Railway Safety Commission An Coimisiún Sábháilteachta Iarnróid The Management of Third Party...

Railway Safety Commission

An Coimisiún Sábháilteachta Iarnróid

The Management of Third Party Generated Risk in Ireland

International Railway Safety Conference

Goa, October 2007

Historical Legislation:• The focus was on railways a ‘novel technology’ and the need

to protect neighbours.• There was only limited recognition of

– the capacity of 3rd party activities to create railway risk and – ‘fitness-for-purpose’ in design and operation.

• By and large railways seen as exporters rather than importers of risk.

• Even in relatively recent legislation, there was no substantive recognition of a dynamic operating environment.



Contemporary legislation:

• An integrated framework assigns responsibilities to internal and external duty holders.

• Railway undertakings are required to demonstrate adequacy of safety management in a safety case (including 3rd party interfaces).

• The requirement for periodic safety case review against current industry good practice is effectively a check on continuing fitness for purpose.

• A general duty of care is placed on all parties to have regard for their own safety and that of others conducting their activities on and about the railway.

• There is no mechanism for ongoing review of fitness for purpose of 3rd party assets and procedures.

• A responsibility is placed on regulator to promote safety and provide appropriate guidance (including to 3rd parties).



Risk Model:

• The original model, developed in 1998 as part of system safety review,

• used tolerability limits and VPF within ALARP framework to support safety investment.

• Irish Rail, supported by Sotera Risk Solutions, has subsequently developed a more comprehensive model which is

• Predictive, using standard Hazid/FTA tools, and

• based on– 227 functional locations at each of which– 200+ parameters were rated for each and– 1000+ identified hazards.



Predicted Risk:

• 86% + of 3rd party risk related to level crossings and trespass.

• The balance, at approx 7% of total operational risk, is not insignificant and

• derives for only 16 of the identified hazards.

• 9 equivalent fatalities in 2007 = 50% reduction on 2003 base year figure and 20% on 2005 (reflects impact of safety investment programme).

• Only 25 of 1000 modelled hazards related to 3rd party activities but represented 49% of total risk (4.4 equivalent fatalities).

• 80% + (3.5+ equivalent fatalities) is risk to the 3rd parties themselves.

• This equates to 18.5 x the risk that the railway exports to those parties.

9.5%

39.5%

2.2%

Risk from third parties toothers

Risk to third parties fromthemselves

Risk to third parties fromI E



Responsibility and Accountability:• 3rd parties can generate risk ‘on and about’ the railway

(neighbours) and remotely (planners etc.)• Actions giving rise to hazards may

– be wilful or naive– not always be ‘entirely predictable or sensible’

• For a 3rd party to be held accountable;– there must be a reasonable expectation of their being aware of

the potential of their activities to create railway risk– the procedures that they are required to adopt in order to

mitigate that risk must, in a current societal and environmental context, be reasonable

• Responsibility on primary stakeholders, railway undertakings and regulators, to provide education and guidance



Guidance:• Railway undertakings have a

responsibility to provide guidance, particularly where the activity is on the railway.

• Irish Rail has issued guidance on the safety use of unattended level crossings.

• RPA/Veolia (light rail) are running media campaigns aimed at heightening awareness of risk associated with– wearing headphones in

vicinity of railway and– collisions resulting from bad

road vehicle driver behaviour (e.g. running traffic signals).



Guidance:

• As regulator the RSC is mandated to promote safety and provide guidance where appropriate.

• 3rd party guidance is being developed by Sotera Risk Solutions for the RSC in consultation with stakeholders.

• An advanced draft available on the RSC web-site for consultation and has also been announced publicly in context of development risk.

• Completion is expected before end of 2007 and will be followed by a targeted distribution.



Guidance:

• A matrix for each category links 25 principle duty holders (individual and group) with 82 activities.

• For each activity the principal hazards are identified.

• Guidance given on the level of potential risk and actions required to effective management.

• The need for modification/augmentation will be reviewed on an ongoing basis.



• Based of 5 core categories;−Level crossing users−Planners and developers−Emergency services−Neighbours−Passengers

Construction and Development:



Transport:

4.73M/75

Transport:



3.86m/13

Road Traffic Management:



3.35m/19

Agriculture:



Marketing:



Predictability:

Conclusions:

• There is an established practice of stakeholder cooperation in addressing 3rd party risk.

• The regulatory framework is now supportive in making the creators of such risk accountable for management.

• Substantial progress has been made in the reduction of 3rd party risk.• Continuing effort is required in – Improving understanding of potential sources and impacts– Informing and educating stakeholders– Ensuring that they meet their responsibilities.



Thank You for Your Attention

?



Railway Safety Commission An Coimisiún Sábháilteachta Iarnróid The Management of Third Party...

Documents

Transcript of Railway Safety Commission An Coimisiún Sábháilteachta Iarnróid The Management of Third Party...