Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 61
Database Analysis 61
and indicate that the carriers have done enough accident investigation to identify some changes
that would decrease the frequency of similar accidents in the future. The usefulness of this infor-
mation would be greatly improved if a cause table, similar to the WHAT FAILED Table, was devel-
oped so the carrier could list some contributory causes from a pick list. Although there might be
some resistance to adding that field because of liability issues, moving toward being able to rou-
tinely list contributing causes would be helpful.
4.2.9.2 Potential Measures for Improving Root Cause Analysis
The following potential measures would enhance the ability of HMIRS to identify the root
causes of hazmat accidents.
1. Require that the DOT number be a mandatory input for all reports filed with PHMSA for en
route incidents.
2. Perform an additional Q/A check on carrier names to verify that the name being entered cor-
responds to the name provided on the annual PHMSA Registration form.
3. Require PKGFAIL entries to be filled out for all reports submitted to PHMSA.
4. Continue to emphasize the new requirement that carriers must file a 5800.1 form following an
accident if there was damage to lading and lading protection systems on cargo tanks of 1,000 gal-
lons or greater, even though there is no loss of hazardous material. This is the new requirement
to report Class C accidents. Such a notice might be given to carriers when PHMSA notifies them
that it has received and approved their annual hazmat registration application.
5. Capture driver condition information without compromising the confidentiality of the
driver. The following design option from MCMIS can be enhanced for use in HMIRS. Based
on analysis of the data, the list of options can be enhanced by using the following driver con-
dition categories:
1 = Appeared Normal,
2 = Had Been Drinking,
3 = Illegal Drug Use,
4 = Sick,
5 = Fatigue,
6 = Asleep,
7 = Medication, and
8 = Unknown.
The project team believes that adopting the potential measures above would decrease errors
in data entry and make it easier to query the database for potential causes of accidents.
4.3 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)
This section briefly describes the FARS file. Since the TIFA database incorporates the FARS
records for trucks involved in fatal accidents, to avoid a fragmented analysis, much of the detailed
evaluation is covered in Section 4.4, which describes TIFA.
The FARS file is the primary national crash data file for fatal traffic accidents. It is a census
of all fatal motor vehicle traffic crashes. The TIFA file covers all medium and heavy trucks
involved in a fatal crash, and includes virtually all FARS variables for the crash, vehicle, and
driver. TIFA survey data supplements FARS data for trucks (hereafter the word "trucks" will
be used to refer to medium and heavy trucks, i.e., trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating
[GVWR] over 10,000 lbs). The TIFA data include a more accurate identification and descrip-
tion of trucks in fatal crashes, along with details about the cargo, configuration, motor carrier
operating the vehicle, and crash type.
