Which Inspection Violations Don’t Affect Your CSA Score—and Should You Still Fight the Ticket?

A roadside inspection report can show “Included in SMS: No,” but that single row does not prove the violation code is always excluded from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Safety Measurement System.

That distinction matters. SMS evaluates motor carriers using BASIC measures and, when enough data exists, percentiles. “CSA score” is familiar industry shorthand, but an SMS percentile is not a federal safety rating. The current calculation rules are in FMCSA’s SMS Methodology, version 3.21, revised in June 2026.

First: what “Included in SMS: No” actually proves

It proves only that the displayed inspection row was not used in that SMS snapshot. It does not, by itself, prove that every occurrence of that code is excluded.

A row can show “No” for several reasons:

• the safety event is older than the 24-month SMS measurement window;
• the same violation cite appears more than once on one inspection, and SMS uses that cite only once;
• the violation is attributed to a crash, shipper, or another entity under the methodology’s exclusion rules;
• an adjudicated citation was recorded as dismissed or not guilty; or
• the exact code is not listed in current Appendix A.

FMCSA’s methodology states that safety events older than 24 months are no longer used, and that multiple counts of the same cite are used only once per inspection. Therefore, never classify a code from a single old inspection page. Check the exact code against the current Appendix A violations spreadsheet.

Important correction: 392.2LV is used in SMS

392.2LV, Lane Restriction Violation, is not an excluded code. Current Appendix A v3.21 assigns it to the Unsafe Driving BASIC with a severity weight of 3.

FMCSA’s specific 392.2 FAQ also lists 392.2LV with severity 3. A reader-friendly official inspection example displays 392.2LV as “Included in SMS: Yes” under Unsafe Driving, while displaying 392.2-SLLS1 as “No” on the same report.

Why, then, can an older inspection screenshot display 392.2LV as “No”? The example supplied is outside the current 24-month measurement window, which is sufficient by itself for the event not to be used in the current calculation. The page does not establish a permanent reclassification of 392.2LV. The SMS Methodology is explicit that events older than 24 months are no longer used to assess a carrier’s safety posture.

The complete audited 392.2-family result

HwyPulse audited 93 exact 392.2-family code formats observed in FMCSA’s official Vehicle Inspections and Violations dataset against Appendix A v3.21:

• 57 exact code formats are listed in current Appendix A.
• 36 exact code formats are absent from current Appendix A.
• No additional 392.2-family exclusions were missing from this audit.
• 392.2LV is one of the 57 included formats, not one of the 36 absent formats.

A code absent from Appendix A has no direct roadside BASIC severity weight under the current methodology. That does not erase the inspection, legal violation, ticket, fine, out-of-service consequence, PSP history, MVR exposure, or court deadline.

Each code below opens a readable HwyPulse evidence page. That page identifies the audited Appendix A status, shows recent official FMCSA records when available, and offers access to the underlying government data without dropping readers into an unexplained JSON response.

Registration, licensing, insurance, tax, and authority

• 392.2RG — state vehicle registration or license-plate violation.
• 392.2-SLLSR — state/local registration or tag violation.
• 392.2FT — state or International Fuel Tax Agreement violation.
• 392.2IRP and 392.2-SLLIRP — IRP apportioned-tag or registration violations.
• 392.2-SLLIFTA — state/local IFTA violation.
• 392.2AU and 392.2-SLLSOA — state operating-authority violations.
• 392.2IN and 392.2-SLLSIV — state insurance violations.
• 392.2UCR and 392.2-SLLUCR — Unified Carrier Registration fee violations.
• 392.2DL and 392.2-SLLDL — miscellaneous driver-license violations.

Weight and dimension violations

• 392.2W and 392.2WG — excessive-weight violations.
• 392.2DIM and 392.2-SLLED — width, height, or length violations.
• 392.2-SLLEWA1, 392.2-SLLEWA2, and 392.2-SLLEWA3 — axle or axle-group overweight tiers.
• 392.2-SLLEWG1, 392.2-SLLEWG2, and 392.2-SLLEWG3 — gross-weight overweight tiers.
• 392.2-SLLEWPB — excessive weight on a posted bridge.

Other state and local code formats

• 392.2 — generic “Violation of Local Laws—Explain” code without a suffix.
• 392.2MI — miscellaneous traffic-law violation.
• 392.2-SLL — general state/local-law violation.
• 392.2-SLLEQP — state/local equipment violation.
• 392.2-SLLS1 — speeding 1–5 mph over the limit.
• 392.2-SLLTL — miscellaneous state/local traffic-law violation.
• 392.2-SLLTR — state/local truck-restriction violation.
• 392.2SAFCH — missing, damaged, or ineffective safety chains when required.
• 392.2-SLLL — state/local littering violation.
• 392.2-SLLOWZ — other state/local work-zone violation.
• 392.2S — general speeding code observed in inspection data but absent from Appendix A v3.21.

Appendix A v3.21 is the current classification authority for SMS weighting. FMCSA’s 392.2 FAQ remains useful, but it appears to lag the current spreadsheet by continuing to list 392.2S. For a current classification decision, use the latest Appendix A—not an older FAQ table or one inspection row.

These classifications do not create exemptions from traffic law. 49 CFR §392.2 requires CMVs to comply with the laws of the jurisdiction where they operate unless an applicable FMCSA rule imposes a higher standard.

Five other exact code formats confirmed in the supplied inspections

The screenshots also showed five non-392.2 formats that were absent from Appendix A v3.21 in the audit:

• 390.19TG — filing an MCS-150 with false or misleading information.
• 390.21TB1-MC — operating a CMV without the legal name or trade name displayed.
• 390.21TB2-DOT — operating a CMV without the USDOT number displayed as required.
• 395.8F12-HOSM — record-of-duty-status form-and-manner failure involving the shipping document number, shipper name, or commodity.
• 395.8F5-HOSM — record-of-duty-status form-and-manner failure involving the truck, tractor, trailer unit number, or license number and state.

Exact formatting matters. A nearby code, a different suffix, or an equivalent-looking regulation can have a different Appendix A classification. These five findings apply to the exact displayed formats above; they do not classify every violation under §§390.19, 390.21, or 395.8. Appendix A remains the authority.

What about cargo securement, mud flaps, and other “No” rows?

Do not assume a code is excluded merely because one row says “No.” For example, 392.9A2 cargo-securement formats and 392.2-SLLMF mud-flap formats are represented in current Appendix A. A duplicate cite, an old event, or another row-level rule can produce “No” without changing the code’s current classification.

The correct workflow is:

1. record the exact code, including every hyphen and suffix;
2. check the inspection date against the 24-month window;
3. look for duplicate occurrences of the same cite on the inspection;
4. compare the exact code to current Appendix A;
5. review any adjudicated-citation notation and the stated reason for exclusion; and
6. separate the SMS question from the citation, PSP, MVR, CDL, insurance, and employment questions.

Will a local-ordinance ticket stay off CSA and the MVR?

Not automatically. A court charge and an inspection violation are separate records. “Local ordinance” is not a universal reporting exemption.

49 CFR §384.209 generally requires states to report many convictions involving state or local motor-vehicle traffic-control laws, with specified exceptions that include parking, vehicle-weight, and vehicle-defect violations. 49 CFR §383.31 also imposes notification duties for many state and local traffic-law convictions involving CDL holders.

Whether a disposition reaches an MVR, CDLIS, PSP, or SMS depends on the exact charge, conviction, vehicle, license, jurisdiction, inspection record, and reporting process. Obtain the final disposition in writing rather than relying on the words “local ordinance.”

Should you hire an attorney?

Paying a ticket can amount to a conviction. Before deciding, check the court deadline, mandatory-appearance language, CDL implications, possible points or suspension, insurance and employment consequences, and whether the associated inspection data is accurate.

A licensed attorney familiar with the issuing jurisdiction can explain the risks and available dispositions for a specific case. No outcome is guaranteed. If the inspection data is inaccurate, incomplete, or duplicated, FMCSA’s DataQs guidance explains the separate federal review process. DataQs does not replace the state court.

PSP is not a driver “CSA score.” FMCSA’s PSP–MVR comparison explains that PSP contains FMCSA crash and roadside-inspection history, while an MVR generally contains state licensing and conviction information.

If you received a traffic ticket and want case-specific advice, request a free quote from the nationwide attorney network at MyTrafficCase. MyTrafficCase and HwyPulse are operated by CDL Protect Inc. This promotional link is not a promise of dismissal or a substitute for court instructions.

Bottom line

A violation row marked “Included in SMS: No” is a snapshot result, not a permanent verdict about the code. Confirm the event date, duplicates, adjudication, exact suffix, and Appendix A classification.

The corrected audit contains all 36 observed 392.2-family formats absent from Appendix A v3.21. It does not include 392.2LV, because FMCSA currently classifies that lane-restriction code in Unsafe Driving with severity 3.

This article provides general educational information, not legal advice. SMS methodology, Appendix A, code mappings, state reporting practices, and individual cases can change. Verification completed July 12, 2026.