<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">

<channel>
<title>U.S. DoT OIG Highway &amp; Vehicle Safety RSS Feed</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?subject=22</link>
<description>The 10 most recent releases on the U.S. DoT OIG web site related to Highway &amp; Vehicle Safety</description>
<language>en-US</language>
<webMaster>webmaster@oig.dot.gov (OIG Webmaster)</webMaster>

<atom:link href="http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?subject=22" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<item>
<title>Review Initiated of NHTSAs FY 2008 Drug Control Obligation Summary and Performance Summary Reports</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2415</link>
<description>The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is initiating a review of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSA) fiscal year (FY) 2008 Drug Control Obligation Summary and Performance Summary Reports.  The review will be conducted in accordance with the attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards prescribed by the Comptroller General of the United States.</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2415</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>National Bridge Inspection Program: Assessment of FHWAs Implementation of DataDriven, RiskBased Oversight</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2411</link>
<description>On January 12, 2009 we issued our audit report on FHWAs implementation of datadriven, riskbased oversight of the National Bridge Inspection Program.  Our objectives were to evaluate FHWAs (1) implementation of a datadriven, riskbased oversight to target bridge safety risks most in need of attention, particularly those related to load ratings and postings and (2) promotion of state use of bridge management systems.  Our review found that FHWA made limited progress implementing datadriven, riskbased bridge oversight.  Although FHWAs annual review of state bridge inspection programs assured compliance with Federal standards, it did not incorporate routinely a systematic datadriven approach to identifying, prioritizing, and remediating nationwide bridge safety risks in coordination with states.  Additionally, we found that FHWA could strengthen its role in expanding states use of bridge management systems, which are computerized systems that prioritize replacement and repair projects and help ensure bridge safety.  We recommended that the FHWA Administrator develop and implement minimum requirements for datadriven, riskbased bridge oversight during bridge engineers annual NBIS compliance reviews and develop a comprehensive plan to routinely conduct systematic, datadriven analysis to identify nationwide bridge safety risks, prioritize them, and target those higher priority risks for remediation in coordination with states.  In implementing the plan, FHWA should (a) direct the Office of Bridge Technology to routinely and systematically identify and prioritize nationwide bridge safety risks and (b) direct the Division Offices to work with states to remediate higher priority nationwide bridge safety risks.  We also recommended that FHWA develop a requirement for states to correct promptly data inaccuracies found by FHWAs NBI data validation program and increase FHWAs use of elementlevel data by (a) coordinating with AASHTO to update the standards for elementlevel data, (b) incorporating AASHTOs updated standards into the NBIS through the rulemaking process, and (c) developing and implementing a plan to collect elementlevel data after AASHTOs updated standards have been incorporated into the NBIS.  We further recommended that FHWA initiate a program to collect data regularly on states use of bridge management systems, evaluate the data to identify those states most in need of assistance in implementing effective bridge management systems, and target those states for technical assistance and training resources.</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2411</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Audit Initiated of NHTSA Management of Research and Demonstration Projects</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2340</link>
<description>The National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) awards contracts and grants to states, universities, commercial entities, and nonprofit organizations for conducting behavioral and vehicle safety research.   The Office of Inspector General plans to review NHTHAs management of research and demonstration projects and determine whether NHTSA provided appropriate management and oversight of research funds and selected projects.</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2340</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Best Practices For Improving Oversight of State Highway Safety Programs</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2269</link>
<description>On March 25, 2008, we issued our report on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSA) oversight of state highway safety programs.  Our audit was conducted in response to a requirement within the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEALU).  The objective of our audit was to evaluate NHTSAs oversight of state highway safety programs and identify best practices.We found that NHTSA developed and followed guidelines and procedures for oversight reviews of state highway safety programs, but we identified weaknesses in NHTSAs annual program reviews that made it difficult for NHTSA to comprehensively assess whether states were on course to meet their safety goals.  Specifically, NHTSA did not (1) ensure that states consistently measured performance, (2) assess states reporting of performance trends, and (3) analyze states longterm progress in meeting safety goals.  We identified opportunities for NHTSA to better measure the results of its grant programs and enhance the accountability for grant funds.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2269</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Effectiveness of Federal Drunk Driving Programs</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2150</link>
<description>On October 25, 2007, the Inspector General testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Transportation Safety, Infrastructure Security, and Water Quality on the effectiveness of Federal drunk driving programs.  The Inspector Generals statement focused on the following areas:  (1) key strategies identified for countering alcoholimpaired driving; (2) how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) could better measure the effectiveness of key strategies; and (3) actions NHTSA has agreed to take, in concert with the states, to improve performance measures for alcoholimpaired driving.  The Inspector General urged NHTSA to work more aggressively with its state partners  to accomplish these actions in advance of the scheduled 3year time period.</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2150</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>FHWA Can Do More in the Short Term to Improve Oversight of Structurally Deficient Bridges</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2129</link>
<description>The Inspector General testified on September 20, 2007, before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. The Inspector Generals statement highlighted bridge inspections and funding for bridge rehabilitation and replacement as significant challenges for the Department of Transportation, made observations on the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) actions to address prior OIG recommendations regarding improving its oversight of structurally deficient bridges, and outlined actions that can be taken immediately to strengthen FHWAs oversight. The Inspector General called on FHWA to develop a datadriven, riskbased approach to bridge oversight to better identify and target those structurally deficient bridges most in need of attention.</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2129</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Federal Highway Administrations Oversight of Structurally Deficient Bridges</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2115</link>
<description>The Inspector General testified on September 5, 2007, before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.  The Inspector Generals statement highlighted bridge safety and funding as significant issues for the Department of Transportation, discussed previous work regarding structurally deficient bridges in the United States, and made observations on the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) actions to address prior OIG recommendations regarding improving its oversight of such bridges.  The Inspector General called on FHWA to develop a datadriven, riskbased approach to bridge oversight to better identify and target those structurally deficient bridges most in need of attention.  Additionally, the Inspection General described actions that can be taken immediately to strengthen the FHWAs oversight.</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2115</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Initial Assessment of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project Stem To Stern Safety Review</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2106</link>
<description>On August 16, 2007, we issued our report, &amp;ldquo;Initial Assessment of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project Stem to Stern Safety Review.&amp;rdquo;   This assessment is part of our ongoing independent oversight as requested by the Massachusetts Congressional delegation in July 2006 and subsequently reaffirmed by the NTSB Reauthorization Act of 2006. The Stem to Stern safety review is divided into several phases, with Phase I being a purposely limited and expeditious review to identify immediate risks to public safety.  We evaluated whether the findings and recommendations in the Stem to Stern Safety Reviews Phase I report adequately analyzed immediate risks and whether necessary remedial measures were identified.We found that Phase I of the Stem to Stern Safety Review generally analyzed the correct project components, but certain items should have been classified as higher priority safety risks in the Phase I report, or necessary followup activities were not sufficiently clear.  We also found that the leadership, scope, and methodology for Phase II of the Stem to Stern Safety Review need to be specified and aggressive action must be taken going forward.  FHWA agreed with the findings in our report and concurred with its recommendations.</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2106</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Inspector Generals Response to Secretary Peters Request for an Assessment of the National Bridge Inspection Program</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2100</link>
<description>On August 3, 2007, the Inspector General (IG) responded to Secretary Peters request that the Office of Inspector General (OIG) conduct an independent review of the National Bridge Inspection Program and the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) oversight of the Nations bridges. Our overall objective is to evaluate FHWAs implementation of the National Bridge Inspection Program and make recommendations for improvement in order to provide assurance to the Secretary, the Congress and the traveling public that FHWA is doing everything that should be done to ensure bridge safety.</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2100</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Opportunities To Further Improve Railroad Safety</title>
<link>http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2041</link>
<description>On May 8, 2007, the Assistant Inspector General for Surface and Maritime Programs testified before the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials regarding the Office of Inspector Generals May 3, 2007 report on the Federal Railroad Administrations (FRA) activities to oversee safety at the Nations highwayrail grade crossings (grade crossings).  The Assistant Inspector General testified that FRA can further improve railroad safety by:  (1) ensuring compliance with mandatory reporting requirements for grade crossing collisions, (2) increasing FRAs involvement in investigations of grade crossing collisions, (3) addressing sight obstructions at grade crossings without automated warning devices, (4) establishing reporting requirements for FRAs national grade crossing inventory system, and (5) requiring states with the most dangerous crossings to develop action plans.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2041</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
