeStat
is run six months later, the compliance review will then be 23 months
old, five months beyond the time window of 18 months, and therefore,
will no longer be used by SafeStat due to its age. Time-weighting
stresses the outcome of more recent safety events, which are more
relevant to current safety status, and phases out safety-event data as
they become older and less likely to reflect current safety status. This
allows a carrier to reflect improvement in subsequent SafeStat runs if
there are fewer or no new adverse safety events.

***Severity Weighting***

Where appropriate, safety measures are severity weighted. For example,
the Accident SEA assigns a weight of 1, or 2 to a crash, depending on
whether it involved (1) property damage only (towed vehicle), or (2)
injuries or fatalities. Additional weight is placed on a reportable
crash if hazardous material is released.

## Percentile Ranking

An important objective of the SafeStat calculations is to compare the
performance of individual carriers to their peers, producing an
easily-understood measure of performance not tied to arbitrary point
values. Therefore indicators and SEA values are expressed as percentiles
reflecting the carrier's status relative to others. For instance, the
Driver Review Indicator is produced by calculating the Driver Review
Measure for all carriers that had recent reviews, ranking them in
ascending order, and giving each carrier a corresponding percentile
rating from 0 to 100. The highest numbers indicate the worst performers
among all carriers for which sufficient data are available.

# [  ]{.underline}Number range figsNumber range tablesAccident SEA

![](media/image5.wmf){width="4.195138888888889in"
height="2.942361111111111in"}The Accident SEA Value reflects a carrier's
crash experience relative to its peers. The Accident SEA Value is based
on the Accident Involvement Indicator (AII) and the Recordable Accident
Indicator (RAI). The AII uses measures derived from state-reported crash
data normalized by power unit data from the Motor Carrier Census. The
RAI uses measures based on recordable crash and annual vehicle-miles
traveled (VMT) data gathered at the most recent compliance review. The
sections that follow present the specific computations for each measure,
indicator, and the Accident SEA Value. Figure 3-1 shows the
computational hierarchy used to calculate an Accident SEA Value.

**Figure 3-1****. Accident SEA Value Computational Hierarchy **

##  Accident Involvement Indicator (AII)

SafeStat uses the state-reported crash data and Motor Carrier Census
power unit (trucks, tractors, hazardous material tank trucks, motor
coaches, and school buses) data to calculate the Accident Involvement
Measure (AIM) for all carriers. SafeStat uses only vehicles involved in
crashes that have occurred within the last 30 months and time weights
the data to give more relevance to recent crashes than to older crashes.
It also weights individual crashes based upon the consequences of the
crash (i.e., vehicle towed, injury, fatality, and release of hazardous
material). SafeStat then normalizes this weighted crash information by
the number of power units to obtain the AIM. Carriers with similar
numbers of state-reported crashes are grouped, compared to one another
by their AIMs, and ranked on a percentile basis. SafeStat assigns a
percentile number (from 0-100) to the AII of each carrier, based on that
rank. A carrier must have two or more crashes to have the potential to
receive a deficient AII, i.e., 75 or higher.

##### State-Reported (Reportable) Crash Data  {#state-reported-reportable-crash-data .unnumbered}

States provide a crash report for each commercial motor vehicle involved
in a crash that meets the reportable crash standard. A reportable crash
involves a vehicle being towed from the scene, or an injury or fatality.
Each crash report is counted as a crash by SafeStat. SafeStat uses the
following data elements from the reportable crash data to calculate the
carrier's AII:

-   Date of the crash

-   Injuries

-   Fatalities

-   Release of Hazardous Material (HM)

##### Census Power Unit Data {#census-power-unit-data .unnumbered}

SafeStat computes the AII using state-reported crash data, which are
normalized by the number of owned, term-leased, and trip-leased power
units (trucks, tractors, hazardous-material tank trucks, motor coaches,
and school buses) contained in the Census data. The primary source of
power unit information in the Census is Forms MCS‑150 and MCS‑151.
Carriers are required to update their MCS-150 information biennially.
When the number of power units for a carrier is suspect, specific
state/federal organizations are notified to obtain the most accurate
value.

##### Accident Involvement Measure (AIM) {#accident-involvement-measure-aim .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the reportable crash data that fall within three time
windows. It time weights the data to give more relevance to recent crash
involvement than to older crash involvement. It also weights individual
crashes based upon the consequences of the crash (i.e., vehicle towed,
injury, fatality, and release of hazardous material). SafeStat combines
these two weighting aspects into a quantity called the Total
Consequence/Time Weighted Crashes (TCTWC). SafeStat calculates the AIM
by dividing the TCTWC by the average number of power units (PU) for the
carrier to normalize the measure. The basic equation for the AIM is
shown below. The steps that follow the equation detail SafeStat's
calculation of the AIM.

  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
                                        **AIM = TCTWC / PU**

  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------

A.  Begin to compute the TCTWC by aggregating each carrier's reportable
    crash data into three time periods based on the age of each crash: 0
    to 6 months, 7 to 18 months, and 19 to 30 months.

![](media/image6.wmf){width="4.084027777777778in"
height="1.8916666666666666in"}

B. Within each time period, weight each crash for severity by assigning
a severity score of 1 for crashes which involved a vehicle being towed
(but no injuries), and 2 for crashes which involved injury or fatality.
Add 1 to the severity score if a carrier vehicle released hazardous
materials.

![](media/image7.wmf){width="2.854861111111111in" height="0.875in"}

![](media/image8.wmf){width="3.2645833333333334in"
height="1.4381944444444446in"}C. Within each time period, sum the
severity scores to get a total crash severity score for the time period:

D. Time weight the severity scores for the three time periods so that
the most recent crashes receive the most weight, then sum the weighted
scores for all three periods to produce the Total
Consequence/Time-Weighted Crashes (TCTWC).

![](media/image9.wmf){width="4.43125in" height="1.6604166666666667in"}

> E. Calculate the average number of PUs over 30-month time frame by
> determining the number of PUs at the end of each of the three time
> periods.
>
> ![](media/image10.wmf){width="3.948611111111111in"
> height="1.2229166666666667in"}
>
> F. Compute AIM by dividing the TCTWC by the average number of PUs
> (trucks and buses owned, term-leased, and trip-leased).

![](media/image11.wmf){width="3.4034722222222222in"
height="1.570138888888889in"}

##### Calculation of the Accident Involvement Indicator (AII) {#calculation-of-the-accident-involvement-indicator-aii .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the Accident Involvement Measure (AIM) to calculate the
Accident Involvement Indicator (AII). The following steps detail
SafeStat's calculation of AII.

A. Determine the total number of each carrier's vehicles involved in
crashes over the last 30 months (no time or severity weighting), and
place each carrier into one of the groups below:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| # *Group* {#group .unnumbered}  | # *Number of Vehicles Invo         |
|                                 | vlved in State-Reported Crashes* { |
|                                 | #number-of-vehicles-invovlved-in-s |
|                                 | tate-reported-crashes .unnumbered} |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 0                               | 0                                  |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 1                               | 1                                  |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2                               | 2-3                                |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 3                               | 4-8                                |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 4                               | 9-20                               |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 5                               | 21-88                              |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 6                               | 89+                                |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

B.  For Group 0: Assign an AII of 0.

> For Group 1: Insufficient information to calculate a percentile
> ranking. No AII assigned.
>
> For Groups 2 through 6: within each group, rank all the carriers' AIM
> values in ascending order. Transform the ranked values into
> percentiles from the 0 percentile (representing the lowest AIM) to the
> [100th]{.underline} percentile (representing the highest AIM). Assign
> the percentile value to the AII. If a carrier has no crashes within
> the past 24 months, the AII will be capped at 74.

##  Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI)

SafeStat uses recordable crash and vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) data
gathered during compliance reviews to calculate the Recordable Accident
Rate (RAR) for all carriers that have had compliance reviews within the
past 12 months. SafeStat takes the number of recordable crashes and
normalizes it by VMT to obtain an RAR. Carriers with similar numbers of
recordable crashes are grouped, compared to one another by their crash
rates, and ranked on a percentile basis. SafeStat assigns a percentile
number (from 0-100) to each carrier based on that rank. A carrier must
have two or more crashes to potentially receive a deficient RAI, i.e.,
75 or higher.

##### Compliance Review Data {#compliance-review-data .unnumbered}

The data items used in assessing recordable crashes are the following:

-   Date of the review

-   Number of recordable crashes (RC) within 12 months prior to the
    review

-   Total number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by a carrier within 12
    months prior to the review

##### Calculation of the Recordable Accident Rate (RAR) Measure {#calculation-of-the-recordable-accident-rate-rar-measure .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the recordable crash data described above from the most
recent review of a carrier that was performed within the last 12 months
to produce a measure called the Recordable Accident Rate (RAR). The RAR
is computed by dividing the total number of recordable crashes (RC) by
the number of annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and then multiplying
this quotient by a convenient constant (in this case, 1,000,000) to
establish a manageable RAR size. The basic equation for RAR follows. The
steps following the equation detail SafeStat's calculation of the RAR.

+-----------------------------------+------------+---------------------+
|                                   | **RAR =**  | **[1,000,000 x      |
|                                   |            | RC]{.underline}**   |
|                                   |            |                     |
|                                   |            | **VMT**             |
+-----------------------------------+------------+---------------------+

A. Identify all carriers whose most recent compliance review was
performed within the last 12 months.

B. Compute the RAR according to the following formula:

![](media/image12.wmf){width="4.625694444444444in"
height="1.4395833333333334in"}

##### Calculation of the Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI) {#calculation-of-the-recordable-accident-indicator-rai .unnumbered}

SafeStat calculates the Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI) by ranking
the RAR values and transforming them into percentiles. The following
steps detail SafeStat's calculations.

A. Determine the total number of crashes for each carrier (no time or
severity weighting), and place each carrier into one of the groups
below:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| #                               | # *Numbe                           |
|  *Group* {#group-1 .unnumbered} | r of Recordable Crashes* {#number- |
|                                 | of-recordable-crashes .unnumbered} |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 0                               | 0                                  |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 1                               | 1                                  |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2                               | 2-4                                |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 3                               | 5-19                               |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 4                               | 20+                                |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

B.  For Group 0: Assign a RAI of 0.

> For Group 1: Insufficient information to calculate a percentile
> ranking. No RAI is assigned.
>
> For Groups 2 through 4: within each group, rank all the carriers' RAR
> values in ascending order. Transform the ranked values into
> percentiles from the 0 percentile (representing the lowest RAR) to the
> [100th]{.underline} percentile (representing the highest RAR). Assign
> the percentile value to the RAR.

##  Calculation of the Accident SEA Value

The Accident SEA Value establishes the carrier's safety status
concerning its crash history. SafeStat uses the Accident Involvement
Indicator (AII), the Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI), and any
state-reported crashes that have occurred since the CR was performed to
calculate the Accident SEA Value. Several possible cases exist in
determining the Accident SEA Value. SafeStat determines which case
exists for each carrier and calculates the Accident SEA Value
accordingly.

![](media/image13.wmf){width="2.222916666666667in"
height="1.0347222222222223in"}Case 1: If no CRs were conducted in the
past 12 months, AII is assigned to the Accident SEA Value. (If the AII
was not assigned in the case of only one crash, then the Accident SEA is
also not assigned a value).

Case 2: If a CR was conducted within the past 12 months and no new
state-reported crashes have occurred since the CR was conducted, then
assign the RAI to the Accident SEA Value. (If the RAI was not assigned
in the case of only one crash, then the AII is assigned to the Accident
SEA Value).

![](media/image14.wmf){width="2.222916666666667in"
height="1.0347222222222223in"}

![](media/image15.wmf){width="3.9868055555555557in"
height="1.0347222222222223in"}Case 3: If a CR was conducted within the
past 12 months and a new state-reported crash has occurred since the CR
was conducted, then assign the higher value of AII and RAI to the
Accident SEA.

# [  ]{.underline}Number range figsNumber range tablesDriver SEA

![](media/image16.wmf){width="4.236805555555556in"
height="3.120138888888889in"}Within the Driver SEA, SafeStat evaluates a
carrier's driver-related safety performance and compliance. The Driver
SEA Value reflects a carrier's driver safety posture relative to its
peers. SafeStat calculates the Driver SEA Value based on the Driver
Inspections Indicator (DII), the Driver Review Indicator (DRI), and the
Moving Violations Indicator (MVI). The DII is based on driver roadside
OOS inspection violations. The DRI is based on the violations of
driver-related acute and critical regulations discovered during a
compliance review. The MVI is based on moving violations recorded in
conjunction with roadside inspections. The sections that follow present
the specific computations for each safety measure, indicator, and the
Driver SEA Value. Figure 4-1 presents the computational hierarchy used
to calculate a Driver SEA Value.

**Figure 4-1****. Driver SEA Value Computational Hierarchy**

##  Driver Inspections Indicator (DII)

Using driver roadside inspection data from inspections performed within
the last 30 months, SafeStat calculates the DII for all carriers that
have had a minimum of 3 driver inspections. SafeStat weights each
inspection by its age and the number of driver OOS violations found, and
then normalizes the weighted driver OOS results by the number of driver
inspections to obtain a weighted driver OOS rate known as the Driver
Inspections Measure (DIM). The DIM is adjusted upward in instances where
the driver was found "jumping," or violating, OOS orders. Carriers with
similar numbers of driver inspections are assigned to one of four
groups. Within each group they are compared to one another and ranked by
their DIM. SafeStat assigns a percentile number (from 0 to 100) based on
that rank. The percentile number becomes the carrier's DII. A carrier
must have 3 or more driver OOS inspections to have the potential to
receive a deficient DII, i.e., 75 and higher.

##### Driver Roadside Inspection Data  {#driver-roadside-inspection-data .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses only those roadside inspections that have been performed
within the last 30 months and pertain to the driver, i.e., inspection
levels 1, 2, and 3 when calculating the DIM. SafeStat uses the following
data elements from roadside inspections in its calculations of the DIM:

-   Number of Driver OOS Violations

-   Number of Drivers Placed OOS

-   Number of Driver Inspections

-   Number of Violations of OOS Orders

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Jumping Vehicle OOS Orders (this is done by the driver)

-   Jumping Driver OOS Orders.

##### Calculation of the Driver Inspections Measure (DIM) {#calculation-of-the-driver-inspections-measure-dim .unnumbered}

SafeStat calculates the DIM by adding the time-weighted number of driver
OOS inspections to the time-weighted number of driver OOS violations and
then dividing by the total time-weighted number of driver inspections.
It then adjusts this rate by the jumping OOS order multiplier (JOOM),
which is based on the number of times the carrier's drivers were found
in violation of OOS orders. The equation for the DIM is:

![](media/image17.wmf){width="5.754861111111111in" height="0.35625in"}

where JOOM is:

  ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------
  **Number of Times of Jumping OOS   **(JOOM)**
  Orders**                           

  0                                  1.0

  1                                  1.2

  2                                  1.4

  3                                  1.6

  4+                                 2.0
  ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------

SafeStat uses driver roadside inspection data from the last 30 months.
It time-weights inspection data to give more importance to recent
inspections. The use of total driver OOS [violations]{.underline} in the
formula has the effect of "severity weighting" the DIM. The following
steps detail SafeStat's calculation of the DIM.

A. Using the results of the levels 1, 2, and 3 driver inspections,
aggregate each carrier's inspections into three time periods based on
the age of each inspection: 0 to 6 months, 7 to 18 months, and 19 to 30
months.

![](media/image18.wmf){width="2.886111111111111in"
height="2.098611111111111in"}

B. Aggregate the following for each time period:

![](media/image19.wmf){width="3.0479166666666666in"
height="2.209722222222222in"}

\*The limit for the maximum number of Driver OOS violations for any one
inspection is 5.

C.  ![](media/image20.wmf){width="2.7784722222222222in"
    height="2.2090277777777776in"}Weight the time periods giving the
    most weight to most recent inspections (3 for 0 to 6 months, 2 for 7
    to 18 months, and 1 for 19 to 30 months).

D. Sum the weighted data for:

1.  Number of Driver OOS Violations

2.  Number of Drivers Placed OOS

3.  ![](media/image21.wmf){width="4.18125in"
    height="2.446527777777778in"}Number of Driver Inspections

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
E.  Determine the number of inspections that uncovered violations of OOS
    orders \[jumping vehicle OOS orders (396.9(c) and 396.9(c)(2)) and
    jumping driver OOS orders (395.13(d) and 392.5(c)2)\] that have
    occurred within the last 30 months, and calculate the JOOM from the
    following table.

  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  **Number of Times of Jumping OOS    **(JOOM)**
  Orders**                            

  0                                   1.0

  1                                   1.2

  2                                   1.4

  3                                   1.6

  4+                                  2.0
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------

F. Calculate a driver OOS violation rate by adding the Time-Weighted
Number of Driver OOS Violations and the Time-Weighted Number of Drivers
Placed OOS and dividing the sum by the Time-Weighted Number of Driver
Inspections. Adjust this rate by multiplying this number by the JOOM to
arrive at the DIM.

![](media/image22.wmf)

##### Calculation of the Driver Inspections Indicator (DII) {#calculation-of-the-driver-inspections-indicator-dii .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the Driver Inspections Measure (DIM) along with the number
of driver inspections performed within the last 30 months (without
application of time weighting) to calculate the Driver Inspections
Indicator (DII). The following steps detail the calculation of DII.

A.  Using level 1, 2, and 3 inspections performed within the last 30
    months, calculate the carrier's total number of driver inspections
    and assign the carrier to one of four peer groups. Withhold carriers
    with [fewer than 3 driver inspections]{.underline} from further
    consideration.

![](media/image23.emf){width="4.4125in" height="0.7861111111111111in"}

B. For each group, rank carriers' DIM in ascending order. Transform the
ranked measures to percentiles from the 0 percentile (representing the
lowest DIM) to the 100th percentile (representing the highest DIM).
Assign the percentile value to the DII. If a carrier has fewer than 3
driver OOS inspections then the DII will be capped at 74. Also, if a
carrier has no driver OOS inspections, then it will receive a DII of 0.

##  Driver Review Indicator (DRI)

Using the results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18
months, SafeStat calculates the DRI. SafeStat quantifies the number and
severity of violations of driver-related acute/critical regulations
(defined in Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR) cited at a carrier's most
recent compliance review into the Driver Review Measure (DRM). All of
the carriers' DRMs are compared to one another and are ranked on a
percentile basis from 0 to 100. SafeStat assigns the percentile number
to the DRI for each carrier with at least one violation of acute and
critical regulations.

##### Calculation of the Driver Review Indicator (DRI) {#calculation-of-the-driver-review-indicator-dri .unnumbered}

A. SafeStat calculates the Driver Review Measure (DRM) for each carrier
as described in Appendix B.

B. The Driver Review Indicator (DRI) is calculated by taking DRMs for
all selected carriers (including those with DRMs of 0) and ranking them
in ascending order. The ranked values are transformed into percentiles
from 0 (representing the lowest DRM) to 100 (representing the highest
DRM). Each carrier with a non‑zero DRM is assigned a DRI equal to its
percentile rank.

##  Moving Violations Indicator (MVI)

Using (1) moving violation data collected in conjunction with roadside
inspections within the last 30 months and (2) the number of drivers from
the Motor Carrier Census, SafeStat calculates the MVI. For each carrier
with a minimum of 3 moving violations, SafeStat weights each moving
violation by its age, and then normalizes the weighted number of
violations by the number of drivers to obtain the Moving Violations
Measure (MVM). Carriers with similar numbers of violations are grouped,
compared to one another by their MVM rates, and ranked by percentile
within each group. SafeStat assigns a percentile number to each
carrier's MVI, based on that rank.

##### Moving Violation Data  {#moving-violation-data .unnumbered}

In calculating the MVI, SafeStat uses moving violations recorded in
conjunction with roadside inspections over the last 30 months. There is
a minimum number of moving violations per carrier (3 or more) required
for SafeStat to consider the data sufficient. SafeStat uses the
following data elements from roadside inspections in its calculations of
the MVI:

-   Number of Moving Violations

-   Date of Moving Violation

    Moving Violations are identified as follows:

  ------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
  **Cite \#**              **Moving Violation**

  392.2C                   Failure to obey traffic control device

  392.2FC                  Following Too Closely

  392.2LC                  Improper Lane Change

  392.2P                   Improper passing

  392.2R                   Reckless Driving

  392.2S                   Speeding

  392.2T                   Improper turn

  392.2Y                   Failure to yield right of way

  392.4, 392.4A            Use or Possession of Drugs

  392.5, 392.5A            Use or Possession of Alcohol
  ------------------------ ----------------------------------------------

##### Census Driver Data {#census-driver-data .unnumbered}

SafeStat computes the MVI using the number of moving violations
normalized by the number of drivers contained in the Census data. The
primary source of driver information in the Census is Forms MCS‑150 and
MCS‑151. When the Census data on the number of drivers for a carrier are
suspect, specific state/federal organizations are notified to obtain the
most accurate value.

##### Calculation of the Moving Violations Measure (MVM) {#calculation-of-the-moving-violations-measure-mvm .unnumbered}

##### SafeStat calculates the MVM by adding the time-weighted number of moving violations and dividing by the number of drivers. The equation for MVM is: {#safestat-calculates-the-mvm-by-adding-the-time-weighted-number-of-moving-violations-and-dividing-by-the-number-of-drivers.-the-equation-for-mvm-is .unnumbered}

![](media/image24.wmf)

SafeStat time-weights violation data to give more relevance to recent
violations. The following steps detail SafeStat's calculation of the
MVM.

A.  Using the moving violations (MV) listed in roadside inspection data,
    aggregate each carrier's moving violations into three periods based
    on the age of each violation: 0 to 6 months, 7 to18 months, and 19
    to 30 months.

> ![](media/image25.wmf)

B.  Multiply the appropriate time weight (3 for 0 to 6 months, 2 for 7
    to 18 months, 1 for 19 to 30 months) by the number of moving
    violations in each of the three time periods and sum all three
    groups to obtain the time-weighted number of moving violations.

![](media/image26.wmf)

C.  Divide the time-weighted number of moving violations by the number
    of drivers to obtain the MVM.

![](media/image27.wmf)

##### Calculation of the Moving Violations Indicator (MVI) {#calculation-of-the-moving-violations-indicator-mvi .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the MVM to calculate the MVI. The following steps detail
SafeStat's calculation of MVI.

A. Determine the total number of moving violations for each carrier (no
time weighting), and place each carrier into one of four groups shown
below:

![](media/image28.wmf)

B. Within each group, rank all the carriers' MVM values in ascending
order. Transform the ranked values into percentiles from 0 percentile
(representing the lowest MVM) to 100th percentile (representing the
highest MVM). Assign the percentile value to the MVI.

## Calculation of the Driver SEA Value

The Driver SEA Value establishes the carrier's safety status concerning
driver operations. SafeStat uses the Driver Inspections Indicator (DII)
and the Driver Review Indicator (DRI) and the Moving Violations
Indicator (MVI) with their associated indicator weights to calculate the
Driver SEA Value.

The Driver SEA Value calculation is [the maximum]{.underline} of the DRI
and DII and uses the MVI when its value is greater than the DRI and DII.
If the MVI is greater than the maximum of the DRI and DII then the
Driver SEA will equal the weighted average of the MVI and the maximum of
the DII and DRI, (placing twice as much weight on the DII/DRI than the
MVI).

> ![](media/image29.wmf)
>
> ![](media/image30.wmf)
>
> ![](media/image31.wmf)

If none of the indicators exist (DRI, DII, or MVI) then the carrier has
insufficient data for SafeStat to calculate a Driver SEA Value.

# [  ]{.underline}Number range figsNumber range tablesVehicle SEA

Within the Vehicle SEA, SafeStat evaluates a carrier's vehicle-related
safety performance and compliance. The Vehicle SEA Value reflects a
carrier's vehicle safety posture relative to its peers. SafeStat
calculates the Vehicle SEA Value based on the Vehicle Inspections
Indicator (VII) and the Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI). The VII is based
on vehicle roadside OOS inspection violations. The VRI is based on the
vehicle-related violations of acute and critical regulations discovered
during compliance reviews. The sections that follow present the specific
computations for each safety measure, indicator, and the Vehicle SEA
Value. Figure 5-1 presents the computational hierarchy used to calculate
a Vehicle SEA Value.

![](media/image32.emf){width="4.321527777777778in"
height="2.821527777777778in"}

**Figure 5-1****. Vehicle SEA Value Computational Hierarchy**

##  Vehicle Inspections Indicator (VII)

Using vehicle roadside inspection data from inspections performed within
the last 30 months, SafeStat calculates the VII for all carriers that
have had a minimum of 3 vehicle inspections. SafeStat weights each
inspection by its age and the number of vehicle OOS violations, and then
normalizes the weighted vehicle OOS results by the number of vehicle
inspections to obtain a weighted vehicle OOS rate, known as the VIM.
Carriers with similar numbers of vehicle inspections are assigned to one
of three groups. Within each group they are compared to one another and
ranked by their VIMs. SafeStat assigns a percentile number (from 0-100)
based on its rank. The percentile number becomes the carrier's VII. A
carrier must have 3 or more vehicle OOS inspections to have the
potential to receive a deficient VII, i.e., 75 and higher.

##### Vehicle Roadside Inspections Data  {#vehicle-roadside-inspections-data .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses data from roadside inspections that have been performed
within the last 30 months and pertain to vehicles, i.e., inspection
levels 1, 2, and 5 when calculating the VIM. SafeStat uses the following
data elements from roadside inspections in its calculations of the VIM.

-   Number of Vehicle OOS Violations

-   Number of Vehicles Placed OOS

-   Number of Vehicle Inspections

##### Calculation of the Vehicle Inspections Measure (VIM) {#calculation-of-the-vehicle-inspections-measure-vim .unnumbered}

SafeStat calculates the VIM by adding the time-weighted number of
vehicle OOS inspections to the time-weighted number of Vehicle OOS
violations and then dividing by the total time-weighted number of
vehicle inspections. The basic equation for the VIM is:

![](media/image33.emf){width="6.279861111111111in" height="0.53125in"}

SafeStat uses vehicle roadside inspection data from the last 30 months.
It time-weights inspection data to give more importance to recent
inspections. The use of total vehicle OOS violations in the formula has
the effect of "severity weighting" the VIM. The following steps detail
SafeStat's calculation of the VIM.

A. Using the results of level 1, 2, and 5 vehicle inspections, aggregate
each carrier's inspections into three time periods based on the age of
each inspection: 0 to 6 months, 7 to 18 months, and 19 to 30 months.

![](media/image34.emf){width="2.8520833333333333in"
height="2.3430555555555554in"}

B. Aggregate the following for each time period:

![](media/image35.wmf)

\* The limit for the maximum number of Vehicle OOS violations for any
one inspection is 5.

C.  Weight the time periods giving the most weight to the most recent
    inspections (3 for 0 to 6 months, 2 for 7 to 18 months, and 1 for 19
    to 30 months).

![](media/image36.emf){width="3.415277777777778in"
height="2.4770833333333333in"}

D. Sum the weighted data for:

1.  Number of Vehicle OOS Violations

2.  Number of Vehicles Placed OOS

3.  Number of Vehicle Inspections

![](media/image37.wmf)

E. Calculate a vehicle OOS rate by adding the Time-Weighted Number of
Vehicle OOS Violations and the Time-Weighted Number of Vehicles Placed
OOS and dividing the sum by the Time-Weighted Number of Vehicle
Inspections to arrive at the VIM.

![](media/image38.wmf)

##### Calculation of the Vehicle Inspections Indicator (VII) {#calculation-of-the-vehicle-inspections-indicator-vii .unnumbered}

SafeStat uses the Vehicle Inspections Measure (VIM) along with the
number of vehicle inspections performed within the last 30 months
(without application of time weighting) to calculate the Vehicle
Inspections Indicator (VII). The following steps detail SafeStat's
calculation of VII.

A. Using level 1, 2, and 5 inspections for each carrier performed within
the last 30 months, calculate the carrier's total number of vehicle
inspections and assign the carrier to one of 3 peer groups. Withhold
carriers with [fewer than 3 vehicle inspections]{.underline} from
further consideration.

![](media/image39.emf){width="3.7333333333333334in"
height="0.7861111111111111in"}

B. For each group, rank carriers' VIM in ascending order. Transform the
ranked measures to percentiles from the 0 percentile (representing the
lowest VIM) to the 100th percentile (representing the highest VIM).
Assign the percentile value to the VII. If a carrier as fewer than 3
vehicle OOS inspections then the VII will be capped at 74. Also, if
carrier has no vehicle OOS inspections, then it will receive a VII of 0.

##  Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI)

Using the results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18
months, SafeStat calculates the VRI. SafeStat quantifies the number and
severity of violations of vehicle-related acute/critical regulations
(defined in Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR) cited at a carrier's most
recent compliance review into the Vehicle Review Measure (VRM). All of
the carriers' VRMs are compared to one another and are ranked on a
percentile basis from 0 to 100. SafeStat assigns the percentile number
to the VRI for each carrier with at least one violation of acute and
critical regulations.

##### Calculation of the Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI) {#calculation-of-the-vehicle-review-indicator-vri .unnumbered}

A. SafeStat calculates the Vehicle Review Measure (VRM) for each carrier
as described in Appendix B.

B. The Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI) is calculated by taking VRMs for
all selected carriers (including those with VRMs of 0) and ranking them
in ascending order. The ranked values are transformed into percentiles
from 0 (representing the lowest VRM) to 100 (representing the highest
VRM). Each carrier with a non‑zero VRM is assigned a VRI equal to its
percentile rank.

##  Calculation of the Vehicle SEA Value

The Vehicle SEA Value establishes the carrier's safety status concerning
vehicles. SafeStat uses the Vehicle Inspections Indicator (VII) and the
Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI) with their associated indicator weights
to calculate the Vehicle SEA Value.

The Vehicle SEA calculation is [the maximum]{.underline} of the VRI and
VII.

![](media/image40.wmf)

If only one of the two indicators (VRI or VII) exists, then that
indicator is assigned to the Vehicle SEA Value. If neither of the
indicators exists, then the carrier has insufficient data for SafeStat
to calculate a Vehicle SEA Value.

# [  ]{.underline}Number range figsNumber range tablesSafety Management SEA

The Safety Management SEA Value reflects the carrier's safety management
posture relative to its peers. The Safety Management SEA Value is based
on the Enforcement History Indicator (EHI), the Hazardous Material
Review Indicator (HMRI), and the Safety Management Review Indicator
(SMRI). The EHI uses the Enforcement Severity Measure (ESM) based on the
results of violations cited in closed enforcement cases. The HMRI and
the SMRI use violations of hazardous material-related acute, critical,
and severe regulations and violations of safety management-related acute
and critical regulations, respectively, that were discovered during a
compliance review. The sections that follow present the specific
computations for each safety measure, indicator, and the SEA value
within the Safety Management SEA. Figure 6-1 shows the computational
hierarchy used to calculate a Safety Management SEA Value.

![](media/image41.wmf)

**Figure 6-1****. Safety Management SEA Value Computational Hierarchy**

##  Enforcement History Indicator (EHI)

Closed enforcement cases result in penalties based on major violations
of the FMCSR/HMR. These violations are discovered during CRs and
terminal audits. The FMCSA initiates the enforcement case against the
carrier and tracks it from initiation through settlement. A carrier's
closed enforcement case history may contain a pattern of violations that
indicates a serious lack of commitment to safety on the part of the
carrier's management. The purpose of this indicator is to measure the
historical pattern of safety enforcement. SafeStat calculates the EHI
based on a carrier's closed enforcement case history over the last 6
years. Closed enforcement cases in this time frame are time and severity
weighted and an ESM is calculated. All carriers with ESMs are compared
to one another and ranked on a percentile basis. SafeStat then assigns a
percentile number to each such carrier's EHI based on that rank.

##### Calculation of the Enforcement Severity Measure (ESM) {#calculation-of-the-enforcement-severity-measure-esm .unnumbered}

SafeStat requires that a carrier had at least 1 enforcement case that
has been initiated and closed within the past 30 months or at least 2
enforcement cases closed within the past 6 years to calculate the ESM.
Each closed enforcement case initiated on a carrier over the past 6
years is assigned a time weight and a severity weight. SafeStat
multiplies these weights together to obtain an enforcement case value
for each closed enforcement case. It then adds the enforcement case
values to get the ESM. The equation for each carrier is:

**ESM = Sum of all (Time Weight for Closed Enforcement Case x Severity
Weight for Closed Enforcement Case)**

The following steps detail SafeStat's calculation of the ESM.

A. Identify all carriers with (1) at least 1 closed enforcement case
that has been initiated by a CR or terminal audit within the last 30
months or (2) at least 2 closed enforcement cases that have been
initiatied by CRs or terminal audits within the last 6 years.

B. For the carriers identified in step A, determine the age of each
enforcement case based on the initiation date (the date the associated
CR investigation was completed). Assign each enforcement case a time
weight (the more recent the initiation date, the greater the weight
applied), using the following table:

![](media/image42.wmf)

C. Assign a severity weight to each enforcement case by applying the
number of different types of violations cited in the case (the more
different violations cited, the greater the weight applied), using the
following table:

  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
  \# of Different Violations Cited      Severity Weight

  1                                     1

  2 to 3                                2

  4+                                    3
  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------

D.  For each closed enforcement case, multiply the time weight by the
    severity weight to obtain its enforcement case value.

![](media/image43.wmf)

E. Add the enforcement case values for all closed enforcement cases to
calculate the Enforcement Severity Measure (ESM).

![](media/image44.wmf)

##### Calculation of the Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) {#calculation-of-the-enforcement-history-indicator-ehi .unnumbered}

SafeStat assigns an EHI to a carrier based on a percentile ranking of
its Enforcement Severity Measure (ESM), the age of the most recent
closed enforcement case, and whether the most recent subsequent
compliance review resulted in violations of acute/critical regulations.
The following steps detail SafeStat's calculation of EHI and ensure that
only carriers with closed enforcement cases initiated by a CR or
terminal audit within in the past 30 months will be eligible to receive
a high EHI of 75 and higher:

A. Place all carriers with an ESM into one of two groups:

> Group 1:
>
> \(1\) had a recent CR (or terminal audit)-initiated closed enforcement
> case (within 30 months) and no subsequent compliance review or
>
> \(2\) had a recent CR (or terminal audit)-initiated closed enforcement
> case (within 30 months) and the most recent subsequent compliance
> review resulted in violations of acute/critical regulations.
>
> Group 2:
>
> \(1\) had a recent CR (or terminal audit)-initiated closed enforcement
> case (within 30 months) and the most recent subsequent compliance
> review resulted in [no]{.underline} violations of acute/critical
> regulations.
>
> \(2\) had [no]{.underline} recent closed enforcement cases (within 30
> months) but at least 2 CR (or terminal audit)-initiated closed
> enforcement cases between 31 months and 6 years ago.

B. Rank carriers in Group 1 in ascending sequence by their respective
ESMs. Assign each carrier's EHI a percentile ranking from 75 to 100
based on the carrier's ESM. The higher the ESM, the higher the
percentile, and the worst the safety posture.

C. Rank carriers in Group 2 in ascending sequence by their respective
ESMs. Assign each carrier's EHI a percentile ranking from 50 to 74 based
on the carrier's ESM.

##  HM Review Indicator (HMRI)

Using results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18
months, SafeStat calculates the HMRI. SafeStat quantifies the number and
severity of violations of hazardous material-related acute, critical,
and severe regulations cited at a carrier's most recent compliance
review to obtain an HM Review Measure (HMRM). Violations of acute and
critical regulations are defined in Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR.
Violations of hazardous material-related severe violations are defined
in Chapter 13 of the US DOT FMCSA Field Operations Training Manual. All
violations used are listed in Tables B-1 to B-5 in Appendix B of this
document. SafeStat calculates the HMRM for each HM carrier as described
in Appendix B. All of the carriers' HMRMs are compared to one another
and are ranked on a percentile basis from 0 to 100. SafeStat assigns the
percentile number to the HMRI for each carrier with at least 1 violation
of acute ,critical or severe regulations.

##  Safety Management Review Indicator (SMRI)

Using the results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18
months, SafeStat calculates the SMRI. SafeStat quantifies the number and
severity of violations of safety management-related acute and critical
regulations (defined in Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR) cited at a
carrier's most recent CR into the Safety Management Review Measure
(SMRM). SafeStat calculates the SMRMs for each carrier as described in
Appendix B. All of the carriers' SMRMs are compared to one another and
are ranked on a percentile basis from 0 to 100. SafeStat assigns a
percentile number to the SMRI for each carrier with at least one
violation of acute and critical regulations.

##  HM Inspections Indicator (HMII)

The HMII is based on roadside inspections and the resulting Hazardous
Material Out-of-Service (HMOOS) violations. It was used in earlier
versions of SafeStat (versions 3 & 4), but its use has been suspended
from the algorithm. This indicator was found to be ineffective in
identifying unsafe motor carriers. While there is still merit for
incorporating an indicator based on HMOOS violations, improvements need
to be made to the normalization data before reconsidering the inclusion
of the indicator. See Appendix C for more details. It is important to
note that roadside HMOOS violations are currently used in the Driver and
Vehicle Inspection Indicators (DII and VII).

##  Calculation of the Safety Management SEA Value

The Safety Management SEA Value establishes the carrier's safety status
concerning its safety management practices. SafeStat uses the
Enforcement History Indicator (EHI), the HM Review Indicator (HMRI), and
the Safety Management Review Indicator (SMRI) to calculate the Safety
Management SEA Value.

The Safety Management SEA calculation is [the highest]{.underline} of
the EHI, HMRI and SMRI.

> ![](media/image45.wmf)

If only one of the three indicators (EHI, HMRI, or SMRI) exists, then
that indicator is assigned the Safety Management SEA Value. If none of
the indicators exists, then the carrier has insufficient data for
SafeStat to calculate a Safety Management SEA Value.

# Number range figsNumber range tables[  ]{.underline}SafeStat Evaluation

Following its implementation in the CVIS (now PRISM) program, SafeStat
was evaluated in conjunction with that program's evaluation. PRISM's
success is dependent upon the ability to evaluate interstate motor
carrier safety performance and link that performance to vehicle
registration privileges. Also, any system that the FMCSA uses to
determine safety status must have the confidence of both the public and
private stakeholders.

The evaluation of SafeStat consisted of a comprehensive set of
evaluation criteria to satisfy FMCSA and CVIS objectives:

1\) Effectiveness in identifying unsafe carriers

2\) Ability to determine an unbiased standard of safety fitness

3\) Ability to be comprehensive, relevant, and current

4\) Ability to rank carriers relative to overall safety risk

5\) Ability to identify specific performance and regulatory compliance
deficiencies

6\) Consistency over time and adaptability to changing requirements

The evaluation also addressed other important issues related to SafeStat
performance, in particular, data issues. Also, emphasis in the
evaluation was given to the first criterion that addressed SafeStat\'s
effectiveness in identifying carriers likely to be at risk (have greater
than average crash rates). This evaluation, called the Effectiveness
Study, is summarized below.

##  Description of the Effectiveness Study

As part of the evaluation of CVIS/PRISM, an effectiveness study was
devised to confirm that the carriers that SafeStat was identifying were
indeed high safety risk carriers. Safety risk at any given time is
defined as the likelihood of having crashes in the near future. By
examining the SafeStat post-identification crash experience of
identified carriers, this study essentially tested SafeStat's crash rate
prediction capability and represents the "bottom-line" assessment of its
performance. Beyond confirming SafeStat's effectiveness, the results of
this study are being used to refine SafeStat to further emphasize the
components of the system that are the most closely related to high
future crash rates and to evaluate the contribution of potential new
measures and indicators.

The effectiveness study was accomplished by: (1) performing a simulated
SafeStat carrier identification using historical data; (2) observing the
crash involvement over the immediate 18 months after SafeStat was run
for both the carriers identified by SafeStat as having poor safety
status and other carriers not so identified by SafeStat, but which had
sufficient data to be identified; and (3) comparing the
post-identification crash rates of both groups of carriers. If SafeStat
is effective in identifying unsafe carriers (i.e., carriers having a
high risk of being involved in future crashes), then the carriers
identified as having a poor safety status would be expected to have
higher post-selection crash rates than the carriers that were not
identified by SafeStat. The greater the post-selection crash rate for
the identified carriers relative to those carriers not identified, the
more effective SafeStat would be in identifying unsafe motor carriers.

Rather than use the most recent available data and having to wait for a
period of time to collect post- identification crash data, the analysis
was performed using historical data. The study was conducted by
simulating a carrier identification by SafeStat on data available at an
earlier date (April 1, 1996) and then observing the carriers' crash
involvement that occurred over the next 18 months (from April 1996 to
October 1997). This procedure simulated carrier identification by
SafeStat as if it had been run as of April 1, 1996 using safety events
that occurred prior to that date, and allowed for sufficient subsequent
crash reporting to accurately measure the post-identification crash
rates.

![](media/image46.wmf)

**Figure 7-1. Effectiveness Analysis Timeline**

From this simulation run of SafeStat, carriers that had sufficient data
to be scored were placed into the following groups based on their
overall SafeStat results in order to compare the "post-selection crash
performance":

1)  carriers identified as "at-risk" (worst SafeStat Scores)

2)  other carriers identified as having a poor safety status according
    to SafeStat

3)  carriers with sufficient data but not identified by SafeStat as
    having a poor safety status

The post-identification crash rate of each group was calculated as the
number of reported crashes per 1000 power units (PUs). The number of PUs
is defined by the total number of trucks, tractors, hazardous material
tank trucks, motor coaches, school buses, minibuses/vans, and limousines
that are owned or term leased by a motor carrier. The carrier PU
information was based on census data that reside in the centralized
FMCSA national database, the Motor Carrier Management Information System
(MCMIS).

The crash data were based upon the crashes reported by the states
(according to the National Governors' Association (NGA) standard) that
occurred during the post-selection period (April 1996 to October 1997).
These data also reside in the MCMIS. Each reported crash was weighted
based on the severity and timing of the crash.

The severity weighting scheme placed emphasis on crashes with greater
consequences, while the time weighting placed emphasis on crashes that
occurred soon after the SafeStat identification run. Severity- weights
were assigned as follows: a weight of 0.5 for property damage only, a
weight of 1.0 for crashes involving injuries/fatalities or hazardous
material release, and a weight of 1.5 for crashes involving
injuries/fatalities and hazardous material release. Time weights were
assigned to each crash as follows: a weight of 1.5 for crashes that
occurred within the first six months of 18 month post-selection time
period, a weight of 1.0 for crashes that occurred 7 to 12 months into
the post-identification time period, and a weight of 0.5 for crashes
that occurred in the last 6 months of the time period. Each crash had
its severity weight multiplied by its time weight to obtain on overall
weight. In each carrier group, the weighted crashes were summed and
divided by the number of PUs to provide a weighted crash rate for the
group. The following section discusses the results for each carrier
group.

##  Results

[Overall Effectiveness of SafeStat]{.underline}

The post-selection crash rates for the SafeStat identified and not
identified carrier groups were examined both in terms of their overall
SafeStat Scores and in terms of the four Safety Evaluation Areas (SEAs)
 Accident, Driver, Vehicle, and Safety Management  that determine the
overall SafeStat Scores. The rates are shown in Table 7-1 and in Figure
7-2.

**Table 7-1. Post-Selection Crash Rates**

+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+
| **Carrier Group**        | **Number of | **       | **% Higher than |
|                          | Carriers**  | Weighted | Not Identified  |
|                          |             | Crash    | Carriers**      |
|                          |             | Rate\*** |                 |
+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+
| **All Identified**       | **4,276**   | **56.4** | **85%**         |
+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+
| At-Risk (with Worst      | 1,450       | 82.3     | 169%            |
|                          |             |          |                 |
| SafeStat Scores)         |             |          |                 |
+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+
| Other Identified (with   | 2,826       | 43.2     | 41%             |
|                          |             |          |                 |
| Poor SafeStat Scores)    |             |          |                 |
+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+
| **Not Identified**       | **69,797**  | **30.5** | **-**           |
+--------------------------+-------------+----------+-----------------+

\* Number of weighted crashes per 1000 power units from 4/1996 to
10/1997.

![](media/image47.wmf)

**Figure 7-2. Crash Rates for the Three Groups of Carriers**

These results confirm that SafeStat did identify carriers with a higher
crash risk. The group of all carriers that SafeStat identified as poor
performers had an 85% higher crash rate than carriers that were not
identified. The carriers designated as "at-risk" by SafeStat had a much
higher crash rate (169% greater) than the carriers that were not
identified. A majority of these "at-risk" carriers were identified in
part because they had previous problems with respect to their crash
rates (i.e., they had deficient Accident SEA values).

However, even the SafeStat identified carriers in the "other identified"
group, which did not have high Accident SEA values but were in the worst
25th percentile in two of the other SEAs, posed a 41% greater crash risk
than the carriers that were not identified. This result shows that
SafeStat has the proactive capability to identify carriers that are
likely to be involved in crashes even though they previously did not
have exceptionally high crash rates.

[Effectiveness of Individual SEAs]{.underline}

Further testing was done to determine the effectiveness of the principal
components of SafeStat. This was accomplished by placing carriers into
groups based on their performance results for each particular SEA (i.e.,
Accident, Driver, Vehicle, or Safety Management).

The results for carriers with high individual SEA values compared to
those with lower SEA values are as follows (Carriers with [high SEA
values]{.underline} were in the worst 25th percentile and were
designated as the worst performers in that particular evaluation area.
Conversely, carriers with [no high SEA values]{.underline} were not in
the worst 25th percentile, and therefore, were not among the poorest
performers in that SEA.):

**Table 7-2. Crash Rates of Carriers with and without High SEAs**

+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| **Safety         | **Number of  | **Weighted** | **% Greater than   |
| Evaluation       | Carriers**   |              | Carriers without   |
| Area**           |              | **Crash      | the High SEA**     |
|                  |              | Rate\***     |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| High Accident    | 2,596        | 81.4         | 172%               |
| SEA              |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| No High Accident | 71,477       | 29.9         | \-                 |
| SEA              |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
|                  |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| High Driver SEA  | 7,036        | 56.2         | 90%                |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| No High Driver   | 67,037       | 29.5         | \-                 |
| SEA              |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
|                  |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| High Vehicle SEA | 12,456       | 38.3         | 22%                |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| No High Vehicle  | 61,617       | 31.4         | \-                 |
| SEA              |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
|                  |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| High Safety      | 4,442        | 42.0         | 35%                |
| Mgmt. SEA        |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+
| No High Safety   | 69,631       | 31.0         | \-                 |
| Mgmt. SEA        |              |              |                    |
+------------------+--------------+--------------+--------------------+

\* Number of weighted crashes per 1000 power units from 4/1996 to
10/1997.

*Accident SEA* - The results confirm what may seem intuitively to be
obvious: carriers with high crash rates in the past are likely to
continue to have high crash rates in the future. In other words, past
crash rate performance is a good indicator of future crash rate
performance. The effectiveness study shows a 172% greater post-selection
crash rate for carriers with poor Accident SEAs compared to carriers
that were not identified as having poor Accident SEAs. Comparing SEAs,
the Accident SEA is by far the most effective SEA for identifying
high-risk carriers, thereby justifying the "double-weighting" of the
Accident SEA in SafeStat.

*Driver SEA* - The Driver SEA (with a 90% higher crash rate for carriers
with poor Driver SEAs) is the next most effective SEA. These results
from the study are especially impressive because the criteria for the
Driver SEA are based on violations and are independent of crash history.

*Vehicle SEA* - Carriers with poor Vehicle SEAs did have a higher crash
rate (22%) than carriers without poor Vehicle SEAs. Although the
difference is not as great as the crash rate differences in the Accident
and Driver SEAs, it is significant. As with the Driver SEA, the criteria
for the Vehicle SEA are based on violations and are independent of crash
history. Also, it should be noted that due to the larger amount of
vehicle roadside inspection data, the Vehicle SEA was computed over many
more carriers (12,456 as opposed to the Accident SEA's 2,596 and the
Driver SEA's 7,036) and, thus, it has the potential of identifying more
carriers in absolute terms.

*Safety Management SEA* - The Safety Management SEA is also effective in
identifying carriers with high crash rates. Indicators in this SEA are
based on safety regulation compliance supporting the association of
safety regulations with crash risk. Carriers with high Safety Management
SEAs had a 35% higher post-identification crash rate than carriers that
did not have high Safety Management SEAs. Recent improvements made to
this SEA in SafeStat have substantially increased its effectiveness.

## Conclusion

SafeStat does work. The effectiveness study shows that all of the
individual parts of SafeStat and SafeStat as a whole do indeed identify
carriers that are likely to have significantly higher crash rates than
carriers not identified. The effectiveness study has also proven to be a
useful tool in quantifying the performance of SafeStat. Also, since
SafeStat was designed to be continuously improved, the results of the
study enable SafeStat developers and the FMCSA to assess the relative
strengths of SafeStat's component parts and to continue to make
enhancements to improve its efficiency. Finally, SafeStat continues to
be strengthened and improved through the addition of better data and new
indicators (most recently, a Moving Violation Indicator in the Driver
SEA, which a separate analysis has shown will further increase
SafeStat's effectiveness).

# Appendix A [ ]{.underline}SafeStat Reports {#appendix-a-safestat-reports .Heading--A .unnumbered}

SafeStat generates standard report files as the result of each run. This
appendix contains short examples of three of these reports, with
definitions of all fields for each report. The examples are entirely
fictitious, containing no data from actual carriers.

The following reports are included:

1\. *SafeStat Analysis Report*

This report lists all carriers with SafeStat scores, and includes
SafeStat-calculated data and certain safety event data for a specified
state. It is divided by SafeStat categories.

2\. *Supplementary SafeStat Analysis Report*

This report has the same overall purpose as the *SafeStat Analysis
Report*, but provides more detailed supporting data to supplement the
primary report.

3\. *Motor Carrier Safety Record Report*

The report contains safety evaluation summary data and a list of safety
event data that SafeStat used to calculate the carrier's safety status.
It has two sections: safety evaluation summary and safety evaluation
area detail. The detail section has a potential of four sub-sections,
one for each SEA. SafeStat reports only the SEAs that are in the unsafe
margin.

## A.1 Field Definitions for the *SafeStat Analysis Report* {#a.1-field-definitions-for-the-safestat-analysis-report .unnumbered}

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *State Rank*      Ranks carriers within a state - first stratified by
                    category (Category A has SafeStat Scores 350-550,
                    Category B has SafeStat Scores 225-350, and Category
                    C has SafeStat Scores of 150-225) and then are sorted
                    by the SafeStat Score within each category.

  *Comb. Rank*      Ranks carriers within carrier population nationwide -
                    first stratified by category (A, B, and C) and then
                    are sorted by the SafeStat Score.

  DOT#              US DOT number

  *Carrier Name*    The name of the carrier

  *City*            The city in which the carrier is domiciled

  *ST*              The state in which the carrier is domiciled

  *CNT CDE*         County Code where carriers is domiciled

  *HM/PASS*         Identifies if motor carrier hauls hazardous material
                    or is a passenger carrier.

  *\# of Power      Number of power units owned, term-leased, and
  Units*            trip-leased usually comes from the census data on
                    Forms MCS-150 and 151

  *SafeStat         Carriers with 2 or more deficient SEAs (deficient
  Indicatr*         defined as SEA values of 75 or higher) are given a
                    SafeStat Score that is equal to the sum of the
                    deficient SEA values for the Vehicle and Safety
                    Management SEAs, plus 2 x the deficient Accident SEA,
                    plus 1.5 x the deficient Driver SEA. SEA values of
                    less than 75 are not be used in calculating the
                    SafeStat Score.

  *Acc. SEA Value*  Accident SEA Value is calculated on a 0-100 scale.
                    The higher the value, the worse the performance. Only
                    Accident SEA Values of 75 or greater are used in
                    calculating the SafeStat Score. Accident SEA Values
                    of less than 75 are placed in parenthesis

  *Dr. SEA Value*   Driver SEA Value is calculated on a 0-100 scale. The
                    higher the value, the worse the performance. Only
                    Driver SEA Values of 75 or greater are used in
                    calculating the SafeStat Score. Driver SEA Values of
                    less than 75 are placed in parenthesis. If the Driver
                    SEA Value is blank, there were not sufficient data to
                    provide a Driver SEA Value.

  *Safety Mgmt SEA  Safety Management SEA Value is calculated on a 0-100
  Value*            scale. The higher the value the worse the
                    performance. Only Safety Management SEA Values of 75
                    or more are used in calculating the SafeStat Score.
                    Safety Management SEA Values of less than 75 are
                    placed in parenthesis. If the Safety Management SEA
                    Value is blank, there were not sufficient data to
                    provide a Safety Management SEA Value.

  *Veh. SEA Value*  Vehicle SEA Value is calculated on a 0-100 scale. The
                    higher the value the worse the performance. Only
                    Vehicle SEA Values of 75 or more are used in
                    calculating the SafeStat Score. Vehicle SEA Values of
                    less than 75 are placed in parenthesis. If the
                    Vehicle SEA Value is blank, there were not sufficient
                    data to provide a Vehicle SEA Value.

  *Rev. Date*       Date of most recent Compliance Review (CR) within the
                    last 18 months. If the most recent CR is older than
                    18 months the CR data will not be displayed on the
                    SafeStat Report.

  *Overall Rating*  Overall Safety Rating from the most recent CR; S -
                    Satisfactory; C - Conditional; and U - Unsatisfactory

  *\# of Enf*       Number of closed enforcement cases since 1986

                    
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

![](media/image48.png){width="5.077083333333333in"
height="8.4in"}Example A.1: SafeStat Analysis Report -- SafeStat Scored
Carriers for Combined States

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

## A.2 Field Definitions for the *SafeStat Analysis Report \-- Supplemental List* {#a.2-field-definitions-for-the-safestat-analysis-report----supplemental-list .unnumbered}

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  DOT#              US DOT number

  *Carrier Name*    The name of the carrier.

  *ST*              State in which the carrier is domiciled

  *Compliance       Individual factor ratings from the latest CR
  Review Factors:*  performed within the last 18 months: S -
                    Satisfactory, C - Conditional, & U - Unsatisfactory

  *1*               Rating in Factor 1 (General)

  *2*               Rating in Factor 2 (Driver)

  *3*               Rating in Factor 3 (Operational)

  *4*               Rating in Factor 4 (Vehicle)

  *5*               Rating in Factor 5 (Haz. Mat.)

  *6*               Rating in Factor 6 (Accident)

  *CR-Violations :* Number of violations of Acute and Critical
                    regulations from the latest CR performed within the
                    last 18 months:

  *DR A-C*          Number of violations of Driver-related Acute and
                    Critical regulations. Violations are used in the
                    Driver Review Indicator (DRI).

  *VH A-C*          Number of violations of Vehicle-related Acute and
                    Critical regulations. Violations are used in the
                    Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI).

  *SM A-C*          Number of violations of Safety Management-related
                    Acute and Critical regulations. Violations are used
                    in the Safety Management Review Indicator (SMRI).

  *HM A-C*          Number of violations of Hazardous Material-related
                    Acute and Critical regulations. Violations are used
                    in the HM Review Indicator (HMRI).

  *\# of NGA Acc.*  Number of state-reported crashes involving the
                    carrier in the last 30 months.

  *\# of Recdbl.    Number of Recordable crashes found during a CR within
  Acc.*             the last 12 months. All findings from the review are
                    displayed, even if no Recordable crashes were found.

  *Veh. Insp.*      Number of vehicle roadside inspections in the last 30
                    months

  *Drv. Insp.*      Number of driver roadside inspections in the last 30
                    months

  *Veh. OOS Rate*   Vehicle OOS rate using the last 30 months of data.
                    This is the number of vehicles placed OOS divided by
                    the number of vehicle inspections. This rate is not
                    time-weighted.

  *Veh. OOS Viol.   Shows the average number of vehicle OOS violations
  Rate*             issued per vehicle OOS inspection. For example, if a
                    carrier had 2 inspections that resulted in the
                    vehicle being place OOS, one inspection resulted in 3
                    vehicle OOS violations and the other inspection
                    resulting in 1 vehicle OOS violations, the Vehicle
                    OOS Violation Rate would be (1 + 3) / 2 = 2. Note,
                    this number will always be greater than 1.

  *Drv. OOS Rate*   Driver OOS rate using the last 30 months of data.
                    This is the number of drivers placed OOS divided by
                    the number of driver inspections. This rate is not
                    time-weighted.

  *Drv. OOS Viol.   Shows the average number of driver OOS violations
  Rate*             issued per driver OOS inspection. Note, this number
                    will always be greater than 1.

  *Viol. OOS Order* Number of violations of OOS orders (i.e., jumping OOS
                    orders, both vehicle and driver) in the last 30
                    months

  *\# of HM OOS     Number of HM OOS inspections in the last 30 months
  Insp*             

  *\# of Mov.       Number of moving violations issued in conjunction
  Viol.*            with roadside inspections over the past 30 months.

  *Moving Viol.     Moving Violation Indicator (MVI) are calculated on a
  Indic.*           0-100 scale. The higher the MVI, the worse the
                    performance. Only MVIs of 75 or higher are shown and
                    used in calculating the Driver SEA. If the MVI is
                    blank, there were not enough moving violations to
                    reach an indicator of 75 or higher

  *Total \# of      Number of drivers used to normalize the number of
  Drv.*             moving violations in the MVI.

  *#LTR*            Number of Safety Status letters previously sent to
                    motor carrier.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

![](media/image49.png){width="4.340277777777778in"
height="8.5in"}Example A.2: SafeStat Analysis Report -- Supplemental
List

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

## A.3 Field Definitions for the *Motor Carrier Safety Record Report* {#a.3-field-definitions-for-the-motor-carrier-safety-record-report .unnumbered}

In the states participating in PRISM, some of the SafeStat-scored
carriers were sent warning letters. The following Motor Carrier Safety
Record Report is an example of the warning letter attachment that was
mailed to the carrier. This report presents the census and safety
information that led to the carrier's SafeStat score.

**Section I; Safety Evaluation Summary** - provides descriptive
information and indicates the safety areas where the carrier is
deficient.

Identifying Information

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Carrier Legal    The carrier name used in legal transactions.
  Name*             

  *Carrier 'Doing   The carrier name used in normal practice.
  Business As'      
  Name*             

  *US DOT#*         A unique number assigned by the U.S. Department of
                    Transportation to the carrier reported under the
                    carrier name. Carriers that provide interstate
                    service, haul hazardous material, or carry passengers
                    are required to apply for this number.

  *Telephone        The carrier's telephone number includes the 3-digit
  Number*           area code, 3-digit local exchange and 4-digit number.

  *Street (physical The number and street at which the carrier is
  address)*         located.

  *Street (mailing  The number and street at which the carrier's mail is
  address)*         delivered.

  *City (physical   The city in which the carrier is located.
  address)*         

  *City (mailing    The city in which the carrier's mail is delivered.
  address)*         

  *State (physical  The state in which the carrier is located.
  address)*         

  *State (mailing   The state in which the carrier's mail is delivered.
  address)*         

  *Zip (physical    The 5-digit Zip number appropriate to the physical
  address)*         location of the carrier.

  *Zip (mailing     The 5-digit Zip number used in delivering mail to the
  address)*         carrier.

  *Expanded Zip     The 4 digit expanded Zip number amended to the Zip
  Code (mailing     used in delivering mail to the carrier.
  address)*         

  *County Name      The name of the county in which the carrier is
  (physical         located.
  address)*         

  *Hazardous        'N' if the carrier does not haul hazardous material,
  Material Carrier* 'Y' if the carrier hauls hazardous material.

  *Passenger        'N' if the carrier does not carry passenger, 'Y' if
  Carrier*          the carrier carries passenger.

  *Number of Power  The number of tractors, trucks, and buses owned and
  Units Owned and   term-leased by the carrier.
  Term-Leased*      
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

[Safety Evaluation Summary]{.underline}

> Each of the four Safety Evaluation Areas (i.e., Accident, Driver,
> Vehicle, and Safety Management) is enumerated. When a carrier's
> performance is found to be deficient with respect to a SEA, a mark 'X'
> is displayed beside the SEA.

**Section II; Safety Evaluation Area Detail** - There are four
subsections that provide details on the respective SEAs (i.e., Accident,
Driver, Vehicle, Safety Management). When data for a SEA are available,
that report subsection is generated and amended to the report.

[Accident]{.underline}

State-Reported Crashes (used in the Accident Involvement Indicator):

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Accident Date*   The date in which the crash occurred.

  *Event State*     The state in which the crash occurred.

  *Location*        A brief description of the location where the crash
                    occurred.

  *Acc Rpt Number*  The number that identifies the police crash report.

  *Fatalities*      The number of persons killed in or outside a vehicle
                    at the scene of the crash.

  *Injuries*        The number of persons injured in or outside a vehicle
                    at the scene of the crash.

  *Driver's Lic     The state in which the driver involved in the crash
  State*            is licensed.

  *Vehicle ID       The vehicle identification number is a unique
  (VIN)*            combination of alphanumeric characters formulated by
                    the manufacturer of the first vehicle listed in the
                    state crash report.

  *Veh Lic State*   The state/district issuing the license plate of the
                    motor vehicle.

  *Vehicle Plate    The numeric, alphanumeric, or alphabetic characters,
  Number*           exactly as displayed, on the plate or tag affixed to
                    the motor vehicle.

  *Number of Power  The number of tractors, trucks, and buses owned and
  Units Owned and   term-leased by the carrier.
  Term-Leased*      
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Compliance Review (review data used for the Recordable Accident
Indicator)

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Date of Last     The date of the last compliance review done on the
  Review*           carrier, if conducted within the last 12 months.

  *Recordable       The number of recordable crashes that occurred within
  Accident in 12    the year previous to the last review.
  Months Prior to   
  Review*           

  *Vehicle Miles    The number of vehicle miles traveled within the year
  Traveled in 12    previous to the last review.
  Months Prior to   
  Review*           
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

[Driver]{.underline}

*Roadside Inspections (Inspections that resulted in a driver being
placed Out-of-Service within the last 30 months)*. *For each roadside
inspection*:

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Inspection Date* The date in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Event State*     The state in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Inspection       A unique number identifying the inspection report.
  Report Number*    

  *Inspection       There are five types of inspection levels: full
  Level*            inspection, walk-around inspection, driver only
                    inspection, special study inspection, and terminal
                    inspection.

  *Driver's Last    The last name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Driver's First   The first name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Number of Driver The number of driver Out-Of-Service violations found
  OOS Violations*   in the inspection.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Moving Violations (Moving Violations found in conjunction with Driver
Inspections within the last 30 months):

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Inspection Date* The date in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Event State*     The state in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Inspection       A unique number identifying the inspection report.
  Report Number*    

  *Inspection       There are five types of inspection levels: full
  Level*            inspection, walk-around inspection, driver only
                    inspection, special study inspection, and terminal
                    inspection.

  *Driver's Last    The last name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Driver's First   The first name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Violation Code/  Violation Code and description of moving violation.
  Description*      

  *Drivers*         Total number of Interstate and Intrastate drivers.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

*For statistics on recent driver inspections*:

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Total Driver     The total number of driver inspections conducted
  Inspections       within the last 30 months of the date of the report.
  within the last   
  30 months of      
  report date*      

  *Total            The total number of occurrences in which drivers
  Out-Of-Service    violate an OOS order within the last 30 months of the
  Orders Violated*  date of the report.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

*Compliance Review*

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Date of Last     The date of the last compliance review done on the
  Review*           carrier, if conducted within the last 18 months.

  *Primary Federal  Primary citation number for this violation.
  Regulation*       

  *Secondary        Secondary citation number for this violation.
  Federal           
  Regulation*       

  *Violation Type*  Acute or Critical.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

[Vehicle]{.underline}

*Roadside Inspections (Inspections that resulted in vehicles placed
Out-of-Service within the last 30 months)*. *For each roadside
inspection*:

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Inspection Date* The date in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Event State*     The state in which the inspection was conducted.

  *Inspection       A unique number identifying the inspection report.
  Report Number*    

  *Inspection       There are five types of inspection levels: full
  Level*            inspection, walk-around inspection, driver only
                    inspection, special study inspection, and terminal
                    inspection.

  *Driver's Last    The last name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Driver's First   The first name of the inspected driver.
  Name*             

  *Number of        The number of vehicle Out-Of-Service violations found
  Vehicle OOS       in the inspection.
  Violations*       

  *Vehicle Plate    The numeric, alphanumeric, or alphabetic characters,
  Number*           exactly as displayed, on the plate or tag affixed to
                    the motor vehicle.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

*For statistics on recent vehicle inspections*:

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Total Vehicle    The total number of vehicle inspections conducted
  Inspections       within the last 30 months of the date of the report.
  within the last   
  30 months of      
  report date*      

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

*Compliance Review*

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Date of Last     The date of the last compliance review done on the
  Review*           carrier, if conducted within the last 18 months.

  *Primary Federal  Primary citation number for this violation.
  Regulation*       

  *Secondary        Secondary citation number for this violation.
  Federal           
  Regulation*       

  *Violation Type*  Acute or Critical.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

[Safety Management]{.underline}

DOT/OMCHS Federal Safety Regulation Enforcement (closed enforcement
cases from 11/87 to the present). For each closed case:

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Date Enforcement The date in which the enforcement case was closed.
  Case Closed*      

  *Investigation    An alphanumeric combination of characters which
  \#*               uniquely identifies the federal case.

  *Violation        The violation sections cited in the enforcement case.
  Section \#*       

  *Counts Settled*  The number of counts settled for the specific
                    violation section \# addressed in the case.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Compliance Review

  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  *Date of Last     The date of the last compliance review done on the
  Review*           carrier, if conducted within the last 18 months.

  *Hazardous        
  Materials related 
  violations*       

  *Primary Federal  Primary citation number for this violation.
  Regulation*       

  *Secondary        Secondary citation number for this violation.
  Federal           
  Regulation*       

  *Violation Type*  Acute or Critical.

  *Safety           
  Management        
  related           
  violations*       

  *Primary Federal  Primary citation number for this violation.
  Regulation*       

  *Secondary        Secondary citation number for this violation.
  Federal           
  Regulation*       

  *Violation Type*  Acute or Critical.
  ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Example A.3a: Page 1 of the Motor Carrier Safety Record Report

![](media/image50.png){width="6.486111111111111in"
height="7.6506944444444445in"}

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

Example A.3b: Page 2 of the Motor Carrier Safety Record Report

![](media/image51.png){width="6.485416666666667in"
height="7.492361111111111in"}

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

Example A.3c: Page 3 of the Motor Carrier Safety Record Report

![](media/image52.png){width="5.658333333333333in" height="7.3in"}

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

Example A.3d: Page 4 of the Motor Carrier Safety Record Report

![](media/image53.png){width="6.490972222222222in"
height="7.080555555555556in"}

**All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.**

Example A.3e: Page 5 of the Motor Carrier Safety Record Report

![](media/image54.png){width="6.481944444444444in"
height="7.154166666666667in"}

All carrier names and DOT numbers are fictitious, intended for
illustration purposes only.

# B [ ]{.underline}Calculating Review Measures {#b-calculating-review-measures .Heading--A .unnumbered}

Review measures DRM, VRM, SMRM, and HMRM are calculated for DRI in the
Driver SEA, the VRI in the Vehicle SEA, and the SMRI and HMRI in the
Safety Management SEA, respectively. Each of these four review measures
has a specified set of associated acute and critical regulations, and in
the case of the HMRI, hazardous material-related severe regulations. See
Tables B-1 to B-5 at the end of this appendix for a list of associated
acute, critical, and severe regulations. A review measure is scored
based on the number and severity of each violation of associated
regulations. The following steps detail SafeStat\'s calculation of the
carrier\'s review measure:

A. Identify all violations of acute, critical, and severe regulations
related to the given review measure, should such violations exist. If a
carrier does not have any violations of acute, critical, or severe
regulations related to the measure, the review measure is assigned a
value of 0.

B. If the carrier has one or more violations of acute and critical
regulations related to the measure, obtain the following information:

  -------------- --------------------------------- -----------------------
                 Violations of Critical            \# of Occurrences
                 Regulations:                      

                                                   \# of Records Checked

                                                   

                 Violations of Acute Regulations:  \# of Occurrences
  -------------- --------------------------------- -----------------------

C.  Assign the severity weight to each violation of acute and critical
    regulations using the Table B-1 at the end of this appendix.

> Each violation of acute and critical regulations has a corresponding
> severity weight that depends on the nature of the violation. The
> severity weight for each violation was determined by the following
> criteria:

  --- ------------- -- -----------------------------------------------------
      **Severity       **Criterion**
      weight**         

      1                Violations of critical regulations that are
                       compliance or paperwork oriented.

      1                Violations of hazardous material-related severe
                       regulations.

      2                Violations of critical regulations that are
                       performance oriented.

      3                Violations of all acute regulations.
  --- ------------- -- -----------------------------------------------------

D. Calculate the weighted Violation Value for each violation, as
follows:

-   For each violation of critical regulations:

**Violation Value = Severity Weight x (10 + (Violation Rate x 10))**

where Violation Rate = \# of Occurrences / \# of Records Checked

For example, if a violation of a critical regulation was cited in the CR
as having had occurred 10 times out of 20 records check (violation rate
of 0.5) and was considered "performance oriented" (severity weight of
2), then

Violation Value = 2 x (10 + (0.5 x 10)) = 2 x (10 + 5) = 2 x 15 = 30

-   For each violation of acute regulations:

**Violation Value = Severity Weight x (10 + \# of Occurrences)**

where \# of Occurrences is set to a maximum of 10

and the severity weight of non-ratable and ratable violations of acute
regulations are 1 and 3 respectively

For example, if a violation of an acute regulation was cited in the CR
as having had occurred 5 times then

Violation Value = 3 x (10 + 5) = 3 x 15 = 45

-   [For each violation of hazardous material-related severe
    regulations:]{.underline}

Violation similar in nature to a violation of critical regulations that
inidicate breakdowns in management and/or operational controls will be
calculated the same as a violation of critical regulations

Violation similar in nature to violations of acute regulations that
demand immediate corrective action will be calculated that same as a
violation of acute regulations

E. Obtain the carrier\'s review measure for the given SEA by summing all
of the violation values associated with the measure. Using the two
violation value examples in Step C of 30 and 45, SafeStat will calculate
the review measure as 75 (30 + 45).

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-1. Driver Review Measure</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver known to have an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or
greater.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver who has refused to submit to an alcohol or
controlled-substances test required under part 382.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver known to have used a controlled substance.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver known to have tested positive for a controlled
substance.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver who has not undergone a return-to-duty alcohol
test.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver who has not undergone a return-to-duty
controlled-substances test with a result indicating a verified negative
result for controlled substances.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Allowing a driver to perform safety-sensitive function, after
engaging in conduct prohibited by Subpart B, without being valuated by a
substances-abuse professional, as required by § 382.605.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver within 24 hours after being found to have an alcohol
concentration of 0.02 or greater, but less than 0.04.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver who has not undergone a return-to-duty alcohol test
with a result indicating an alcohol concentration of less than .02 or
with verified negative test result, after engaging in conduct prohibited
by part 382 subpart B.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Operating a commercial motor vehicle without a valid commercial
driver's license.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Knowingly allowing, requiring, permitting, or authorizing an employee
with a Commercial Driver's License which is suspended, revoked, or
canceled by a state or who is disqualified to operate a commercial motor
vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Knowingly allowing, requiring, permitting, or authorizing an employee
with more than one commercial driver's license to operate a commercial
motor vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Knowingly allowing, requiring, permitting, or authorizing a driver to
drive who is disqualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a physically-unqualified driver.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a disqualified driver.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Operating a motor vehicle not in accordance with the laws,
ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being
operated.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting a driver to drive while under the influence
of, or in possession of, a narcotic drug, amphetamine, or any other
substance capable of rendering the driver incapable of safely operating
a motor vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting a driver to drive a motor vehicle while under
the influence of, or in possession of, an intoxicating beverage.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting a driver who shows evidence of having
consumed an intoxicating beverage within 4 hours to operate a motor
vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.6 Scheduling a run which would necessitate the vehicle being
operated at speeds in excess of those prescribed.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting a driver to drive without the vehicle’s cargo
being properly distributed and adequately secured.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive more than 15 hours. (driving in Alaska).</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive more than 15
hours. (driving in Alaska).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty 20 hours. (driving in
Alaska)</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty 20 hours. (driving in Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-2" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.201</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.211</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.213(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.215</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.309(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.309(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.503</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.505(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.605(c)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>383.23(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>383.37(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>383.37(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>383.51(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.11(b)(4)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.15(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.4(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.5(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.5(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.6</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>392.9(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(1)(i)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(1)(ii)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Table B-1. Driver Review Measure (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty more than 70 hours in 7
consecutive days. (driving in Alaska)</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 70 hours in 7 consecutive days. (driving in
Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty more than 80 hours in 8
consecutive days. (driving in Alaska)</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 80 hours in 8 consecutive days. (driving in
Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive more than 15
hours. (driving in Alaska).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty 20 hours. (driving in Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 70 hours in 7 consecutive days. (driving in
Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 80 hours in 8 consecutive days. (driving in
Alaska)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
short-haul property-carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive
after having been on duty 16 consecutive hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive more than 10 hours.</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property-carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive more than 11
hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty 15 hours.</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property-carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after the end
of the 14<sup>th</sup> hour after coming on duty.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty more than 60 hours in 7
consecutive days.</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property-carrying commercial motor vehicle driver driver to drive after
having been on duty more than 60 hours in 7 consecutive days.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective through January 3, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
driver to drive after having been on duty more than 70 hours in 8
consecutive days.</p>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property-carrying commercial motor vehicle driver driver to drive after
having been on duty more than 70 hours in 8 consecutive days.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to restart a period of
7 consecutive days without taking an off‑duty period of 34 or more
consecutive hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to restart a period of
8 consecutive days without taking an off‑duty period of 34 or more
consecutive hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive more than
10 hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty 15 hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-1" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-3" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(1)(iii)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(1)(iv)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(2)(i)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(2)(ii)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(2)(iii)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.1(h)(2)(iv)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.1(o)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.3(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.3(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>395.3(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="3"><blockquote>
<p>395.3(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.3(c)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.3(c)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.5(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>395.5(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Table B-1. Driver Review Measure (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="4"></td>
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-2. Vehicle Review Measure</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="4"></td>
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-3. Safety Management Review Measures</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
property‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to restart a period of
8 consecutive days without taking an off‑duty period of 34 or more
consecutive hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive more than
10 hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty 15 hours.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 60 hours in 7 consecutive days.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><em>Effective January 4, 2004:</em> Requiring or permitting a
passenger‑carrying commercial motor vehicle driver to drive after having
been on duty more than 70 hours in 8 consecutive days.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>False reports of records-of-duty status.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to correct out-of-service defects listed by driver in a
driver vehicle-inspection report before the vehicle is operated
again.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to promptly repair parts and accessories not meeting minimum
periodic inspection standards.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting the operation of a motor vehicle declared
"out-of-service" before repairs were made.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to implement an alcohol and/or controlled-substances testing
program.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver before the motor carrier has received a negative
pre-employment controlled-substance test result.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to conduct post-accident testing on driver for alcohol and/or
controlled substances.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to implement a random controlled-substances and/or an alcohol
testing program.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Failing to conduct random alcohol testing at an annual rate of not
less than the applicable annual rate of the average number of driver
positions.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to conduct random controlled-substances testing at an annual
rate of not less than the applicable rate of the average number of
driver positions.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Failing to subject a driver who has been identified as needing
assistance to at least six unannounced follow-up alcohol and
controlled-substance tests in the first 12 months following the driver's
return-to-duty.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Operating a passenger carrying vehicle without having the required
minimum levels of financial responsibility in effect.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain at principal place of business required proof of
financial responsibility for passenger vehicles.</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-2" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-4" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.3(c)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.5(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.5(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.5(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.5(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.8(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-3" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-5" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.11(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.17(g)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.9(c)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-4" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-6" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.115(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.301(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.303(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.305</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>382.305(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>382.305(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>382.605(c)(2)(ii)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td colspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>387.31(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>387.31(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-3. Safety Management Review Measures
(continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="4"></td>
<td rowspan="4"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-4. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Acute/Critical Regulations)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>2</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Operating a motor vehicle without having the required minimum levels
of financial responsibility coverage in effect.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain required proof of financial responsibility at
principal place of business.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain copies of all accident reports required by State
or other governmental entities or insurers.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Making, or causing to make fraudulent or intentionally-false
statements or records and/or reproducing fraudulent records.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver not medically examined and certified.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a driver not medically examined and certified each 24
months.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain driver-qualification file on each driver
employed.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain inquiries into driving record in driver's
qualification file.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain medical examiner's certificate in driver's
qualification file.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to require a driver to make a record-of-duty status.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to require a driver to forward the original of the
record-of-duty status within 13 days of completion.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to preserve driver's record-of-duty status for 6 months.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to require driver to prepare driver vehicle-inspection
report.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a commercial motor vehicle not periodically inspected.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to keep minimum records of inspection and vehicle
maintenance.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Carrier failing to give immediate telephone notice of an incident
involving hazardous materials.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Carrier failing to report in writing an incident involving hazardous
materials.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to instruct a category of employees in hazardous-materials
regulations.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting a shipment of hazardous materials not accompanied by a
properly prepared shipping paper</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to maintain proper accessibility of shipping papers.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Moving a transport vehicle containing hazardous material that is not
properly-marked or placarded.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting a package bearing a poison label in the same transport
vehicle with material marked or known to be foodstuff, feed, or any
edible material intended for consumption by humans or animals unless an
exception in §177.841(e)(i) or (ii) is met.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting a shipment of hazardous material in a cargo tank that
has not been inspected or retested in accordance with §180.407.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to periodically test and inspect a cargo tank.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to mark a cargo tank which passed an inspection or test
required by § 180.407.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to retain cargo tank manufacturer’s data report or
certificate and related papers, as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-5" class="unnumbered">Federal </h1>
<h1 id="section-7" class="unnumbered">Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>387.7(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>387.7(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>390.15(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>390.35</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.45(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.45(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.51(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.51(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>391.51(b)(7)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.8(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.8(i)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>395.8(k)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.11(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.17(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>396.3(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-6" class="unnumbered">Federal</h1>
<h1 id="section-8" class="unnumbered">Section </h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>171.15</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>171.16</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.800(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.817(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.817(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.823(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.841(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.407(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.407(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.415</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.417(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-4. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Acute/Critical Regulations) (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>3</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="5"></td>
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-5. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Hazardous Material-Related Severe Regulations)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Similar to Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical*</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Failinf to retain copies of cargo tank manufacturer’s certificate and
related papers (or alternative report) as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Permitting a person to smoke or carry a lighted cigarette, cigar, or
pipe within 25 feet of a motor vehicle containing Class 1 materials,
Class 5 materials, or flammable materials classified as Division 2.1,
Class 3, Division 4.1 an 4.2.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Failing to furnish a driver of motor vehicle transporting Division
1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 (explosive) materials with a copy of the rules of part
397 and/or emergency response instructions.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Failing to ensure a motor vehicle containing Division 1.1, 1.2, or
1.3 (explosive) material is attended at all times by its driver or a
qualified representative.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Requiring or permitting the operation of a motor vehicle carrying
Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 explosives in that is not accompanied by a
written route plan. (critical) (Number checked is the number of
instances checked for compliance with § 397.67(d).)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Parking a motor vehicle containing Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3
materials within 5 feet of traveled portion of highway.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="2"><blockquote>
<p>Parking a motor vehicle containing hazardous material(s) other than
Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 materials within 5 feet of traveled portion of
highway or street.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Manufacturing, assembling, certifying, inspecting, or repairing a
cargo tank or cargo tank motor vehicle manufactured to a DOT
specification, without registering.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Representing, marking, certifying, selling or offering a package or
container as meeting the requirements of this subchapter, whether or not
it is used or intended to be used for the transportation of a hazardous
materials when it was not manufactured, fabricated, marked, maintained,
reconditioned, repaired, or retested in accordance with this
subchapter.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a hazardous material without preparing a shipping paper.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to enter the proper description of a hazardous material on a
shipping paper.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to enter on a shipping paper the notation "DOT-E" followed by
the exemption number.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to enter the hazardous substance constituent on a shipping
paper when not identified by the proper shipping name.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to include on shipping papers for a shipment of radioactive
material physical and chemical form, activity, and category of
label.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to enter the words "Poison Inhalation Hazard" or "Toxic
Inhalation Hazard" on the shipping paper when required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to enter the word "HOT" on the shipping paper for elevated
temperature materials as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a hazardous waste without a hazardous waste manifest.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to prepare the hazardous waste manifest in accordance with 40
CFR Part 262.</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><h1 id="secondary-federal-section" class="unnumbered">Secondary
Federal Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h1 id="federal-7" class="unnumbered">Federal</h1>
<h1 id="section-9" class="unnumbered">Section </h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.417(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>397.13(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>397.19(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>397.5(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><h1 id="section-10" class="unnumbered"></h1>
<blockquote>
<p>397.67(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>397.7(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>397.7(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
<p><strong>Federal Section</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>107.502(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>171.2(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.200(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.202(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.203(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.203(c)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.203(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.203(m)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.203(n)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.205(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.205(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-5. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Hazardous Material-Related Severe Regulations) (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Similar to Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical*</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to properly mark a non-bulk package of hazardous material
with the proper shipping name and identification number.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to mark a package of hazardous materials with the words
"Inhalation Hazard" when required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to mark a package containing Class 1 material with the
appropriate EX-number.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to properly mark a portable tank of hazardous materials with
the proper shipping name and identification number.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide to a motor carrier the required identification
numbers for a portable tank.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide to a motor carrier the required identification
numbers for cargo tank.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to properly label a package of hazardous materials.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to affix the correct label to a package of radioactive
material.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide the required placards to a motor carrier.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide emergency-response information.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide an emergency-response telephone number.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide an emergency-response telephone number which is
monitored at all times that a hazardous material is in transit.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to provide the 24-hour emergency-response telephone number of
a person who is knowledgeable of the hazards and characteristics of the
hazardous materials being shipped of a person who does not have
comprehensive emergency-response and accident-mitigation
information.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to train hazardous-material employees as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a forbidden material for transportation.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering for transportation materials which if combined, would likely
cause a dangerous evolution of heat, flammable or poisonous gas or
vapor, or corrosive material</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a hazardous material in an unauthorized package.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting hazardous materials in a portable tank which has an
identifiable release of hazardous materials to the environment.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering for transportation a hazardous material in a package which
resulted in the effectiveness of the package being substantially
reduced.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Loading a cargo tank with a hazardous material which exceeds the
maximum weight of lading marked on the specification plate.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to brace containers of hazardous materials to prevent
relative motion between containers.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Loading into or on, or unloading a Class 1 (explosive) material from
a motor vehicle with the engine running.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Loading hazardous materials not in accordance with the segregation
table.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering manifolded (interconnected) cylinders except as
authorized.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a charged/filled cylinder that has a container pressure at
70 <sup>O</sup>F (21.1<sup>O</sup> C) which exceeds its marked or
designated service pressure.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a charged/filled cylinder that has a container pressure at
130<sup>O</sup>F (54.4<sup>O</sup>C) which exceeds 5/4 times its marked
or designated service pressure.</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><h1 id="secondary-federal-section-1" class="unnumbered">Secondary
Federal Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.834(g)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.835(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.848(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
<p><strong>Federal</strong></p>
<p><strong>Section</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.301(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.313(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.320(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.326</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.326(c)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.328(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.400(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.403</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.506(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.600(c)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.604(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.604(a)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.604(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>172.704(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.21(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.21(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.22(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.24(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.24(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.24(b)(d)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.30</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.30</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.30</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.301(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.301(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.301(f)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-5. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Hazardous Material-Related Severe Regulations) (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Similar to Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical*</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a charged/filled cylinder with flammable, corrosive, or
noxious gases without a prescribed valve protection device.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a charged/filled cylinder that was manufactured outside the
United States, not in accordance with prescribed DOT specifications.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering or accepting for transportation a hazardous material in an
unauthorized cargo-tank motor vehicle.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting or loading two or more materials in a cargo-tank motor
vehicle which resulted in an unsafe condition (fire, explosion,
etc.)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting a hazardous material in a cargo-tank motor vehicle which
had a dangerous reaction when in contact with the tank.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Loading a division 6.1 material in a cargo tank having a
maximum-allowable working pressure of less than 25 psig.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting Division 6.1 material oxidizer liquid, liquid organic
peroxide, or corrosive liquid in cargo-tank piping without bottom damage
protection devices meeting the requirements of §178.337-10 or §
178.345-8(b).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a cylinder that is not free of leaks, bulges, defective
valves or safety devices, or bears evidence of physical abuse.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a charged/filled cylinder for which required markings have
not been properly maintained.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a cylinder charged with fluorine equipped with a safety
relief device.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a cylinder that has not been retested and marked as
required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a cylinder charged/filled with a poisonous material without
providing additional protection as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Using a Type B package not designed and constructed in accordance
with all applicable requirements contained in 10 CFR 71.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a radioactive material described, marked and packaged as a
limited quantity that exceeds .5 mr on the surface of a package.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a radioactive material for transportation not in proper
condition for shipment.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering or accepting for transportation in a type A package a
quantity greater than that authorized.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering for transportation in a type B package a quantity greater
than that authorized.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material that exceeds allowable
external radiation levels.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material exceeding 122<sup>O</sup>
F on the external surface of the package. (Non-exclusive use)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material exceeding 185 <sup>O</sup>
F on the external surface of the package. (Exclusive use)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material with removable
contamination in excess of 22 dpm/square cm.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material with removable
contamination in excess of 220 dpm/square cm.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a package of radioactive material with removable
contamination in excess of 220 dpm/square cm.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Storing in one area packages of radioactive material that exceed a
total Transport Index of 50.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Offering a fissile material, controlled shipment in a conveyance
containing other packages of any Class 7 (radioactive) material required
to bear one of the labels prescribed in 49 CFR 172.403.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Transporting a forbidden material.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Operating a specification cargo tank containing a hazardous material
which does not conform to the retest and inspection requirements set
forth in part 180.</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><h1 id="secondary-federal-section-2" class="unnumbered">Secondary
Federal Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
<p><strong>Federal</strong></p>
<p><strong>Section</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.301(g)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.301(i)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.33(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.33(a)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.33(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.33(c)(5)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.33(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.34(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.34(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.34(d)(4)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.34(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.40(d)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.413</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.421</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.422</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.431(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.431(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.441</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.442(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.442(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.443(a)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.443(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.443(b)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.447</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>173.457(b)(3)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.801</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>177.824</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Table B-5. Hazardous Material Review Measure (Violations of
Hazardous Materials-Related Severe Regulations) (continued)</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><p><strong>Severity</strong></p>
<p><strong>Weight</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>1</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td rowspan="5"><blockquote>
<p>*Indicates whether the violation of the severe regulation is
calculated the same as a violation of an acute regulation (A) or a
violation of a critical regulation (C).</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Similar to Acute/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Critical*</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>A</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>C</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><blockquote>
<p><strong>Description</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Performing a repair of a non-ASME Code stamped cargo tank while
failing to hold a valid ASME Certificate of Authorization for the use of
the “U” Stamp or a National Board Certificate of Authorization for the
use of the “R” stamp. Non-ASME tanks only.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Performing a repair of an ASME Code “U” stamped cargo tank while
failing to hold a valid National Board Certificate of Authorization for
the use of the “R” stamp. ASME tanks only.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to perform a repair of an ASME Code “U” stamped cargo tank in
accordance with the National Board Inspection Code. ASME tanks only.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to verify the suitability of a repair affecting the
structural integrity of the cargo tank by testing as prescribed in the
applicable specification or in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to leak test repairs done to piping or valves. Note: Not a
leakage test as prescribed in § 180.407(h).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Performing a (stretching, modification, or rebarrelling) of a
non-ASME Code stamped cargo tank while failing to hold a valid ASME
Certificate of Authorization for the use of the “U” Stamp or a National
Board Certificate of Authorization for the use of the “R” stamp.
Non-ASME tanks only.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Performing a stretching, modification, or rebarrelling of an ASME
Code “U” stamped cargo tank while failing to hold a valid National Board
Certificate of Authorization for the use of the “R” stamp. ASME tanks
only</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to performing a stretching, modification, or rebarrelling of
a cargo tank to the applicable specification.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to have a stretching, modification, or rebarrelling of a
cargo tank certified by a Design Certifying Engineer.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to perform a (stretching, modification, or rebarrelling) of
an ASME Code “U” stamped cargo tank in accordance with the National
Board Inspection Code.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to verify the suitability of a modification affecting the
structural integrity of the cargo tank with respect to pressure by
testing as prescribed in the applicable specification or in
§180.407(g)(1)(iv).</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to retain records of repair, modification, stretching, or
rebarrelling made to each tank, as required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to retain a copy of test and inspection reports as
required.</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>Failing to retain a copy of the pressure test report as required. MC
330 and MC 331 cargo tanks only</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><h1 id="secondary-federal-section-3" class="unnumbered">Secondary
Federal Section</h1></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p><strong>Primary</strong></p>
<p><strong>Federal Section</strong></p></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(b)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(b)(5)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(b)(6)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(c)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(1)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(3)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(5)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(9)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(d)(10)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.413(e)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.417(b)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
<td><blockquote>
<p>180.417(c)(2)</p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

# Appendix C [ ]{.underline}Improvements for SafeStat {#appendix-c-improvements-for-safestat .Heading--A .unnumbered}

### C.1 Changes for Version 8.6 (January 2004) {#c.1-changes-for-version-8.6-january-2004 .unnumbered}

Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) will use [only]{.underline} closed
enforcement cases initiated from compliance reviews (CRs) or terminal
audits. Carriers will still need CR (or terminal audit)-initiated
enforcements within the past 30 months to receive a deficient EHI of 75
or higher. Also, EHIs will not be calculated for carriers with a single
closed enforcement case that is older than 30 months. The prior version
of SafeStat calculates an EHI for any carrier with an enforcement case
within the past six years. This change will allow the EHI to be more
responsive in assessing carriers with more current problems or a pattern
of long-term problems. Note that carriers with a closed enforcement case
within last 30 months and carriers with multiple closed enforcements
over the last 6 years will still receive an EHI.

### C.2 Changes for Version 8.5 (January 2003) {#c.2-changes-for-version-8.5-january-2003 .unnumbered}

Indicators in the Accident SEA (both the AII and RAI) based on only one
crash will not be calculated.

Reason:

> Crash rates based on only one crash do not provide enough information
> to compute meaningful numerical percentile rankings.

### C.3 Changes for Version 8.4 (March 2002) {#c.3-changes-for-version-8.4-march-2002 .unnumbered}

-   The power unit (PU) figures used in the Accident Involvement
    Indicator (AII) will be an average of the carrier's PU totals at the
    end of the three time periods used for time-weighting in the AII
    calculation (0-6 months, 6-18 months, and 18-30 months). The PUs
    numbers are used as a measure of exposure in the AII to estimate the
    number of power units operated over a 30-month time period when
    reportable crashes could have occurred. Due to the potentially
    significant changes in exposure of individual carriers over the
    course of 30 months (via downsizing, mergers, etc.), an average
    number of PUs provides a better estimation of vehicle exposure for
    carriers that have updated their MCS-150 Motor Carrier Census
    information.

-   The trip-lease power unit (PU) numbers are added to the owned and
    term-leased PUs to determine the total number of PUs of a carrier.
    SafeStat uses this number of PUs when accounting for a carrier's
    exposure to crashes in the Accident Involvement Indicator (AII).
    Including accurate trip-leased PU figures will improve the accuracy
    of exposure for carriers that extensively used this type of leasing
    arrangement.

-   Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) will use all closed enforcement
    cases, including those not initiated from compliance reviews (CRs)
    or terminal audits. Enforcement cases not initiated from CRs or
    terminal audits will receive a significantly lower severity weight
    than cases initiated from CRs. Carriers will still need CR (or
    terminal audit)-initiated enforcement within the past 30 months to
    receive a deficient EHI of 75 or higher. The distinction between
    enforcement cases based on CR/terminals audit and those from other
    sources is made because CR/terminal audit-initiated enforcement
    cases are based on a more comprehensive investigation of a carrier's
    operations than other initiating sources such as roadside or dock
    inspections.

### C.4 Changes for Version 8.3 ( September 2001) {#c.4-changes-for-version-8.3-september-2001 .unnumbered}

Prior versions of SafeStat used only the violations of acute and
critical regulations that were used as part of the safety rating as
defined in Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR. In an effort to incorporate
more information from compliance reviews, the HM Review Indicator (HMRI)
has been expanded to include non-ratable violations of acute and
critical regulations. These HM-related non-ratable violations that are
listed in Chapter 12 of the FMCSA Field Operations Training Manual are
severe, and often result in enforcement action from FMCSA. A full
listing of the non-ratable (and ratable) violations are listed in
Appendix B of this document. The following table lists the severity
weighting for the violations used in the HRMI calculation:

  --- ------------- -- -----------------------------------------------------
      **Severity       **Criterion**
      weight**         

      1                Ratable violations of critical regulations that are
                       compliance or paperwork oriented.

      1                Non-ratable violations of acute and critical
                       regulations.

      2                Ratable violations of critical regulations that are
                       performance oriented.

      3                Ratable violations of all acute regulations.
  --- ------------- -- -----------------------------------------------------

### C.5 Changes for Version 8.2 (March 2001) {#c.5-changes-for-version-8.2-march-2001 .unnumbered}

The Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) is limited to only using data
from enforcement cases initiated by compliance reviews or terminal
audits.

### C.6 Changes for Version 8.1 (September 2000) {#c.6-changes-for-version-8.1-september-2000 .unnumbered}

-   The violation list of acute/critical regulations has been updated.

-   The following improvements have been made to the calculation of the
    Enforcement History Indicator (EHI):

1.  Uses only closed enforcement cases that were initiated within the
    past 6 years.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  EHI of 75-100 are applied to each carrier that:

    \(1\) had a recent closed enforcement case (within 30 months) and no
    subsequent compliance review or

    \(2\) had a recent closed enforcement case (within 30 months) and
    its the most recent subsequent compliance review resulting in
    violations of acute/critical regulations.

2.  EHI of 50-74 are applied to each carrier that:

    \(1\) had its most recent closed enforcement case more than 30
    months ago or

    \(2\) had a recent closed enforcement case (within 30 months) and
    its most recent subsequent compliance review was \"clean\" (i.e.,
    resulted in no acute/critical violations).

Reason:

-   Carriers with a prior enforcement history who demonstrate good
    safety practice through a recent compliance review will no longer be
    viewed as \"deficient\".

-   The Enforcement History Indicator range was expanded to include the
    50-100 percentile (previously the indicator range included the
    75-100 percentile). This change will provide information on more
    carriers.

-   The EHI uses only closed enforcement cases within the past 6 years,
    which is consistent with FMCSA\'s policy, Uniform Fine Assessment.

### C.7 Changes for Version 8 (March 2000) {#c.7-changes-for-version-8-march-2000 .unnumbered}

A full-scale review was performed on the SafeStat algorithm by the
developers with the objective of improving consistency in the indicator
calculations and the determination of the SEA values for all four SEAs.
The focus was on making improvements and achieving greater consistency
in the calculations while maintaining the underlying methodology and
preserving the best aspects of the algorithm. Many of the changes have
no effect on CR prioritization, but give the safety investigators and
other stakeholders important additional information on the carrier's
status in each SEA and make SafeStat better able to support additional
applications. The improvements bring SafeStat closer to being capable of
providing a complete safety status assessment of all carriers with
sufficient data.

General Summary of Improvement Objectives:

-   Increase the consistency of the SEA and indicator calculations while
    simplifying the algorithm.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Eliminate the possibility of offsetting bad performance with other
    information. This focuses the attention on the deficient areas in
    order to find opportunities for safety improvement.

-   Provide a more complete coverage of carriers with indicators and SEA
    values. Although emphasis remains on identifying the worst 25^th^
    percentile in each SEA, indicators and SEA values below 75 will now
    be calculated for many more carriers. In Version 8, every carrier
    that meets the data sufficiency tests will be provided with an
    indicator and SEA value. This is accomplished without compromising
    existing rules that require a "critical mass of bad data" (e.g., 2
    crashes, 3 OOS violations) to obtain deficient values of 75 or
    higher.

-   Preserve underlying SafeStat measures that determine the indicators,
    and in turn, the SEA values and SafeStat Score. This allows for
    comparisons of measures and the detection of possible trends from
    cycle to cycle.

The following lists the changes for Version 8 in each SEA as well as
changes in the SafeStat Categories.

**Accident SEA**

[Accident Involvement Indicator (AII) Improvements:]{.underline}

-   Assign all carriers with 0 crashes an indicator of 0.

-   Carriers with 1 crash will be assigned an indicator from 0 to 74
    based on the crash rate (AIM).

-   Carriers with no crashes within the last 24 months will be limited
    to a maximum indicator of 74.

> [Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI) Improvements:]{.underline}

-   Assign all carriers with 0 crashes an indicator of 0.

-   Carriers with 1 crash will be assigned an indicator from 0 to 74
    based on the crash rate (RAR).

### Driver SEA {#driver-sea .unnumbered}

> [Driver Inspection Indicator (DII) Improvements:]{.underline}
>
> For all carriers with 3 or more driver inspections:

-   Carriers with no driver OOS inspections will be assigned an
    indicator (DII) of 0.

-   Carriers with 1-2 driver OOS inspections and a DII value \> 74 will
    be assigned an indicator (DII) capped at 74.

> [Driver Review Indicator (DRI) Improvements:]{.underline}
>
> Carriers with a CR and no violations (critical/acute and
> non-critical/acute) will be assign a DRI (and SMRI, VRI, and, if
> applicable, HMRI) of 0.
>
> [Moving Violation Indicator (MVI) Improvements:]{.underline}
>
> The computation of the MVI remains the same, but now values below the
> 75^th^ percentile will be assigned.

[Driver SEA Calculation Improvements]{.underline}

> The driver-review exclusion rule will be eliminated. Previously, the
> Driver SEA was assigned no value when a compliance review was
> performed within 6 months that resulted in no driver-related
> acute/critical violations regardless of other driver data. The Driver
> SEA calculation will now be [the maximum]{.underline} of the review
> (DRI) and inspection (DII) indicators, and will only use the MVI when
> its value is greater than the DRI and DII. If the MVI is greater than
> the maximum of the DRI and DII then the Driver SEA will equal the
> weighted average of MVI and the maximum of the DII and DRI, (placing
> twice as much weight on the DII/DRI as the MVI). Previously, the
> Driver SEA was calculated using a complex weighted average of all
> three indicators resulting in some undesired situations. The following
> illustrates the new Driver SEA calculation:
>
> If MVI \> MAX(DII, DRI), then:
>
> Driver SEA = (MVI+ (2 x MAX(DII, DRI))) / 3
>
> Else:
>
> Driver SEA = MAX(DII, DRI)

### Vehicle SEA {#vehicle-sea .unnumbered}

> [Vehicle Review Indicator (VRI) Improvements:]{.underline}

-   Made consistent with DRI.

-   See DRI Improvements.

> [Vehicle Inspection Indicator (VII) Improvements:]{.underline}

-   Made consistent with DII.

-   For all carriers with 3 or more vehicle inspections:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Carriers with no vehicle OOS inspections will be assigned an
    indicator (VII) of 0.

-   Carriers with 1-2 vehicle OOS inspections and a VII \> 74 will be
    assigned an indicator (VII) capped at 74.

> [Vehicle SEA Calculation Improvements]{.underline}

-   Made consistent with the other SEAs.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Vehicle SEA calculation will be the maximum of the review (VRI) and
    inspection (VII) indicators, instead of a complex weighted average
    used previously.

> Vehicle SEA = MAX(VII,VRI)

### Safety Management SEA {#safety-management-sea .unnumbered}

> [Safety Management/Haz Mat Review Indicators (SMRI/HMRI)
> Improvements:]{.underline}

-   Made consistent with DRI/VRI.

-   See DRI Improvements.

> [Enforcement History Indicator (EHI) Improvements:]{.underline}
>
> Re-calibrate the EHI range of 85-100 to 75-100 in order to reflect the
> increase in the enforcement rates and expand scoring to the worst
> 25^th^ percentile used throughout SafeStat.

### SafeStat Score/Category Ranges {#safestat-scorecategory-ranges .unnumbered}

Change the SafeStat Score threshold between Category A & B from 300 to
350. This new threshold assures that Category A carriers will have an
Accident SEA value of 75 or higher along with 2 other SEA values of 75
or higher.

[Category]{.underline} [Previous SafeStat Runs]{.underline} [Current
SafeStat Run]{.underline} (Version 8)

A \>=300 and \<=550 \>=350 and \<= 550

B \>=225 and \< 300 \>=225 and \<350

### C.8 Changes for Version 7 (September 1999) {#c.8-changes-for-version-7-september-1999 .unnumbered}

\(1\) Increase the Driver SEA weight (from 1 to 1.5) in calculating the
SafeStat score. SafeStat-scored carriers will still be required to have
at least two deficient SEAs. (A SEA with a value from 75 to 100 is
defined as deficient). Therefore, the SafeStat score is calculated as
follows:

> ![](media/image55.wmf)

Reason: This change is based on the SafeStat Effectiveness Study results
(see chapter 7) showing that carriers with deficient Driver SEAs with
values of 75 and higher have higher future crash rates than carriers
with deficient Vehicle SEAs or Safety Management SEAs. Therefore the
increased weighting of carriers with deficient Driver SEAs makes
SafeStat more efficient in prioritizing carriers likely to have crashes.

\(2\) Modify the SafeStat Score ranges for Categories A, B, and C as
follows:

[Category]{.underline} [Previous SafeStat Runs]{.underline} [Current
SafeStat Run]{.underline} (Version 7)

A \>=300 and \<=500 \>=300 and \<= 550

B \>=225 and \< 300 \>=225 and \<300

> C \>=150 and \< 200 \>=150 and \<225

Reason: The increased weighting placed on the Driver SEA necessitated
recalibrating the SafeStat score range for Categories A, B, and C.
Although there will be no additional SafeStat-scored carriers, scored
carriers are reprioritized leading to possible changes in their category
assignments if they have a Driver SEA of 75 or higher.

(3) Change the way the indicators in the Accident SEA (Accident
    Involvement Indicator (AII) and Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI))
    are combined to allow for Accident SEA values under 75.

Reason: While SEA values under 75 are not needed for CR prioritization,
stakeholders and other safety programs may want to use Accident SEA
values below 75 in making decisions related to motor carrier safety.

\(4\) Recalibrate RAI group 1 to 2-4 crashes (previously 2-5) and group
2 to 5-19 crashes (previously 6-19).

Reason: RAI groups are defined by having the same proportion of crashes
in each group. Changes in recordable crash distribution necessitate
periodic recalibrations of crash groupings used in the AII and RAI
within the Accident SEA.

\(5\) Incorporate 392.5C2 violations into SafeStat as a jumping OOS
order violation in the Driver Inspection Indicator (DII) in the Driver
SEA.

Reason: A 392.5C2 violation occurs when a driver has violated the OOS
orders related to a 392.5 violation (use or possession of alcohol).
392.5C2 should be included with the other jumping OOS orders violations
(396.9C2, 395.13C1, 395.13D1, & 395.13D2).

\(6\) Add 392.4A violations into SafeStat as a moving violation used in
the Moving Violation Indicator (MVI).

Reason: A 392.4A violation occurs when the driver is found using or
possessing drugs. 392.4A should be incorporated with the other moving
violations which already include a similar violation cite, 392.4.

### C.9 Changes for Version 6.1 (September 1998) {#c.9-changes-for-version-6.1-september-1998 .unnumbered}

Expanded the new indicator, the Moving Violations Indicator, from being
used in only PRISM states to being used in all states.

Reason: The MVI proved to be an effective indicator identifying poor
performing carriers when tested on carriers in the PRISM states. With
minor modifications, the MVI is now being applied to all motor carriers
nationally.

**C.10 Changes for Version 6 (March 1998)**

(1) Change the Recordable/Preventable Accident Indicator (RPAI) to the
    Recordable Accident Indicator (RAI).

Reason: Due to recent changes in the Compliance Review (CR) methodology,
"preventability" of recordable crashes is no longer being captured in
the CR data available to SafeStat. To accommodate this change, the RPAI
will be replaced with the RAI. The RAI follows the same basic
methodology as the RPAI with only minor changes. The RAI will use all
recordable crashes as opposed to the RPAI's recordable/preventable
crashes. The peer groupings for the RAI were slightly altered to account
for larger number of crashes being recorded.

\(2\) Change the calculation of the Accident SEA. Previously, SafeStat
considered a "Satisfactory" rating for the Accident Factor (factor 6)
issued within the past 6 months when combining the RPAI and Accident
Involvement Indicator (AII) to obtain an Accident SEA value. The new
methodology considers if there have been any state-reported crashes
after a review has been performed when combining the RAI and AII.

Reason: Because "Satisfactory" ratings are no longer issued according to
the new CR methodology, it will not be incorporated into the SafeStat
methodology. The improved approach uses the latest state-reported crash
data available (reportable crashes that have occurred after the CR was
performed) with the RAI and AII to calculate the Accident SEA Value.

\(3\) FOR PRISM STATES ONLY: Test a new indicator, Moving Violations
Indicator (MVI), that uses moving violations recorded during roadside
inspections.

Reason: Since more moving violation information is being collected
during roadside inspections, there is a great potential to use such
information in determining motor carrier safety status. Preliminary
tests have shown that there is a positive relationship between the MVI
and high crash rates.

> The MVI uses methodology similar to that currently being used in the
> Accident Involvement Indicator (AII). Note that the MVI will be used
> only on carriers domiciled within the five PRISM states. There is a
> potential to incorporate carriers domiciled in others states in the
> future.

**C.11 Changes for Version 5 (September 1997)**

(1) Using the enforcement initiation date -
    State_Investigation_Completed field (as opposed to the currently
    used closed enforcement date) to determine the age of closed
    enforcement cases.

Reason: The date currently used in the algorithm, closed enforcement
case date, is the day that the enforcement case is closed. For
non-safety reasons such as due process, the closed enforcement case date
can be years after the case was initiated, thereby making the date
somewhat inaccurate for determining the safety status of carriers. The
State Investigation Completed date best represents when serious
violations have been found that result in an enforcement case being
initiated. This date can be used to obtain an accurate age of the
enforcement case. It is important to note that SafeStat will still only
use [closed]{.underline} enforcement cases.

\(2\) Delete the "reformed" carrier rule used in calculating the
Enforcement History Indicator (EHI). The rule states that if a carrier
has a CR that is more recent than the enforcement case and the CR
results in an overall satisfactory rating, the carrier does not receive
an EHI. The logic of this rule was to provide carriers with poor
enforcement histories a means of redeeming themselves based on a
subsequently review that resulted in an overall Satisfactory rating.

Reason: The "reformed" carrier rule was re-assessed because the rule
uses the overall ratings, which, as of April 1997, were no longer being
issued. The effectiveness study results show that, using the current
reformed carrier rule, the "reformed" carriers performed significantly
worse (59% higher crash rate than the total carrier average) than the
"non-reformed" carriers (10% higher crash rate). This defeats the
purpose of the rule which was to exclude carriers that do not pose a
high crash risk. Deleting the rule altogether will improve the
effectiveness of the EHI and simplify the algorithm. The indicator will
work as it was originally intended - to identify carriers with a history
of enforcement cases. Analogous to convictions on a criminal record or
incidents on a credit check, these events (enforcement cases) will
remain with the carrier for an extended period of time and not be
overwritten simply by short-term good behavior (e.g., good recent CR
results).

\(3\) Suspending the use of the Hazardous Material Inspection Indicator
(HMII) until roadside inspection data can indicate that a particular
inspection involved examining for HM violations.

Reason: The results of the effectiveness study show that this indicator
is ineffective in predicting carriers with high crash rates. The
ineffectiveness of the HMII is probably partially due to the fact the
HMII does not normalize by the number of HM inspections and instead uses
the total number of inspections. Using this normalization factor leads
to identifying large, exclusively HM carriers by default. These carriers
tend to be safer than most other carriers. There is still merit for
incorporating an indicator in SafeStat that uses HM OOS violations.
Before such an indicator can be used, it is imperative that good
normalization data (i.e., HM inspections) be collected. However, until
there is a means of obtaining a carrier's total number of HM
inspections, the HM OOS violations data will be excluded from SafeStat.

\(4\) Changing severity weighting of crashes used in AII from:

> Towaway = 1
>
> Injury = 2
>
> Fatal or HM Release = 3

To:

Towaway = 1

Injury or Fatal = 2

Add 1 if HM was released

Reason: This change in crash severity weighting gives the crashes with a
fatality the same weight as an crash resulting in injury. The
justification for this weighting is that a fatal crash is a type of
injury crash. Once a crash has occurred, whether one of the injured
participants survives or not depends on a myriad of factors (e.g., type
of car/truck involved, age, height, weight, health, and number of
participants, seat belt use, quality and speed of emergency services,
etc.) that are largely inconsequential to the safety status of the motor
carrier involved.

[^1]: The proposed Improved Process consists of three components: a New
    Entrant Program, SafeStat, and the Progressive Compliance Assurance
    Program (PCAP). A description of this process is contained in "Motor
    Carrier Safety Fitness Determination: Proposals for an Improved
    Process," June 1997. This report is available from the Volpe Center,
    Economic Analysis Division, DTS-42, 55 Broadway, Cambridge, MA
    02142.

[^2]: See Section 7, SafeStat Evaluation, for an explanation of the
    relationship of crash risk and SafeStat results.

[^3]: A full listing of acute and critical regulations can be found in
    Part 385 Appendix B of the FMCSR, titled "Explanation of Safety
    Rating Process."