AGENDA ITEM: B3
MEETING:
RSSB Board Meeting
DATE:
03 September 2015
SUBJECT:
Structured approach to safety risk prioritisation
SPONSOR:
Chris Fenton/Anna Bradley
AUTHOR:
George Bearfield
1.
Purpose
1.1
This purpose of this paper is to update the board on earlier work to establish a clear industry
Risk Management Framework through the industry publication ‘Taking Safe Decisions’ and
work underway to implement that framework through SSRG and its related groups and seek
guidance from the board on how to complete this process.
2.
Background
2.1
The document ‘Taking Safe Decisions’ was published in 2008, and was the culmination of an
extensive programme of research and industry consultation that began in the earliest days of
RSSB, to clarify industry and regulatory responsibilities for safety risk management and risk
acceptance. A particular focus was on achieving a consistent interpretation of how to ensure
that safety risk was managed ‘so far as is reasonably practicable’ and also agreement around
the mechanisms and analysis that support such judgements. A consensus position was reached
and the document endorsed for the industry at the RSSB board.
2.2
Some key achievements were:


Achieving a consensus view that duty holders should not factor ‘societal concern’ into
their determination of their legal responsibilities. Such factors might instead influence
government and regulatory responses. However companies might voluntarily factor
such concerns into their broader business thinking.
Agreement of how the industry undertakes safety related appraisals including how to
consistently monetise potential risk reductions or risk increases in an analysis.
2.3
The publication of the document represented a milestone for the industry, however there
remains significant opportunity to develop the processes it describes through industry and
regulatory processes. The processes outlined are most valuable when the whole industry
applies them consistently. As well as representing a good practical approach they provide for
a logical and defensible industry position should this position be questioned for example in the
aftermath of a major railway accident.
2.4
Following the initial publication of the document the general legislative requirements in the
Health and Safety at Work Act, were supplemented with railway specific regulations from
Europe. The Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems Regulations (ROGS) (which
transcribed the Railway Safety Directive) came into force in 2006. More recently the Common
Safety Methods for Risk Evaluation and Assessment (CSM RA) and Monitoring have come into
force. The latter are regulations which apply as written, do not need transcribing into domestic
regulations and are quite prescriptive. The CSM RA in particular introduces additional risk
acceptance principles which need to be considered in a complementary way with the duty to
manage risk so far as is reasonably practicable.
2.5
These changes led to an update to Taking Safe Decisions in 2014. As a result the document
now describes a complete risk management framework for the GB mainline railway, which is
consistent with regulatory requirements, and represents an effective good practice approach
to risk management.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 September 2015
Page 1 of 2
AGENDA ITEM: B3
The framework is summarised at the top level in the diagram below:
Figure 1: The Taking Safe Decisions risk management framework
3.
Implementing the agreed industry process in the work of SSRG and its sub-groups
3.1
The framework of groups and activities under the SSRG set up under the initiative to improve
the management of safety co-operation, are still evolving. Within the RSSB administered
groups, explicit application of the framework in the guidance is increasingly being undertaken.
The approach is at its most advanced in the work of the People on Trains and at Stations Risk
Group and further detail of this will be presented at Board.
3.2
Although there is no explicit legal duty to apply the framework at the industry wide level it is
proving beneficial to apply it explicitly at the groups. Some key benefits of application of the
process are:




The regulations require companies to prioritise activity to address areas that give rise
to the greatest risks. The framework instils this thinking in the work of the groups.
It encourages sustained focus on high priority issues: the framework stresses the need
to follow initiatives through to implementation and track their effectiveness through
continued monitoring.
It provides a clear audit trail and therefore gives a level of assurance that resources
are being applied in the right place to address risks, and that correct processes are
being followed.
Its use is a practical demonstration of the benefits it provides, which should encourage
broader adoption of the framework within the industry.
3.3
At its last meeting the SSRG endorsed the implementation of this framework in the other SSRG
sub-groups. Work to fully embed the approach will likely entail consideration and update of
the SSRG group remits and review of the agenda structure. It will also be likely to require
briefing and training for those responsible for adhering to the processes such as meeting chairs
and attendees, meeting managers and those managing related programmes of work. Given
that some of the SSRG sub-groups are not RSSB managed, a degree of co-operation will be
needed to deliver a consistent approach.
4.
Recommendations
4.1
The board is asked to:

ENDORSE SSRG’s commitment to apply Taking Safe Decisions across all of its work.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 September 2015
Page 2 of 2