Example Of Essay On Transportation Risk/Loss Control Research Assignment

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Overview

1. From the table-based data provided in page 2:
a. The two predominant loss presented are as follows: the number of people killed totaling 43,510 in 2005 and the number of people injured totaling 2,889,000 in 2003 .
b. An example of a loss rate which is seen to be presented in Table 1 is the injury rate per 100,000 population where 996 percent was reported in 2003 .
c. To explain the fundamental difference between a loss total and a loss rate, one contends that the main disparity lies on the manner by which the numbers are derived. For one, the loss total is the total number of people killed or injured. On the contrary, the loss rate is computed by dividing the total number of people killed or injured over the total identified resident population
d. The major benefit in using a loss rate vis-à-vis a loss total from the perspective of an organizational standpoint is as a standard for future projections of fatalities or injuries given an identified number of resident population at a given time .
2. From tables presented from pages 2 and 3, the comparison of data for 2011 and 2012 are as follows:
a. The total number of crash-related fatalities and injuries was noted to increase. The total number of fatalities was recorded at 32,479 and 33,561 for 2011 and 2012, respectively. Likewise, the total number of injuries also increased where 2,217,000 and 2,362,000 for 2011 and 2012, respectively, were recorded
b. The traffic crash fatality rates from a resident population similarly increased for the period under study: from 10.42 in 2011 to 10.62 in 2012. In addition, the injury rates were also observed to exhibit rising trends where there were 712 injuries in 2011 and increased to 752 in 2012. Concurrently, the standpoint of fatality rates from vehicle miles travelled (VMT), the rates manifested increasing trends from 1.10 to 1.13 in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Finally, the injury rates were75 in 2011 and increased to 80 in 2012 .
c. The extent of passenger car, large truck and motor-related fatalities were 22,510 and 22,912 in 2011 and 2012, respectively. In addition, the injuries for occupants by vehicle type were 2,010,000 and 2,134,000 in 2011 and 2012; respectively .
d. The extent of non-occupant fatalities exhibited increasing trends at 5,339 and 5,692 in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Similarly, the non-occupant injuries for the period rose from 126,000 and 136,000 for 2011 and 2012, respectively .
3. The reasons why unfavorable human loss-based trends might for the abovementioned presented data are as follows: the drivers of vehicles who encountered accidents and resulted to fatalities or injuries could be drank, young or lacking in experience, as well as unexpectedly encountered children as pedestrians or could have been distracted by children on board.

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data on Occupant Protection

1. For the fatality data which is presented on page 1, a comparison of the total number of vehicle occupant fatalities for 2011 and 2012 which occurred for restrained passengers were 9,471 and 9,679 in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Moreover, the number of fatalities for unrestrained passengers also exhibited similar increasing trends from 10,215 to 10,335 in 2011 and 2012, respectively .
2. For the fatality data presented on page 2, the age range which contributed to the greatest number of fatalities was identified to come from the unrestrained passengers at 25 to 34 years old. Likewise, the male gender which contributed the greatest fatalities was identified to be in the unrestrained category where there were 7,345 fatalities in 2012. The suspected reason why these groups were heavily represented was their increased preponderance to drive while drank, fail to adhere in using restraints, have tendencies to speed, and could have children as occupants in their vehicles or could have encountered children as pedestrians .
3. For the fatality data presented on page 2, the number of restrained versus unrestrained reported for individuals who were under the age of 12 were 369 and 219 (restrained and unrestrained, respectively). Moreover, for the age ranging from 55 and above, the number of restrained fatalities was 3,854 while the number of unrestrained fatalities was 2,084. One valid reason as to why restrained fatalities were greater for both groups was the precarious nature of the individuals within the identified age groups: extremely young or significantly old .
4. One reason why seat belt use rates tend to vary from one state to the other is the diversity in laws enacted per state which depend on the seating position of occupants, or the age and type of vehicles .
5. The extent of seat belt use in a given geographic area, apparently influence the extent of crash related liability and defines the manner by which a company that operates a fleet operation designs policies for strict adherence. For instance, in South Dakota, the total number of occupants killed was on 98 with 66.5% observed seat belt use rate. As such, the state could strive to apply stricter legislations to drive the number
of deaths to an even minimal number .

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data on Large Trucks

1. The total number of large truck occupant fatalities in relation to the total number of other vehicle occupant fatalities in crashes involving large trucks for calendar years 2011 and 2012 are as follows: the fatality data on people killed in crashes involving large trucks were 640 and 697 for 2011 and 2012, respectively. Moreover, the occupants of other vehicles in crashes involving large trucks were reported at 2,723 and 2,843 for 2011 and 2012, respectively. These data exhibited rising trends .
2. Based on the fatality and injury data presented on page 1, the major reason for the difference that exists between the total number of large truck fatalities and the total number of fatalities for occupant of other vehicles that are involved in crashes with large trucks could come from the professional drivers’ ability for defensive driving. On the contrary, the drivers of other vehicles could possess different levels of expertise in driving which make them more preponderant to meet accidents involving large trucks .
3. The difference noted from the response in #2 may significantly impact a motor carrier’s overall legal liability through ensuring significant accountabilities of their professional drivers. Large truck drivers are observed to possess the proper training and competencies for practicing defensive driving to limit their liabilities, as needed
.
4. Based on the fatality and injury data presented in page 2, a broad assessment of the occurrence of fatal and injury crashes, as well as vehicle involvement rates, for the years 2007 up to 2012 is deduced to manifest a fluctuating pattern. As such, based on one’s speculation, the reason for the significant fatality-based fluctuations during the six-year period could be the vehicle miles travelled. As observed, the lesser the miles travelled, there are lesser tendencies for accidents that ultimately result to fatalities or injuries .
5. Based on the graph presented on page 3, the possible reasons for the following large truck fatal crash statistics are as follows:
a. The higher prevalence of fatal crashes in rural areas than in urban areas could stem from the tendencies of drivers to speed due to greater space and lesser infrastructure, vehicles, or people in rural areas .
b. The higher prevalence of fatal crashes in weekdays rather than on weekends could stem from the greater number of vehicles on the road for people who go to work or school .
c. The higher prevalence of fatal crashes during the daytime on weekdays than during the nighttime could stem from the greater number of vehicles driven by people who rush to work or to school .
d. The higher prevalence of fatal crashes during the nighttime on weekends rather than in the daytime could stem from more people who went out to go to movies or shopping centers at daytime and converge on their way home at night .
6. The bar graph data presented in Figure 3 can be used to establish a fleet operation’s large truck driver qualifications standard through stressing the importance of monitoring drivers’ preponderance for speeding. Therefore, one of the most relevant policies is adherence to speed limits to avoid accidents and losses .

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data on Speeding

1. From the presented information, the overall level of success that has been experienced with regard to reducing the occurrence of speeding-related fatalities within the United States could be deduced as fairly effective as seen from the steady decline in speeding related fatalities from the period 2003 to 2011
2. The graphically based information presented in Figure 1 exhibited the percentage of speeding drivers in fatal crashes according to age and gender. As noted, males within the age ranges of 15 to 24 years old exhibited the highest percentages of 37%. Moreover, the figure showed that with age, speeding-related fatal crashes minimize over time .
3. Based on the information, it could be deduced that the additional driving related risks which compound the potential for fatal crashes to occur in conjunction with speeding are as follows: alcohol-impaired drivers who drive from 9 p.m. to 3 a.m.; those drivers who fail to use restraints; and those who drive with the roadway surface condition such as snow, ice or frost, or other challenging road surfaces .

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data on Alcohol Impaired Driving

1. According to the data, a total of 31 percent of all traffic fatalities in the United States in 2012 were related to alcohol impaired driving. As deduced, this value relate to the overall risk of operating a fleet of vehicles on American highways in such a way that enforcement of stricter regulations to monitor alcohol consumption and alcohol impaired driving is needed to prevent fatalities and injuries .
2. Based on the information on page 3, daytime alcohol impairment fatalities it was lower than the rate at night. As indicated, there was an estimate of as much as four (4) times higher at night (35%) as compared to the rate during daytime (9%). The information could be used from a fleet driver scheduling standpoint as being more vigilant at night to check on alcohol consumption and impairment .
3. With regard to the 2012 data presented in Table 3, drivers who are male and from the age range of 25 to 34 have been reported to exhibit the greatest potential to be involved in alcohol impairment-related fatal crashes .
4. The significant concern that could be deduced from the graph-based data presented in Figure 3 is the revelation that significant levels of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) with an average of 0.15 or greater were actually recorded in 6,730 or 59% of drivers who were involved in fatal crashes in 2012. As such, one acknowledged that alcohol impaired driving remains a threat that increases preponderance to accidents .

National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey

1. According to sections 6.4 and 6.5, the top 10 vehicle movements prior to the critical crash envelope are: (1) going straight, (2) negotiating a curve, (3) stopped in traffic lane, (4) decelerating in traffic lane, (5) avoidance maneuver to a previous critical event, (6) changing lanes, (7) turning left, (8) accelerating in traffic lane, (9) passing or overtaking another vehicle, and (10) turning right. Moreover, the top 10 critical pre-crash events are: (1) vehicle travelling turning or crossing at intersection, (2) vehicle travelling off the edge of the road, (3) other vehicle in lane stopped, (4) vehicle travelling over the lane line, (5) travelling in the same direction, (6) vehicle control loss for travelling too fast, (7) poor road condition, (8) vehicle problem, (9) other vehicle encroachment from crossing street, and (10) other vehicle encroachment from adjacent lane .
2. According to section 6.6, the most significant critical reason for critical pre-crash event attributed to the following are: (1) for drivers is recognition error (inadequate surveillance); for vehicles is tires failed or degraded; and for (3) roadway based reasons is slick roads (ice, loose debris, etc.) .
3. A motor carrier can utilize pre-crash event, as well as the driver, vehicle, and roadway-based information to prevent the occurrence or recurrence of fleet vehicle losses through increased awareness on threats or risk factors and designing appropriate measures to address these .

The Hartford’s “Preventability of Motor Vehicle Collisions”

1. The differences in defining preventable collision, as defined by the National Safety Council and the American Trucking Association’s (ATA), is in the aspects of accountability of the driver. The first definition focused entirely on the driver’s failure to prevent collisions from happening. In contrast, ATA’s definition was written in a more positive light without putting the blame entirely on the driver; yet focusing on the importance of professionalism, knowledge of defensive driving, and accountability. As such, ATA’s definition is deemed most reasonable for focusing on due diligence of professional drivers in exhibiting core competencies for preventing collisions at all cost .
2. The perspectives and activities that separate non-proactive motor carriers from proactive companies with regard to analyzing vehicle collision preventability focus on comprehensive awareness and application of the concept of preventability. The concept emphasizes the need for professional drivers to apply defensive driving and be aware of the consequences of negligence. Therefore, proactive companies make it a point to design policies to train their drivers in imbibing the concept of preventability. Consistent with the policy of communicating the concept, proactive companies develop strategies to ensure adherence to the preventability concept, including developing rewards and punishments for those found to violate these, as needed .
3. Management plays a very important role in establishing as well as running an effective crash analysis system through the development of policies, procedures, and programs that aim to prevent collisions. These programs should include training for drivers, evaluating and monitoring their performance, identifying strengths and weaknesses, as well as instituting rewards and sanctions based on the exemplified performance. Through the crash analysis system, appropriate information and data are collected and evaluated to determine root causes of the collision and to develop an improved system that would minimize and ultimately prevent critical crashes
.

Best Practices Guide For Fleet Safety Program Development

1. Based on the guide, the organizational and public-based assets that can be negatively affected as a result of transportation-related accidents are the organization’s assets or properties (machinery, infrastructure, human resources) and the image that is projected to the public .
2. Based on the document, the key elements of an effective fleet risk control system are: written policy, program administration, driver selection, authorization, and review, driver training, driver discipline, drug and alcohol testing, emergency equipment, vehicle inspection and maintenance, accident reporting and investigation, and recordkeeping . Moreover, the various responsibilities of a fleet risk manager to ensure that an organization adopts these key elements are as follows: (1) ensure compliance of the program by communicating the key elements; (2) ensure that the operators possess licenses appropriate for the type of vehicle being operated; (3) adopt effective standards for all operators; (4) maintain and updating files per vehicle and operator; and (5) ensure pre and post trip inspections are regularly conducted .

Fleet Safety Program Evaluation Guide

1. If an organization already has a formal fleet risk control policies in place, it is still necessary for an individual to routinely evaluate or audit the extent that such practices are being followed to determine consistency in compliance and to discern any need for improvements, as deemed necessary .
2. The person who is most likely to perform a fleet evaluation/audit is assigned manager or specifically, the safety manager whose responsibilities include fleet evaluation and control. Moreover, the management-based approaches that could be used to promote the successful completion of this process would include instituting motivational and
performance evaluation programs. These programs have specialized strategies that encourage subordinates to abide by the policies and motivate them to achieve identified objectives or goals. Likewise, those who fail to follow the designed policies should be subjected to sanctions to correct their actions as required .

References

Maine Municipal Association. (2005). Best Practices Guide for Fleet Safety Program Development. Risk Management Services.
NHTSA. (2008). National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Surve. US Department of Transportation.
NHTSA. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Alcohol Impaired Driving. US Department of Transportation.
NHTSA. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Large Trucks. US Department of Transportation.
NHTSA. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Occupant Protection. US Department of Transportation.
NHTSA. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Overview. US Department of Transportation.
NHTSA. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts 2012 Data Speeding. US Department of Transportation.
Northland Insurance. (n.d.). Fleet Safety Porgram Evaluation Guide.
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (2009). Preventability of Motor Vehicle Collisions. Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.