National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Chapter 5 - Findings and Conclusion
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26449.
×
Page52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26449.
×
Page53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26449.
×
Page54

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

52 References Acquisition Management Systems Control. (2012). Department of Defense Standard Practice: System Safety. https://www.dau.edu/cop/armyesoh/DAU%20Sponsored%20Documents/MIL-STD-882E.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. Adduci, R. J., W. T. Hathaway, and L. J. Meadow. (2000). Hazard Analysis Guidelines for Transit Projects. Report No. DOT-VNTSC-FTA-00-01, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. https://www.transit. dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/HAGuidelines.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. American Society for Quality. (n.d.). Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Template. https://asq.org/-/media/public/ learn-about-quality/data-collection-analysis-tools/asq-fmea-template.xls?la=en. Accessed June 29, 2021. Association of American Railroads. (2020). Freight Railroads Move Hazardous Materials Safely. https://www.aar. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/AAR-Hazmat-Fact-Sheet.pdf. Accessed August 20, 2021. Boniface, D. (2003). Principles of Risk-Based Decision Making. U.S. Coast Guard. https://www.hsdl.org/ ?abstract&did=471178. Accessed June 29, 2021. Branford, K. (2011). Seeing the Big Picture of Mishaps: Applying the AcciMap Approach to Analyze System Accidents. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 1(1), 31–37. Branford, K., A. Hopkins, and N. Naikar. (2009). Guidelines for AcciMap analysis. In Learning from High Reliability Organisations (pp. 193–212), CCH Australia. https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/ bitstream/1885/20987/2/01_Branford_Guidelines_for_ACCIMAP_2009.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. British Standards Institute. (2007). BS EN 61025: 2007 Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). https://doi.org/10.3403/30101041. Accessed June 29, 2021. Bureau of Reclamation. (2019). A-5 Event Trees. https://www.usbr.gov/ssle/damsafety/risk/BestPractices/ Chapters/A5-EventTrees.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. California Public Utilities Commission. (n.d.). Rail Transit Safety Branch. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/rtsb/. Accessed July 7, 2021. California Public Utilities Commission. (2021). Program Standard—Procedures Manual: State Safety and Security Oversight of Rail Fixed Guideway Systems. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/ rail-safety-division/rtsb/cpuc-ssoa-program-standard-procedures-manual---20210315.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Center for Chemical Process Safety. (2001). Layer of Protection Analysis: Simplified Process Risk Assessment. American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (n.d.). Guidance for Performing Failure Mode and Effects Analysis with Performance Improvement Projects. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enrollment-and-Certification/ QAPI/downloads/GuidanceForFMEA.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. CGE Risk Management Solutions. (2015). BowTieXP: BowTie Methodology Manual. IP Bank B.V. https:// bowtierisksolutions.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/BowTieXP-User-Manual-V9.2-Rev-39.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Chen, Y. (2012). Improving Railway Safety: Risk Assessment Study. University of Birmingham School of Engi- neering. https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/4465/1/Chen13PhD.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. CSA Working Group. (2020). Canadian Method for Risk Evaluation and Assessment for Railway Systems. CSA Group. Curry, D. G., R. D. Quinn, D. R. Atkins, and T. C. G. Carlson. (2004). Injuries and the Experienced Worker— “He Was Too Experienced to Have Done Something Like That!” Professional Safety, 49(9), 30–34. Dekker, S., and E. Hollnagel. (2004). Human Factors and Folk Models. Cognition, Technology and Work, 6(2), 79–86. Dembski, A. (1998). FMEA Worksheet. Lehigh University. https://www.lehigh.edu/~intribos/Resources/ FMEA-template.xls. Accessed June 29, 2021.

References 53   Edmonton Transit Service. (2020). Canadian Common Method for Risk Evaluation and Assessment Internal Version. ETS. European Commission. (2009). Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 352/2009 of 24 April 2009 on the Adoption of a Common Safety Method on Risk Evaluation and Assessment as Referred to in Article 6(3)(a) of Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Official Journal of the European Union, 108, 4–29. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2009:108:FULL. Accessed July 14, 2021. European Commission. (2013). Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 402/2013 of 30 April 2013 on the Common Safety Method for Risk Evaluation and Assessment and Repealing Regulation (EC) No 352/2009. Official Journal of the European Union, 121, 8–29. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:121:0008:0025:EN:PDF. Accessed July 14, 2021. European Railway Agency. (2009). Guide for the Application of the Commission Regulation on the Adoption of a Common Safety Method on Risk Evaluation and Assessment as Referred to in Article 6(3)(a) of the Railway Safety Directive. https://www.era.europa.eu/sites/default/files/activities/docs/guide_for_application_ of_cms_en.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. FACTOR. (2021). Managing Risk Leading an Industry to Safer, More Secure Routes. https://www.factorinc.com/ index.php/leading-an-industry-to-safer-more-secure-routes. Accessed June 29, 2021. Federal Aviation Administration. (2000). System Safety Handbook. https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ handbooks_manuals/aviation/risk_management/ss_handbook/. Accessed June 29, 2021. Federal Transit Administration. (2019a). Sample Safety Risk Assessment Matrices for Rail Transit Agencies. https:// www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/regulations-and-guidance/safety/public-transportation- agency-safety-program/134136/sample-safety-risk-assessment-matrices-rail-transit-agencies.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. Federal Transit Administration. (2019b). State Safety Oversight Program Certification Status. https://www. transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/safety/state-safety-oversight-program-certification-status. Accessed June 29, 2021. Federal Transit Administration. (2020). National Transit Database (NTD) Glossary. https://www.transit.dot.gov/ ntd/national-transit-database-ntd-glossary. Accessed July 14, 2021. Federal Transit Administration. (2021). Public Transportation Agency Safety Program. Rail Transit Providers. https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/safety/public-transportation-agency-safety-program/ rail-transit-providers#RailSRM. Accessed August 30, 2021. GAIN Working Group B. (2003). Guide to Methods and Tools for Airline Flight Safety Analysis. https://www. skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/237.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Golden Empire Transit District (GET). (2020). Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP), Revision 0, May 28, 2020, Reviewed May 2021. International Electrotechnical Commission. (2006). Analysis Techniques for System Reliability—Procedure for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). IEC 60812. https://www.sis.se/api/document/preview/567774/. Accessed July 14, 2021. International Electrotechnical Commission. (2010). Analysis Techniques for Dependability—Event Tree Analysis (ETA). IEC 62502: 2010-10. Joint Software System Safety Engineering Workgroup. (2010). Joint Software Systems Safety Engineering Hand- book. U.S. Department of Defense. https://www.acqnotes.com/Attachments/Joint-SW-Systems-Safety- Engineering-Handbook.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Jovicic, D. (2009). Collection of Examples of Risk Assessments and of Some Possible Tools Supporting the CSM Regulation. European Railway Agency. https://www.era.europa.eu/sites/default/files/activities/docs/collection_ of_ra_ex_and_some_tools_for_csm_en.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Kishore, E. A. (2013). Formal Safety Assessment in Maritime Industry—Explanation to IMO Guidelines. https:// www.researchgate.net/profile/Arun-Kishore-Eswara/publication/256471309_Formal_Safety_Assessment_ in_Maritime_Industry_-_Explanation_to_IMO_Guidelines/links/00b49539927c0467ae000000/Formal- Safety-Assessment-in-Maritime-Industry-Explanation-to-IMO-Guidelines.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Leitner, B. (2017). A General Model for Railway Systems Risk Assessment with the Use of Railway Accident Scenarios Analysis. Procedia Engineering, 187, 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.04.361. Accessed July 14, 2021. Lyon, B. K., and G. Popov. (2016). The Art of Assessing Risk. https://aeasseincludes.assp.org/professionalsafety/ pastissues/061/03/F1_0316.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Manoukian, J.-G. (2016). Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance: What’s the Difference? https://www.wolterskluwer. com/en/expert-insights/risk-appetite-and-risk-tolerance-whats-the-difference. Accessed July 14, 2021. Metro North Partners. (2019). Systems Assurance Guideline. City of Edmonton. Metro North Partners. (2020). Metroline NW Extension LRT: System Safety Program Plan (SSPP). City of Edmonton.

54 Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies Muhlbauer, W. K. (2004). Pipeline Risk Management Manual: Ideas, Techniques, and Resources. Elsevier Science. Office of Rail and Road. (2018). Common Safety Method for Risk Evaluation and Assessment—Guidance on the Application of Commission Regulation (EU) 402/2013. https://www.orr.gov.uk/media/10711. Accessed June 29, 2021. Pandey, M. (n.d.). Fault Tree Analysis. University of Waterloo. http://www.civil.uwaterloo.ca/maknight/courses/ CIVE240-05/Week%2011/Fault%20Tree%20Analysis.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. Pike, D. (2018). PTASP & SMS—The Role of the Transit Agency’s CSO/SMS Executive and Key Staff [PowerPoint presentation]. Transportation Safety Institute. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/ files/docs/regulations-and-guidance/safety/118841/ptasp-and-sms-role-transit-agency%E2%80%99s-cso- sms-executive-and-key-staff-presentation.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Prominiski, N., and K. Chronley. (2020). MBTA Transit Safety Plan [PowerPoint presentation]. https://cdn. mbta.com/sites/default/files/2020-06/2020-06-22-fmcb-21-agency-safety-plan.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB). (2014). Guidance on Risk Evaluation and Risk Acceptance. https:// studylib.net/doc/11421929/. Accessed July 14, 2021. Salmon, P. M., A. Hulme, G. H. Walker, P. Waterson, E. Berber, and N. A. Stanton. (2020). Something for Every- one: A Generic AcciMap Contributory Factor Classification Scheme. https://publications.ergonomics.org. uk/uploads/Something-for-everyone-A-generic-AcciMap-contributory-factor-classification-scheme.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. San Diego Metropolitan Transit System. (2020). San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Agency Safety Plan, Revision 0, July 2020, Reviewed May 2021. Shappell, S. A., and D. A. Wiegmann. (2000). The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System—HFACS. https://www.academia.edu/20108248/The_human_factors_analysis_and_classification_system_HFACS. Accessed July 14, 2021. SKYbrary. (2020). The Human Factors “Dirty Dozen.” https://skybrary.aero/index.php/The_Human_Factors_ %22Dirty_Dozen%22. Accessed June 30, 2021. Stanton, N. A., and P. M. Salmon. (2020). Actor Map and AcciMap: Analysis of the Uber Collision with a Pedestrian in Arizona, USA. https://publications.ergonomics.org.uk/uploads/Actor-Map-and-AcciMap-Analysis-of- the-Uber-collision-with-a-pedestrian-in-Arizona-USA.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Texas Department of Insurance. (n.d.). Fault Tree Analysis. https://www.tdi.texas.gov/pubs/videoresource/ stpfaulttree.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021. Transport Canada. (2020). Rail Safety in Canada. https://tc.canada.ca/en/rail-transportation/rail-safety-canada. Accessed June 29, 2021. Tsegaye, M. (2019). Efficient Procedure to Scheduling Construction Projects at the Planning Phase. Baltic Journal of Real Estate Economics and Construction Management, 7, 60–80. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 332450436_Efficient_Procedure_to_Scheduling_Construction_Projects_at_the_Planning_Phase. Accessed July 14, 2021. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2019). United States Coast Guard—Commandant Instruction 16003.2B. https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/10/2002155400/-1/-1/0/CI_16003_2B.PDF. Accessed August 11, 2021. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2019). Sample Safety Risk Assessment Matrices for Bus Transit Agencies. Federal Transit Administration. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/regulations-and- guidance/safety/public-transportation-agency-safety-program/133711/sample-safety-risk-assessment- matrices-bus-transit-agencies.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2021. Vantuono, W. (2014). Freight Railroads Implement Voluntary CBR Safety Initiatives. Railway Age, https:// www.railwayage.com/regulatory/freight-railroads-implement-voluntary-cbr-safety-initiatives/. Accessed August 30, 2021. Varghese, V. (2016). Six Sigma in the Context of Environmental Management System—A Mechanism Design Approach. International Journal of Pure and Applied Management Sciences. https://www.researchgate. net/publication/309426296_Six_Sigma_in_the_context_of_Environmental_Management_System_-_A_ mechanism_design_approach. Accessed July 14, 2021. Vesely, W. E., F. F. Goldberg, N. H. Roberts, and D. F. Haasl. (1981). Fault Tree Handbook. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1007/ML100780465.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2021.

Next: Appendix A - Survey Instruments »
Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Risk management is the central element of the safety management system (SMS). Identifying, assessing, analyzing, mitigating, communicating, and documenting are all steps in an effective risk management program.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Synthesis 157: Transit Safety Risk Assessment Methodologies is designed to help the transit industry better understand current and new innovative state-of-the-practice methodologies in safety risk assessment (SRA), which is an important part of the system.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!