PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsItem #51:G-03Institutionalizing Safety Workforce Development(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 1 3 4 5 3RAC 3 4 6 16 11 9Standing Committee on Research■ Good topic, but not really "research". This seems more like training to me. Should this be pursued through anotheravenue? There is a need for this type of training, but with current state education and transp. budget limitations, it willlikely be some time before a curriculum can be established. Also, the funding seems disproportionate based on the scopeof the work and deliverables.■ Cost seems high.■ This would be a good project but it looks like it could be a domestic scan candidate or a good synthesis topic rather thana full NCHRP study. The proposed cost may prohibit those alternatives though.■ It is important to have trained transportation safety professionals with the ability to identify, select, prioritize and evaluatecountermeasures■ [Rating: 4] There is a definite need to institutionalize safety within workforce development. The proposed tasks will helpthe safety community progress towards this institutionalization.Research Advisory Committee■ There is formal training (OSHA Training Instititue, ASSE, National Safety Council, etc.), degrees, and ceritification(Board of Certified Safety Professionals - CSP, etc.) and a national systems safety standard (ANSI/AIHA Z10) availablefor those that work on Transportation worker safety. This appears to be to develop training for those Safety professionalsthat would teach the MUTCD content, technical standards for roadway/bridge components, etc. There is overlap for thetwo and this would provide a better train the trainer pool for Safety Professionals that focus on internal worker safety(Confined Space Entry, Fall Protection, Trenching safety as well as workzone setup).■ We believe safety is critical and so is this issue. However, the cost and timeframe seem excessive. This is more of adetermine what is being done and what needs to be done. A course exists that needs to be updated. This should not be along or extensive process.■ Need to coordinate better with existing programs, ie TCCC■ Institutionalizing safety training and education would meet a recognized need and could positively impact WDOToperations and procedures. The research should include civil engineering curriculum.■ This project addresses an important workforce development need. The work might be better handled as a component ofWorkforce planning rather than as a separate research project. The AASHTO Sub-committee on HR is alreadydeveloping a template to conduct workforce planning which can be used by any DOT.■ Although the intent of the project is admirable, there is much safety information available that is not being used or is outof-date.There should be a concerted effort to first assemble that information, and then move forward with this project.To try to establish a common workforce development schema for all 50 states will be difficult due to budgetaryconstraints, existing practice and personnel resources.■ DOTs are woefully lacking in institutionalizing safety into there workforce. This is very important issue for the future ofDOTs.IV-35