Railway Safety Legislation Update
Issue 77: November 2015
Author: Andy Bain
Safety Management System Specialist
RSSB
www.rssb.co.uk
1
Foreword
This Safety Legislation Update has been compiled by RSSB following consideration by the
Railway Safety Legislation Committee. Its aim is to identify emerging and revised health
and safety legislation and supporting documents, which may affect the members of the
railway industry. The update is not a definitive list of legislation and only represents the
knowledge available at the time of going to print. The update is revised quarterly.
How to use this update
The Legislation implementation and update status table
This provides details on the proposed implementation dates of the new or updated
legislation contained in this update together with a column showing whether the entry
has been updated or is new to this issue.
Entries and updates
 New entries to the update are identified as such in their titles
 Significant changes to entries since the previous issue have been identified with a
border
 Each entry is dated at the end with the month that the entry was last updated
 Entries in the update are deleted once they become law or soon after
 In sub-sections that cover several topics the UK position may be shown with shading
 Key dates are shown in red
Railway Safety Legislation Update Governance
The Data and Risk Strategy Group (DRSG) is the governance group for the Railway Safety
Legislation Update. The DRSG will:
 Alert RSSB members to actual and potential changes to safety-related legislation likely
to impact on their operations or business
 Seek to influence and respond in such a way as to ensure that RSSB members’
interests are recognised, promoted and protected
 Disseminate early indications and subsequent information regarding legislative
proposals that concern operational or occupational safety, their management or
reporting. This includes European, UK national and rail industry specific legislation
2
 Identify and consider the implications of proposals for the GB rail industry. Inform
and/or review RSSB activity in promoting or protecting its members’ interests by
seeking to influence and/or respond to those proposals.1 This may include
preparing and making available to members template responses to formal
consultations
 Where appropriate set up working parties or authorise the engagement of specialists
to assist in meeting the above objectives
 Approve the text of the quarterly Railway Safety Legislation Update.
1
The position adopted by RSSB will be in the interests of overall safety in the industry but should
not be seen as necessarily representing the views of all individual members.
3
Contents
Foreword
2
How to use this update
2
Railway Safety Legislation Update - Governance
2
Contents
4
Abbreviations and acronyms
6
Related websites
7
Legislation implementation and update status
8
Railway Interoperability Directive 2008/57/EC –Technical
Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) Scope extended and revision
made
8
Consultation on the implementation of Directive 2013/35/EU on the
minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of
workers to the risks arising from physical agents - electromagnetic
fields (EMF)
9
Section 1: Railway-specific legislation
10
Railway Safety Directives (2004/49/EC and 2014/88/EU) – Common
Safety Indicators and Common Safety Targets
10
Common Safety Method on risk evaluation and assessment
13
Common Safety Methods for conformity assessment, monitoring and
supervision
17
The Fourth Railway Package
21
EC Regulation EU/445/2011 (The Entities in Charge of Maintenance
Regulation)
27
Train Driving Licences and Certificates Regulations 2010 and changes
to the Train Driving Licences Directive
29
ERA Joint Network Secretariat/ Quick response procedure (now
known as JNS urgent procedure)
33
Background
33
Railway Interoperability Directive 2008/57/EC –Technical
Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) Scope extended and revision
made
35
Section 2: General legislation
38
4
COMAH Regulations 2015 and draft legal guidance
38
HSE’s Review of Approved Codes of Practice
39
Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015
40
Exempting from health and safety law those self-employed whose
work activities pose no potential risk of harm to others – excluding
railway activities
42
The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996.
Guidance on Regulations L64
44
Design standards for accessible railway stations: a code of practice by
the Department for Transport and Transport Scotland
45
Section 3: Railway-related consultations
46
Consultation on the implementation of Directive 2013/35/EU on the
minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of
workers to the risks arising from physical agents - electromagnetic
fields (EMF)
47
Consultation on the proposal to withdraw the Railway Safety
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997, Railway Safety
Regulations 1999 and Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments)
Regulations 2001
49
Section 4: News
51
News
51
Court cases
61
5
Abbreviations and acronyms
ACOP
ACSH
ATOC
CER
CSI
CSM
CST
DfT
DRSG
ECM
EMF
ERA
HSE
HSWA
IAB
ICNIRP
IM
MoJ
MS
NSA
NSR
NRV
NTR
ORR
RE&A
RIDDOR
RISC
ROGS
RSD
RSSB
RU
SPWG
SSRG
TEN
TSI
UIC
6
Approved Code of Practice
Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work
Association of Train Operating Companies
Community of European Railways
Common Safety Indicator
Common Safety Method
Common Safety Target
Department for Transport
Data Risk Strategy Group
Entity in charge of maintenance
Electro-magnetic fields
European Railway Agency
Health and Safety Executive
Health and Safety at Work Act
Impact Assessment Board
International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection
Infrastructure manager
Ministry of Justice
Member State
National Safety Authority
National Safety Rule
National Reference Value
National Technical Rule
Office of Rail Regulation
Risk Evaluation and Assessment
Reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences Regulations 1995
Railway Interoperability and Safety Committee
Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations
Railway Safety Directive
Rail Safety and Standards Board
Railway undertaking
Safety Performance Working Group
System Safety Risk Group
Trans-European Network
Technical Specification for Interoperability
International Union of Railways
Related websites
Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC)
www.atoc.org
Business Innovation Skills (BIS)
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-businessinnovation-skills
Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-forcommunities-and-local-government
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-forenvironment-food-rural-affairs
Department for Transport (DfT)
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport
EUR-Lex
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/
European Commission (EC)
http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm
European Railway Agency (ERA) www.era.europa.eu/Pages/Home.aspx
Government News Network
http://www.knowledgeview.co.uk/node/10
Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
www.hse.gov.uk
Law Commission
http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/index.htm
legislation.gov.uk, managed by The National Archives http://www.legislation.gov.uk
Network Rail
www.networkrail.co.uk
Office of Rail and Road (ORR) www.orr.gov.uk
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) www.raib.gov.uk
RSSB
www.rssb.co.uk
Scottish Law Commission
http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk
International Union of Railways (UIC)
www.uic.org/
Ministry of Justice
https://consult.justice.gov.uk/
7
Legislation implementation and update
status
Legislation
Implementation date
Updated in
this issue?
Railway Safety Directives (2004/49/EC and
2014/88/EU) – Common Safety Indicators and
Common Safety Targets
2nd set of CSTs
introduced Apr 2011
New CSIs introduced
July 2014
Yes
Regulation on the Common Safety Methods
– Risk Assessment and Evaluation
July 2012
May and August
2015
January 2011 and
June 2013
Yes
The Fourth Railway Package
EC Regulation EU/445/2011 (the Entities in
Charge of Maintenance Regulation)
January 2019
May 2011
May 2013
Yes
Yes
Train Driving Licences and Certificates
Regulations 2010 and changes to the Train
Driving Licences Directive
ERA Joint Network Secretariat/ Quick response
procedure (now known as JNS urgent
procedure)
Railway Interoperability Directive 2008/57/EC –
Technical Specifications for Interoperability
(TSIs) Scope extended and revision made
Section 2: General legislation
October 2018
Yes
Not applicable
Yes
July 2015
Yes
COMAH Regulations 2015 and draft legal
guidance
HSE’s Review of Approved Codes of Practice
June 2015
No
Not applicable
No
Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2015
Exempting from Health and safety law those
Self-employed whose work activities pose no
potential risk of harm to others
6 April 2015
yes
Unknown
yes
The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals)
Regulations 1996. Guidance on Regulations L64
Not applicable
No
Design standards for accessible railway stations:
Already applies
No
Section 1: Railway-specific legislation
Regulations on the Common Safety Methods
– Conformity Assessment and Monitoring and
Supervision
8
Yes
a code of practice by the Department for
Transport and Transport Scotland
Section 3: Other railway-related consultations
Consultation on the implementation of
Directive 2013/35/EU on the minimum health
and safety requirements regarding the
exposure of workers to the risks arising from
physical agents - electromagnetic fields (EMF)
Consultation on the proposal to withdraw the
Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Regulations 1997, Railway Safety Regulations
1999 and Railway Safety (Miscellaneous
Amendments) Regulations 2001
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
Yes
9
Section 1: Railway-specific legislation
Railway Safety Directives (2004/49/EC
and 2014/88/EU) – Common Safety
Indicators and Common Safety Targets
Background
The Railway Safety Directive (2004/49/EC) requires that ERA sets Common Safety
Targets (CST) for each member state. Member states are required to provide Common
Safety Indicators (CSI) data to ERA on an annual basis (as per Annex 1 of the Safety
Directive).
Main provisions
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information and the
main provisions on the following, relating to Railway Safety Directives:
 For detailed descriptions:
 Common Safety Indicators
 Common Safety Targets and Common Safety Indicators
 UNECE expert group on level crossing safety
 Common occurrence reporting
 National Safety Rules
 ERA Railway Indicators
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
10
Current status
Common Safety Targets
ERA has circulated the 2014 report template to NSAs. There are no significant
differences to the 2013 template. The completed report was submitted to ERA by the 30
September 2015 deadline.
ERA has published a draft proposal for the revision of the assessment method for CSTs
with the purpose of addressing the weaknesses of the current method and of the
general concept. The expected outcomes are:
 Obtain more reliable and robust results of the assessment early enough in the year
 Integrate the actions foreseen in the CSM with the other RSD requirements (including
NSA annual safety report and National safety plans)
 Introduce tangible safety targets linked with the national safety plans and other
activities that are not subject to the enforcement regime for achieving at least the
NRVs
 Motivate MSs to embrace the method and encourage them to apply it at the national
level
 Include safety targets for the EU given the continuous development of the single
European railway area.
ERA was planning to issue a recommendation regarding the CSM-CST revision by the end
of June 2015. However, given that the new Railway Safety Directive was not yet adopted
in the framework of the 4th Railway Package, the ERA mandate for the work on the
revision has been extended for an undefined period.
Partly based on the CSTs, ERA is putting together a programme of work to target
‘priority countries’ with the aim of reducing risk levels. The assessment and what action
ERA should take will also be based on evaluation of the transposition of the directives,
findings from the cross audits, NIB assessment and matrix evaluation.
Common Safety Indicators
ERA has agreed to a voluntary approach for reporting 2014 CSIs using the new annex 1.
NSAs will report 2015 CSI data using the new indicators – i.e. RUs and IMs will need to
use the new CSIs when reporting 2015 data to NSAs (and then NSAs to ERA) in 2016.
Previous CSI and CST working groups have been merged to form a combined working
party called the Safety Performance Working Party (SPWP). ERA believes that SPWP has
completed the main tasks for which it was set up. They are proposing that future work
should be taken forward by smaller correspondence groups rather than full meetings of
the working party.
11
UNECE expert group on level crossing safety
A new working group considering level crossing safety from both a rail and road
perspective has been established under the umbrella of United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE). UIC, NSAs (including ORR) and the ERA is a part of the
group. The group is preparing an action plan for improving level crossing safety uniting
both road and rail infrastructure managers.
Common occurrence reporting
A common EU approach to occurrence reporting and analysis has been in place in both
aviation and maritime for several years. ERA is exploring whether a similar system
would be possible for railways. Occurrence reporting is seen as taking a system-wide
and data-driven approach to accident prevention.
Aligning changes to SMIS with this work wherever possible will be useful for the UK.
Workshops were held by ERA in Valenciennes on 28 October (suicides) and 29 October
(common occurrence reporting). The following questions were considered among others
at the second of these workshops:
What is the impact of requirements on occurrence reporting in the 4 th railway package
legislation?
What are the most appropriate tools to enhance common reporting on occurrences
across the EU?
ERA Railway Indicators
ERA has developed a series of metrics (Railway Indicators) that they are using to
measure performance in delivering ERA-related activity. The railway indicators are
divided into 4 operational activity areas:
ERA has now started collecting data for the pilot phase (year 1) of the Railway
Indicators. The indicators will be reviewed in 2016 to see how well they are functioning
and what adjustments should be made.
Date updated
October 2015
12
Common Safety Method on risk
evaluation and assessment
Background
The Railway Safety Directive (2004/49/EC) requires that a series of Common Safety
Methods (CSMs) are developed by the ERA to describe how safety levels, achievement
of safety targets and compliance with other safety requirements are assessed in the
different member states.
Main Provisions
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information and the
main provisions on the following, relating to the CSM on risk evaluation and assessment:
 Original Regulation
 Revised Regulation
 Risk acceptance criteria for technical systems
 CSM Design Targets
 Article 12 Assessment Bodies for domestic only changes
 RAC for transport of dangerous goods
 DV29bis
 Revised Railway Interoperability Directive Annexes V and VI
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
Current status
Revised regulation
The revised CSM RA has been in force since 23 May 2013 and applied from 21 May 2015
(meaning that it must be used from that date). The principal amendments relate to the
recognition and accreditation of Assessment Bodies. The revised Regulation can be
found here: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:121:0008:0025:EN:PDF
Further changes to CSM Regulation were agreed at RISC in June 2015 and ERA is
preparing guidance to accompany the revised regulation.
13
ERA guidance on accreditation and recognition of assessment bodies is now available on
its website: http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/ERA-GUI-012014-SAF%20EN%20V1.0.pdf. The guidance supports the UK position that for purely
domestic change then a company may use its own assessment body subject to the usual
tests of impartiality, independence, competence etc, this also includes subcontracting to
others where required. Such bodies need to be “recognised” by the National Safety
Authority (the ORR), this may be done through the Safety Certification process and the
management of change section of the company SMS.
ORR guidance will be amended in due course.
Risk acceptance criteria for technical systems
As the harmonised risk acceptance criteria (previously known as CSM RAC) are targets
used at the design stage of technical systems, to avoid confusion, the terminology was
changed to CSM Design Targets (CSM-DT).
CSM Design Targets
Revisions to the regulations were agreed at RISC on 4 June 2015: a functional failure rate
for all catastrophic train accidents of 10-9; Incidents with the potential for single fatalities
would be 10-7. A table of functions would give examples of each.
CER, UIC and EIM have strongly supported the inclusion of design targets in the RAC-TS.
The sector bodies have also worked together to draft guidance for the RAC-TS, which is
now available as draft ERA guidance.
At RISC, it was agreed that ERA would continue working on the guidance with the sector
and NSAs. A taskforce is expected to be setup.
Details have been circulated by DfT via its newsflash emails of the revisions to the CSM.
Article 12- Assessment Bodies for domestic only changes.
Consultation is underway by ERA on the role and competences of assessment bodies.
One issue concerns the potential use of this article, which applies where changes do not
require mutual acceptance, the change is purely domestic and would have no impact on
the wider EU market. The UK position is that we would wish to retain the option of using
internal independent competent assessment bodies recognised by ORR under our SMS
as laid out under safety certification or authorisation.
RAC for transport of dangerous goods
The Commission is holding a series of 11 workshops covering the transport of dangerous
goods by road, rail, inland waterways and pipelines. The workshops were established
following the recommendation of an EC-commissioned study by Det Norske Veritas Ltd
on the development of harmonised RAC for the transport of dangerous goods. ERA is
14
working with UNECE and OTIF to development a risk based approach to the
management of dangerous goods transport.
The most recent workshop was held on 9-11 June, 2015. DfT represented the UK. No
agreement has yet been reached over whether a stand-alone dangerous goods database
should be developed or whether this can be incorporated into existing databases. The
principle difference of opinion is between those who believed that, since the DG
database is intended to be multimodal (covering road, rail and inland waterway
transport), and on an international level, it has to be stand-alone, whilst others felt this
would be duplication of effort given current domestic arrangements.
UIC, AEGPL and the French member state presented some principles for a potential
central database and suggestions for ‘fields’, although ERA are not ready to develop
anything tangible at this stage.
DV29bis
The ERA has published a helpful update on the new process known as DV29bis which
may be obtained from:
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/2014 897 DV 29bis Key Principles.pdf
This concerns the authorisation of structural subsystems and vehicles under the Railway
Interoperability Directive (2008/57/EC). This document essentially ties up the
interoperability management of change requirements with CSM RA requirements.
CSM Risk Evaluation and Assessment - Amended
The CSM for risk evaluation and assessment has been further amended with virtually
immediate effect. The publication of the Commission Implementing regulation (EU)
2015/1136 amending the earlier Implementing regulation (EU) No. 402/2013, often
referred to as the CSM Risk Assessment, sets out harmonised design targets for
technical systems which should help with mutual recognition of those systems across
the EU. The CSM-RA originally contained a single, harmonised, risk acceptance criterion
for catastrophic failures of technical systems which deemed that demonstrable failure
rates of no greater than 10-9 per operating hour were acceptable. This limitation is
addressed by the new Regulation, which came into force on 3 August 2015, through the
extension of risk acceptance criteria to other, non-catastrophic, accidents so that a
wider range of functional failures can be assessed.
It will be followed by revised ORR and ERA guidance which are currently in draft.
The existing ORR guidance on CSM RA to reflect the previous changes to this Regulation
402/2013, and dated March 2015, remains available. That revision includes feedback
from several industry parties, including the ATOC, and has resulted in clearer processes
to identify when the CSM trigger point for significance applies. Additionally information
relating to Assessment Bodies, and their recognition for non-mutually accepted
(domestic only) changes has been expanded. Copies may be downloaded from:
15
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/3867/common_safety_method_guidanc
e.pdf
Roles and Responsibilities of independent Assessment Bodies (ABs).
The following text for ‘domestic changes’ has been agreed in the revised regulation:
‘Where the risk assessment for a significant change is not to be mutually recognised, the
proposer shall appoint an assessment body meeting at least the competency,
independence and impartiality requirements of paragraph 1 of Annex II. The other
requirements of Annex II may be relaxed in agreement with the NSA in a nondiscriminatory way.’
ERA are questioning the need for this article. If it was dispensed with, all projects would
need an accredited or recognised assessment body. Following informal consultation
with industry colleagues, ORR will defend the Article.
RSSB has started a 12 month review of its 6 Railway Guidance Notes covering the CSM
RA. The updated versions will take account of experience in application of CSM RA and
wider industry consultation and this new suite of guidance is due to be ready for
publication towards the end of 2016.
Date updated
October 2015
16
Common Safety Methods for conformity
assessment, monitoring and supervision
Background
The Railway Safety Directive (2004/49/EC) requires that a series of Common Safety
Methods (CSMs) are developed by the ERA to describe how safety levels, achievement
of safety targets and compliance with other safety requirements are assessed in the
different member states. The EC has issued a mandate to ERA for the revision of the
CSM for conformity assessment and CSM for supervision with the aim of further
harmonising approaches among Member States.
Main provisions
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information and the
main provisions on the following, relating to the CSMs:
 Conformity Assessment
 Monitoring and Supervision
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
Current status
Revision of the CSMs for conformity assessment
The revision of the CSMs for conformity assessment shall be considered in relation to
the introduction of ECMs for freight wagons, CSIs, CSTs, other common safety methods,
technical specifications for interoperability (TSIs) as well as existing European standards.
The revision will also take account of the proposed move to a single safety certificate.
At a working party on 4 May 2015, ERA annouced its intention to produce a light impact
assessment. UK comments that the assessment should be broken down to relfect the
different workstreams and to provide a better measure of impacts on different groups
(particular ly smaller operators) were accepted.
The introduction of the revised TSI OPE (expected in 2017) will affect what is looked for
in a Part B safety certificate. In light of this, ERA has identified four areas for review –
technical compatibility, train planning, competence and monitoring and review – to help
17
determine what evidence would be needed for assessment without duplicating what is
required for Part A or what is covered by the TSI OPE.
NSAs were expected to have provided a gap analysis of the TSI OPE and national safety
rules that are not covered by 14 October 2015 in time for the meeting on national
requirements on 28 October 2015.
ERA held a workshop with attendees from NSAs and the sector on 30 June 2015. ERA
agreed to adopt ISO HLS. A revised working paper was prepared for the meeting on 18
September.
It was agreed by participants that there should be a single criterion and the text
proposed by ERA would be reviewed by CER and EMI. ERA also confirmed a desire to
harmonise ECM and CSM CA legal requirements. A proposal on operational planning will
have further discussion with CER/EIM.
Impact assessment interviews between ERA and NSA/sector organisations are planned
for December 2015, with follow-ups in June 2016
EIM, CER and some NSAs stressed their preference for any criteria changes to be
minimal and subject to reported benefits.
The EC has included the recommendation to introduce single safety certification – i.e. no
separation part A/part B application – in the 4th Railway Package.
A report and final recommendation to the Commission are expected by July 2016, this
means that any revision is unlikely to be in force at the earliest in 2017.
ERA does not envisage a fundamental recast of the CSMs, rather an ‘enhancement’
which would link conformity assessment more closely to a duty holder’s SMS. They also
see it as an opportunity to deal with some practical issues about conformity assessment
which were not harmonised or were unresolved. The project has been structured
around four themes:
 Safety certification and authorisation
 Supervision
 Decision making
 Competence management
The first working party meeting was on 12 November 2014.
ERA held a workshop on 9 December 2014 (to coincide with NSA Network) to address
issues around safety certification when an RU subcontracts traction and staff from
another RU.
ERA has a legal view from the EC, that in such circumstances it is not acceptable for the
RU to operate under the safety certificate of the incumbent RU and it needs to have a
18
safety certificate itself. A number of NSAs have objected to this view as they claim that it
would have a serious impact on railway operations in their country and would not
benefit safety.
ERA has published guidance on issuing safety certificates which is intended to address
ongoing issues where there is a lack of harmonization. The main concern among NSAs is
in relation to part B certificates for cross-border services.
ERA has confirmed guidance will need to be revised to reflect the recast Safety Directive.
NSAs are content that the proposals are highlighting the safety-relevant part of the
operations to be checked by the NSAs. The Human Factors Network is preparing
proposals for some criteria that will be complemented by guidance.
CSM for supervision
ORR is exploring how to meet the provisions of article 9 for the supervision of RUs
operating between the UK and other member states, namely France, Belgium and the
Netherlands. A meeting was held with representatives from FR, BE and NL NSAs in
January 2015 to discuss individual supervision strategies and how to coordinate
supervision activities for cross border operators. Eurostar held a safety conference for
its workforce in 17 June.
ERA is planning to replace the existing guidance on supervision which would include
risks and maturity models.
CSM for monitoring
ERA has published a guide to the CSM for monitoring regulations
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/ERA-GUI-05-2012SAF_Guide%20on%20CSM%20for%20monitoring%20V1.0%20Published.pdf
The guide covers monitoring activities, strategy, priorities and plan(s) that need to be
adapted to the specific activities of every actor who is concerned by the regulations.
RSSB has published safety assurance guidance for industry and this covers the
requirements of the CSM for monitoring: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/improvingindustry-performance/2013-leaflet-CSM-monitoring.pdf
Railway industry position
Revision of the CSMs for Conformity Assessment and Supervision
UK industry has expressed the view that ERA’s proposed revision of the CSMs for
Conformity Assessment and Supervision, means that it, the ERA, may need to deal with
the problem of NSAs having different enforcement powers.
19
Date updated
October 2015
20
The Fourth Railway Package
Background
The European Commission (EC) published proposals for the ‘Fourth Railway Package’ on
31 January 2013. The package is a complex series of proposals, summarised at:
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kallas/headlines/news/2013/01/fourthrailway-package_en.htm . There are two pillars to the proposals; the Market Pillar
contains legislative proposals to further open the market for domestic passenger
services across Europe and rules concerning the governance of rail infrastructure. The
Technical Pillar contains a revised Interoperability Directive, Safety Directive and
European Railway Agency (ERA) Regulation:
Interoperability Directive
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2013:0030:FIN:EN:PDF
Safety Directive
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2013:0031:FIN:EN:PDF
Agency regulation
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2013:0027:FIN:EN:PDF
Main provisions
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information and the
main provisions of the Forth Railway Package, focussing on 4 key areas:
 Standards and approvals that work – cutting administrative costs to facilitate new
operators
 Better quality and more choice through allowing new players to run rail services –
encouraging innovation, efficiency and better value for money
 A structure that delivers – maximising operational efficiencies
 A skilled workforce
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
The Council has agreed that competitive tendering should be the main way of awarding
public service contracts. However, direct awards without tendering would be possible ‘if
justified by the structure and geographical characteristics of the market and network
21
and if it would improve the quality of services and/or cost-efficiency.’ Operators would
have to meet objective and measurable performance criteria such as train punctuality
and service frequency
Current status
Fourth Railway Package considerations
Member States reached “political agreement” in 2014 on changes to the technical pillar.
Trilogue discussions between the European Commission, European Council and
European Parliament have been taking place in 2015.
An informal agreement of the technical pillar was agreed at a TRAN vote in July 2015
and a closure of the first reading took place in October 2015.
The European Parliament has now in principle accepted the ‘choice model’, which allows
a duty holder to choose between ERA and their NSA for the issuing of safety certificates
and vehicle authorisations when they apply in only one country. The choice model was
strongly supported by member states. For cross-border services, applications for safety
certification and EU-wide authorisation of vehicles will be submitted to ERA.
Under the agreed texts, ERA will become a ‘one-stop shop’ for all applications for safety
certification and the authorisation of locomotives and rolling stock for cross-border
services. The new regime should be operational three years after the new rules enter
into force, although member states may apply to ERA and the Commission for a one
year extension if necessary. The agreement ‘also foresees a further harmonisation of
technical standards to take place over time’.
Other key points of change will be:
 Certificates will cover “Area of Operation” for the TOC (similarly T&RS will have “Area
of Use” under Interoperability Regulations)
 Depots and sidings come into scope of area of operation
 Greater detail on maintenance functions (and ECMs)
 Annual safety report input date is brought forwards to the end of May
 Member State to designate competent authorities to monitor driving, working, rest
time for drivers as part of CSM Supervision
 Peer reviews of National Investigation Bodies, reports may be published on voluntary
basis (but note FOI could apply)
 ERA to start issuing safety certs within 3 years of the Directive coming into force, and
NSAs can continue for 4 years- and longer for single state operators
The timescales which the Council has agreed for implementation of these changes are
longer than those put forward by the Commission. There would be a period of 10 years
22
when national authorities could directly award public service contracts without having
to justify their use, and existing contracts would be allowed to run until they expire.
Member states would have three years to implement key rules on independence and
financial transparency, with non-discriminatory access required from 2020.
The EC established a Task Force to consider the arrangements that would need to be in
place for the introduction of a single safety certificate. The EC has since proposed an
extension of TF’s remit from single safety certificates to all aspects of 4 TH Railway
Package technical pillar implementation. Revised terms of reference of the TF will be put
to the next RISC meeting for validation. The TF will have a particular role in securing the
legislative measures that will be needed (Implementing Acts and Delegated Acts)..
The extension of responsibility to other actors in the railway system (including loaders
and fillers) has now been resolved: The relevant article 4(4) states:
Without prejudice to the responsibilities of railway undertakings and infrastructure managers
referred to in paragraph 3, entities in charge of maintenance and all other actors having a
potential impact on the safe operation of the Union rail system, including manufacturers,
maintenance suppliers, keepers, service providers, contracting authorities, carriers, consignors,
consignees, loaders, unloaders, fillers and unfillers, shall:
(a) implement the necessary risk control measures, where appropriate in cooperation with other
actors;
(b) ensure that subsystems, accessories, equipment and services supplied by them
comply with specified requirements and conditions for use so that they can be safely
operated by the railway undertaking and/or the infrastructure manager concerned.”
In other member states the above extension of responsibility to others is seen as
beneficial for clarifying responsibilities. In the UK the existing contractual system largely
deals with such concerns.
To ensure that the new responsibilities work effectively, cooperation agreements will be
needed between NSAs and ERA. A subgroup of NSA Network, chaired by UK, will
develop proposals for these agreements.
Entry into force is currently foreseen for 1 January 2016. The transition period (time for
implementation) is 3 years from 1 January 2016, plus there is one additional year for
Member States who have difficulty implementing them. So effectively, by 1 st January
2019 most Member States should have implemented, latest is 1st January 2020.
ERA has considered five possible scenarios for its work on issuing single safety
certificates. The preferred option would mean ERA coordinates the SMS assessment but
involves nominees from a pool of experts (who can be from NSAs or external experts).
An impact assessment on this option will be carried out by ERA.
23
It is clear that the original implementation dates of 2017 for single certification etc are
unlikely to be realised, the revised timescales are to operate in “shadow mode” in 2018
with implementation of the Directive (through national Regulations) by 2019.
This (4th Rail Package) will obviously then have an impact on both CSM Conformity
Assessment and CSM Supervision, work which is being undertaken to ensure that there
will be adequate collaborative and cooperative process in place between the ERA and
the NSAs once the Directives, and the new European Rail Agency Regulation are in force.
Standards and approvals that work
ERA submitted a recommendation to the EC seeking to increase the transparency of the
process for notification of NSRs in different Member States. The recommendation
included a proposal to establish a taskforce to support this work and prepare good
practice guidance. The main recommendations in the report, which have been
integrated into the 4th Railway Package, were:
 Merge NSRs and NTRs into ‘national rules’
 Streamline requirements for notification in NOTIF-IT and publication
 Remaining rules apply to ‘exceptions’ in European law
 NSRs (in current definition) will be: same operating rules, as allowed by OPE TSI and
RID; risk acceptance criteria; and criteria for significant change
The EC see NSRs as a barrier to entry into the market. Extension of EU legislation (eg,
train driver certification, the CSMs for Conformity Assessment and Risk Assessment, and
the TSI OPE) has closed many gaps, therefore making many NSRs and types of NSRs
redundant. The NSR task force developed a draft rule management tool to help
Member States/NSAs work through the significant task of updating, reclassifying and
withdrawing NSRs to reflect these developments. The rule management tool will be
further developed/ applied by the new ERA taskforce. ERA would like NSAs (or other
competent authorities) to apply this tool as soon as possible to clean up the rules, and
then on an annual basis.
ERA confirmed at October 2015’s RISC meeting that progress with rules harmonisation is
to be tracked via a fixed item on RISC agenda and with regular reporting from ERA.
A number of NSAs remain concerned over the likely speed of authorisation when ERA is
responsible. In some member states authorisation is moving towards vehicle series
rather than individual types, which has yet to occur at European level. There are also
concerns that ERA does not yet have a policy covering major and minor vehicle
upgrades.
ERA held a workshop at the end of October 2015 to identify issues arriving from the 4RP,
understand new roles and responsibilities and to consider how to ensure convergence
24
to a common process. Wider discussions between ERA, NSAs and stakeholders will take
place in the new year. ERA is planning to have a workshop involving the sector during
2016.
A number of safety authorities have proposed that ERA make it clear NSA experts are
the first choice of the Agency and that these are nominated by the NSA in question,
established by legal contract between ERA and the NSA rather than individual expert.
There are some concerns over the involvement of non-rail specialists and the possibility
of ‘decoupling’ assessment from supervision.
It was agreed by NSAs to study the framework contract that exists in the aviation sector
between EASA and national aviation authorities. It is expected that ERA will propose a
similar framework, borrowing many parts of EASA contracts. ERA has not yet decided if
contracts will definitely be with NSAs rather than individual experts.
ERA now sees cooperation agreements taking place over three phases: i) learning phase
(now until 2017); ii) shadow running (2018); iii) delivery phase (from 2019 onwards).
EPSF has an agreement with ERA which is regarded as a cooperation agreement for
phase i).
Railway industry position
The industry has expressed views to the EC, particularly on the avoidance of duplication
of approvals processes and increased costs as currently the ORR do not charge for
assessment whereas the ERA will be charging, fees will have to be apportioned between
the ERA and the NSAs.
In other member states the above extension of responsibility to others is seen as
beneficial for clarifying responsibilities. In the UK the existing contractual system largely
deals with such concerns.
The UK does not share the level of concerns of other NSAs and sees the possibility of a
role for non-NSA experts in assessment.
ERA reinterpreted the final recommendation to only include NSRs needed for the OPE
TSI and ORR and some other NSAs have asked ERA to consider including rules for safety
critical work (Type 6).
The development of the rule management tool is an opportunity for UK railway (ORR,
DfT and RSSB) to examine the GB NSRs to ensure they are transparent and that the right
rules appear on the NOTIF-IT database.
25
The Rail Delivery Group, which represents the UK rail industry, said the agreement was a
compromise between countries which ‘wished to see far more ambitious open markets’,
and those ‘who wished to retain national state-owned structures’. RDG said it ‘fully
supports this compromise as a useful step forward.’
Date updated
October2015
26
EC Regulation EU/445/2011 (The Entities
in Charge of Maintenance Regulation)
Background
Prompted by the incidents as Viareggio and Bressanone, ERA established a task force to
look at the management of contractors which reports back to the cooperation of
certifying bodies’ task force.
The Entities in Charge of Maintenance Regulation (ECM) was published in the Official
Journal of the European Union on 11 May 2011. As a result, certifying bodies have
offered certification since May 2012 and freight ECMs will be required to be certified by
2013.
The first amendment to ROGS, which includes the requirement for all vehicles registered
in the NVR to be assigned to an ECM came into force on 26 August 2011. The second
amendment came into force on 21 May 2013 and sets out the requirements for the
certification of freight ECMs, and enables the supervision by ORR.
Main provision
An Entity in Charge of Maintenance has to be assigned to all vehicles and registered as
such in the national vehicle register (NVR). For domestic vehicles, this was done by 9
November 2010. (All international vehicles should have been entered on the NVR by 9
November 2009). The certification scheme currently only applies to freight wagons
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information on Entities
in Charge of Maintenance.
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
Current status
ERA actions
ERA has received a mandate to make a recommendation to the Commission on
examining the feasibility of extending the scope of the certification ECMs to all vehicles
and propose the content for a revised legal act. A timetable has been proposed from
November 2015 until April 2017, when ERA will address the recommendation to the EC.
27
ERA has set-up a Technical Committee (TC) in order to facilitate the provision in Article
6(4) of the ECM Regulation (445/2011/EU). The TC will provide means of formalising the
drafting and issuing of technical recommendations.
The ECM certification scheme and the ECM accreditation scheme are both being revised
to allow migration from EN 45011 to ISO 17065:2012. Comments to ERA to be sent by
15 December. ERA will then consult the European Cooperation for Accreditation.
Railway industry position
A mandate was tabled at RISC on 4 June 2015 on the possible extension of scope. The
UK stated its opposition to this proposal, stressing a lack of market or safety problems
needing a solution, in addition to the unnecessary layer of further regulation. In
addition, any changes should be supported by a proper impact assessment. Germany
offered a compromise text that allowed ERA to make a positive or negative
recommendation rather than the original draft mandate that would have obliged ERA to
extend the scheme. A number of NSAs wanted mandatory certification extended to all
vehicles.
Following an internal review ORR will continue as a certifying body for ECMs for freight
wagons. This position will be reviewed again in 2016.
UKAS has set up an accreditation scheme for the UK so other certifying bodies
can be accredited.
Date updated
October 2015
28
Train Driving Licences and Certificates
Regulations 2010 and changes to the
Train Driving Licences Directive
Background
The Train Driving Licences and Certificates Regulations 2010 (TDLCR)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/724/contents/made sets out the legal
requirements of the licensing and certification system for train drivers in Great Britain.
This brings into force the requirements of the Train Driving Licences Directive
2007/59/EC (TDL).
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:315:0051:0078:EN:PDF)
Main provisions
Any new driver must have a train driver licence and certificate to drive on the mainline
railway.
Existing drivers will need a train driver licence and certificate to drive by 29 October
2018.
Doctors, psychometric assessors and training and examination centres who assess new
train drivers must be recognised by ORR.
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information on Train
Driving Licences and Certificates and on related issues:
 ERA Report on the Introduction of Smartcards
 Driver Registers
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
29
Current status
Extending requirements
The proposed changes to the TDL directive regarding general professional knowledge,
medical and licence requirements at the January 2014 RISC were accepted. The new
section 8 paragraph 2 final sentence in Annex VI has been amended to read: ‘Drivers
must be able to communicate orally and in writing according to level B1 of the Common
European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) established by the Council of
Europe’. The requirement for written communication is additional to the existing
requirements. The amendments were published by the Commission on 24 June 2014.
DfT published the final amending regulations on 23 October 2015.
Driver registers
It is expected ERA will deliver a recommendation for further changes to the Directive
and supporting legislation by the end of 2015. A final draft report was circulated by ERA
on 23 October for comments. Any changes to the Directive are unlikely before 2017.
ERA has established a Task Force and drafting Sub Group on 3 December 2014 to discuss
and agree the proposed changes. Seven meetings have taken place and one more is
planned. The EC mandate to ERA has asked them to prepare proposals in the following
areas:
Article 3: Definitions. Some terms (i.e. historical trains, cross border drivers and native
language) are not properly defined. Different terms were also used for the same
process (e.g. examinations, checks and assessments) and which may need to just one
term. Agreement has been reached within the Task Force on proposed new definitions
Article 4: community certification model. Article 4(2) does not cover all cases where an
exemption would be needed and uses unconventional terminology about a second
driver. It was also felt that the need to inform the infrastructure manager where a
second driver was needed for route knowledge was not appropriate. 4(3) (a) does not
clearly define operations covered under category A of the certificate and might better to
do this than refer to rolling stock. New draft definition proposals for categories of
drivers circulated on 4 June and have now been agreed: these concern category A
shunting movements in a defined restricted area and category B train driving on the
open network.
Article 11(1): Education requirements were seen by most NSA as unhelpful - clarification
or deletion will be considered by ERA. For Article 11(2) and (3) most participants want
common criteria to be developed for the recognition of doctors and psychologists. A
proposal to allow at least two years’ railway operation work experience to be used as
substitute for education has been put forward and no agreement has been reached on
including an education level.
30
Article 11(1): Education requirements were seen by most NSA as unhelpful - clarification
or deletion will be considered by ERA. For Article 11(2) and (3) most participants want
common criteria to be developed for the recognition of doctors and psychologists. A
proposal to allow at least two years’ railway operation work experience to be used as
substitute for education has been put forward and no agreement has been reached on
including an education level.
Article 16: The need for periodic checks for psychometric assessments was unclear as no
timescales were included and it is not apparent who should do this check. This might be
deleted altogether by ERA or else further clarified. There is disagreement among NSAs
and within CER on whether a periodic assessment is needed. Views vary between no
assessment, one every ten years and a periodic check at 55. The evidence for a periodic
assessment is not robust. ERA have redrafted the text so that it is left to NSAs to decide
if they want to have periodic psychometric assessments
Article 17: It was not clear why it was necessary to inform the NSA when a driver ceases
work as the licence can remain valid. This will therefore be deleted.
Article 23(5): recognition of language schools. Most NSA felt they did not have the
expertise to do this and should not be required to do so. It has been agreed that NSAs
should not be recognising or accrediting language schools.
Annex II: Medical requirements. ORR raised concerns over vision requirements and
there may be some changes made. The working group discussed ERA needing expert
advice to enable to keep up to date with changes in medical practice. A working party of
medical experts has proposed changes to clarify the vision requirements and delete the
need for a mandatory assessment after an n accident.
Annex IV: General professional knowledge. Seen as too vague and needs to be replaced
by something more precise. ERA has put forward three options, (a) do nothing, (b)
develop a draft based on general operating principles or (c) amend the Directive to
require a proposal to be developed within three years. (c) has the most support and will
be the recommendation put to the Commission.
Train driver certificate. Not clear what terms to use for rolling stock and infrastructure
on the certificate and this needed to be clarified in the EC decision 17/2010. The EC
Regulation on the format of the certificate was too prescriptive and out-dated requiring
to be a paper copy. NSAs and CER have put forward proposals to change the Regulation
and model certificate to allow more flexibility. CER would prefer the certificate only
listed operating systems the driver is competent to drive on. It has been agreed that the
paper copy can be A4 and ERA will recommend that they draft proposals for the
infrastructure knowledge that will be required on the certificate.
National Licence Register. The EC decision needed clarification on how medical
assessment information is provided to NSAs and what information should be stored by
31
the employer (particularly if more than one employer is involved) should the NSA what
to check what the driver is doing for whom.
Language Requirements. At the 8 October RISC meeting, Cion proposed amendment to
TDD Annex VI 8.1 and new paragraph 2 was again discussed. This would allow RUs to
derogate from second language requirements subject to conditions: limited operation to
border or first station; NSA where border station is located agrees to a derogation; and
RU/IM can demonstrate arrangements for ensuring communication. This was supported
by the UK and many other NSAs but no agreement was reached because of the
complexity of different national border arrangements. Cion will redraft the proposal.
Railway industry position
ORR carried out an informal, targeted consultation of stakeholders on the minor
amendments to the Train Driver Licences and Certificates Regulations 2010 from 18
February to 10 March 2015. The amendments were:
 Remove an option for existing drivers to continue to drive if they lose the sight in one
eye and suitable adaptations could be made
 Set out more detailed requirements for general professional knowledge
 Introduce a new standard for language tests where drivers have to communicate on
safety critical issues
The consultation sought views from railway undertakings and trade unions on:
 The impact the change to the vision requirements will have on existing drivers when
they have a new medical assessment after 1 January 2016.
 Whether the more detailed requirements for general professional knowledge will
require additional training and assessment for train drivers
 Whether the new language standard, which now explicitly requires that reading and
writing should be tested, will require additional training and assessment for new
drivers learning a second language and existing drivers when their language skills are
retested. (Eurostar and Trade Unions only)
 Whether the amendments will result in any additional costs to comply with the
Regulations
Seven responses were received and the views ranged from no to minimal impact caused
by these amendments. It is expected that the amending regulations will be laid before
Parliament in June.
Date updated
October 2015
32
ERA Joint Network Secretariat/ Quick
response procedure (now known as JNS
urgent procedure)
Background
ERA’s Safety Unit has established the Joint Network Secretariat (JNS) to consider issues
concerning the safety regulatory framework and to find solutions to problems preferably
using the existing structure of task forces, working groups and networks within ERA.
ERA established the quick response task force to develop a standard process for dealing
with incidents that impact on more than one EU member state
Main provisions
A proposal for a topic to be discussed at the JNS can be made by ERA, the EC or a
member of an organisation that is represented at either NSA or sector networks. No
topic can be rejected without discussion.
If the proposer suggests that the JNS urgent procedure should be activated, the panel will
consider requests for the procedure to be activated and make a decision within five
working days.
All of the following conditions must be fulfilled before the JNS urgent procedure can be
activated:
 more than one Member State involved
 need for an urgent and harmonised reaction at the EU level.
 correct implementation of EU law is not sufficient to solve the reported issue
 enough information and knowledge available to define an action plan
 likely that the proposed actions will mitigate or avoid the considered risk within a
short period of time
If the panel accepts the request, and the intention is that the procedure should only be
launched when really necessary, a task force is set up to consider the issue, generally
consisting of experts in the relevant field.
33
Current status
ERA will now test the JNS urgent procedure (using a test case on braking distance of
brake blocks). Switzerland acted as a test case on braking performance in relation to K
and LL blocks in case of overloading of freight trains, methods for calculation of braking
distance and risk assessment. The task force to consider the issues met on 29 May 2015.
It consisted of 6 members: 3 NSAs (including Switzerland) and 3 from GRB.
 Panel advice on the test case was completed by 6 July. The panel outlined the
following actions and recommendations:
 UIC leaflet 541-1 to be addressed to ERA and taken into consideration for the next TSI
revision. It is believed the leaflet would eliminate uncertainties about thermal
stability and braking performance in strong downhill gradients. It would also allow
reliable determination of braking performance
 Decrease of lamda parameter
 Study deployment of trackside detectors on European Network. This will contribute
towards risk mitigation through elimination. A proposition to ERA should be made
for financial support of the project.
 Possible UIC study on braking performance deficiency on unaccompanied combined
transport train (analysis to be considered). Not yet decided within UIC whether this
project will be carried out.
Recommendations should be addressed to NSA (approval procedures) before
end of 2015.
The JNS Panel last met on 19 November
Date updated
October 2015
34
Railway Interoperability Directive
2008/57/EC –Technical Specifications for
Interoperability (TSIs) Scope extended
and revision made
Background
The Railway Interoperability Directive (2008/57/EC) requires the production of a suite of
Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs). A TSI is an Annexe to a Decision or
Regulation made by the European Commission (EC) and will come into force six months
after the Decision or Regulation is made.
Decisions and Regulations are published in the Official Journal of the European Union,
which can be found here - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en
Alternatively DfT produce a catalogue detailing the current status of all TSI applicable in
GB – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-interoperability-tsi-catalogue
Main provisions
TSIs define the mandatory, technical and operational standards and expected
performance levels which must be met in order to satisfy the ‘essential requirements’
defined in the Directive and to ensure the ‘interoperability’ of the European railway
system. The ‘Essential requirements’ can be summarised as safety, technical
compatibility, reliability, health, environmental protection and accessibility.
You must comply with TSIs and relevant NTRs if you are building new railway subsystems or carrying out a major upgrade or renewal of an existing railway sub-system.
Replacement of parts of a sub-system on a like-for-like basis, for example replacing track
with track of a similar specification, does not trigger a legal obligation to comply with
TSIs. Advice about whether a specific project must comply with TSIs and NTRs can be
obtained from the DfT.
Previous versions of the RSLU have included detailed background information on TSIs.
See section 1 of issue 76 of the Railway Safety Legislation Update for the latest version
of this detailed background information: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk-analysisand-safety-reporting/2015-06-safety-legislation-update-issue-76.pdf
35
Current status
Revised scope
From 1 January 2015 (1 July 2015 for the Control Command and Signalling TSI) the scope
of TSIs was extended to cover the entire European Railway System (not just TEN) that
fall under the scope of the Railway Interoperability Directive (2008/57/EC) and Railway
Safety Directive (2004/49/EC). This means the TSIs apply to whole of the GB mainline
railway system. The scope of mainline railway system can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/scope-of-rail-interoperability/--539035
This means that the only NTRs which fulfil the following conditions should be mandated
on projects completed after these dates:
 Specific Cases – Outlined in Chapter 7 of each TSI
 Open Points (where A TSI is not sufficient) – An NTR can provide a solution
 To ensure technical compatibility with the legacy rail system where it is not designed
and built to TSIs
National Technical Rules
Where NTRs do not fall in the defined cases above, they should no longer be mandatory
for new projects under the scope of the Railway Interoperability Directive and should
subsequently be withdrawn as mandatory rules for new projects. The Chapter 7 of the
TSIs defines the implementation of the new TSIs. In general the TSIs are not
retrospectively applied and therefore do not apply to subsystems already authorised or
projects already underway prior to 2015.
New TSIs
On January 1 2015, seven TSIs came into force, they are:
Infrastructure TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1299/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1299&from=EN
Persons with Reduced Mobility TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No
1300/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1300&from=EN
Energy TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1301/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1301&from=EN
Locomotives and passenger rolling stock TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No
1302/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1302&from=EN
36
Safety in railway tunnels TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1303/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1303&from=EN
Noise TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1304/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1304&from=EN
Telematics applications for freight TSI - European Commission Regulation (EU) No
1305/2014
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1305&from=EN
The TSIs mentioned above are now published as regulations, and not (as previously)
decisions, therefore they do not require transposition into UK law and are directly
applicable.
The amended Control Command and Signalling TSI Decision was published on 5 January
2015, and entered into force on 1 July 2015
Control Command and Signalling TSI - European Commission Decision (EU) 2015/14
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_003_R_0009&from=EN
Railway industry position
The GB rail industry and RSSB, together with the ORR and DfT, are working together to
clarify which requirements or NTRs in RGSs should remain; which should be updated to
reflect the new TSIs; and where requirements should be withdrawn as they now
superseded by the TSIs.
More information on TSI can be found here: http://www.rssb.co.uk/standards-and-therail-industry/technical-specifications-for-interoperability
More information on NTRs can be found here: http://www.rssb.co.uk/standards-andthe-rail-industry/technical-specifications-for-interoperability/national-technical-rules
For more information you can contact Vaibhav.Puri@rssb.co.uk
Date updated
October 2015
37
Section 2: General legislation
COMAH Regulations 2015 and draft legal
guidance
Background
The COMAH Regulations 2015 came into force on 1 June 2015; the Regulations can be
found at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/483/contents/made
Main provisions
The competent authority will provide a web-based template that operators will be
required to complete by selecting statements from a series of lists. This simplifies the
task for operators and provides a consistent format to the public, which includes
railways passing through or past COMAH sites.
Current status
This new guidance on the COMAH Regulations 2015 (L111, Third edition) has applied
since 1 June 2015: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l111.pdf
This guidance is for anyone who has duties under the COMAH Regulations 2015,
particularly operators of establishments, and also others such as local authorities and
emergency planners. The aim of the Regulations is to prevent and mitigate the effects
on people and the environment of major accidents involving dangerous substances. This
guidance on the COMAH Regulations 2015 gives advice on the scope of the Regulations
and the duties imposed by them.
Date updated
July 2015
38
HSE’s Review of Approved Codes of
Practice
Background
On 28 November 2011 Professor Ragnar Löfstedt published his independent review of
health and safety legislation ‘Reclaiming health and safety for all’. The review reported
that overall a wide range of stakeholders supported the principles of ACOPs; however, it
was felt by many that there was room for improvement.
In his report Professor Löfstedt made the following recommendation: ‘HSE should
review all its ACOPs.’ The Government accepted this recommendation and asked HSE to
review its 52 ACOPs.
Main provisions
HSE completed the first phase of its review of ACoPs in 2012. Thirty six individual ACoP
reviews were completed by the end of 2014.
Several of relevance to the railway sector were reissued in late 2014:
 Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998. Approved Code of Practice
and guidance http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l113.pdf
 Confined Spaces Regulations 1997. Approved Code of Practice, Regulations and
guidance http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l101.pdf
 Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000. Approved Code of Practice and guidance
on Regulations http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l122.pdf
 Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (as amended) and
Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (as amended).
Approved Codes of Practice and guidance
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l146.htm and
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg232.pdf
Some remaining ACoPs are associated with changes to legislation and are being
reviewed in accordance with timescales for the legislative change, such as L144
Managing Health and Safety in Construction. See later section on the changes to
Construction Design and Management Regulations.
Date updated
April 2015
39
Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2015
Background
The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (CDM 2015) came into
force on 6 April 2015, replacing CDM 2007.
HSE has published Legal Series guidance http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l153.pdf
that supports CDM 2015 and explains it in more detail. HSE will seek views later in 2015
on whether to replace this guidance with an Approved Code of Practice, which many in
the industry indicated they would prefer in the 2014 public consultation
http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd261.htm
Main provisions
The legal series guidance describes:
 The law that applies to the whole construction process on all construction projects,
from concept to completion
 What each duty holder must or should do to comply with the law to ensure projects
are carried out in a way that secures health and safety
Current status
CDM 2015 is subject to certain transitional provisions which apply to construction
projects that start before the Regulations come into force and continue beyond that
date:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/regulation-changes.htm
The key changes in the new CDM Regulations which are of relevance to the railway
industry are:
 Principal designer. The replacement of the CDM co-ordinator role (under CDM 2007)
by principal designer. This means that the responsibility for coordination of the preconstruction phase will rest with an existing member of the design team.
 Client. The new Regulations recognise the influence and importance of the client as
the head of the supply chain and they are best placed to set standards throughout
a project.
40
 Competence. This will be split into its component parts of skills, knowledge, training
and experience, and - if it relates to an organisation - organisational capability. This
will provide clarity and help the industry to both assess and demonstrate that
construction project teams have the right attributes to deliver a healthy and safe
project.
The technical standards set out in Part 4 of the new Regulations remain essentially
unchanged from those in guidance related to CDM 2007.
The significant and quickly introduced changes to the CDM Regulations are still resulting
in the HSE receiving queries, the updated answers may be viewed at:http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/faq/index.htm?ebul=hsegen&cr=1/20-oct-15
Other information
Paul Haxell, chair of the IOSH Construction Group said: ‘There are some subtle yet very
significant changes in the responsibilities of the duty holders which need to be carefully
considered.
‘For example, the strengthening of the client responsibilities and the explicit
requirement for the PC to consult with the workforce are every bit as important as the
plan, manage and monitor responsibility placed on the Principal Designer during the preconstruction phase.
‘It is the latter which is receiving a lot of attention in the press. In my opinion, HSE and
CONIAC have got it about right, given the huge variation in breadth which exists in the
construction industry.
‘There is a great new opportunity for the OSH professional to provide pragmatic advice
to support implementation of the new regulations and not be seen to oversell
professional services. The IOSH Construction Group is planning to plan a full part in this
endeavour.’
Date updated
July 2015
41
Exempting from health and safety law
those self-employed whose work
activities pose no potential risk of harm
to others – excluding railway activities
Background
On 28 November 2011 Professor Ragnar Löfstedt published his independent review of
health and safety legislation ‘Reclaiming health and safety for all’. Legislative change to
the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1074 were drafted and included in the
Deregulation Act 2015.
Current status
Following further consultation by HSE on proposed regulations to implement
exemptions from health and safety law, these exemptions will apply to 1.7 million selfemployed people. Self-employed people whose work activities pose no potential risk of
harm to others will be exempt from health and safety law. This includes novelists,
journalists, accountants, confectioners and more. However, a list of work activities that
health and safety law still applies to is set out in The Health and Safety at Work etc Act
1974 (General Duties of Self-Employed Persons) (Prescribed Undertakings) Regulations
2015. This includes:
 Railways
 Asbestos work
 Construction
Railway industry position
ORR argued that railways should be included as a prescribed activity given the hazards
involved for self-employed workers engaged on safety critical work or other activities
across the mainline railway and London Underground networks. This was successful and
self-employed workers undertaking railway activities are excluded from the above
changes and so are not exempt from Health and Safety law.
42
Date updated
October 2015
43
The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and
Signals) Regulations 1996. Guidance on
Regulations L64
Background
The Regulations enact in UK law an EU Directive designed to harmonise signs
across the EU so that signs across the member states will have the same
meaning whichever country they are used in.
Current status
The guidance for this set of Regulations has been updated. Details of BS EN ISO 7010 are
also included in the guidance.
This edition brings the document up to date with regulatory and other changes,
including those relating to the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Chemicals
(Amendments to Secondary Legislation) Regulations 2015. The version of the
Regulations included in the document has been amended to reflect these changes, it
may be downloaded from:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l64.pdf
Date updated
July 2015
44
Design standards for accessible railway
stations: a code of practice by the
Department for Transport and Transport
Scotland
Background
This updated code replaces all previous versions, including ‘Accessible train station
design for disabled passengers: a code of practice’. This latest revision incorporates
modifications to the Commission Regulation (EU) No 1300/2014
Main provisions
This code will help train operators and anybody else carrying out rail infrastructure
improvements to design more accessible trains and stations. It has been published to
ensure that any infrastructure work at stations makes railway travel easier for disabled
passengers and may be downloaded from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/41563
8/design-standards-accessible-stations.pdf
The updated code replaces all previous versions, including ‘Accessible train station
design for disabled passengers: a code of practice’ and incorporates modifications to the
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1300/2014.
Date updated
July 2015
45
Section 3: Railway-related consultations
Several consultations were concluded over the last few months:
Consultation
Organisation
Deadline
Invitation to comment - Train protection system exemption
application received by the Office of Rail and Road from
Network Rail for Crossrail services between Paddington
and Heathrow Airport Junction
ORR
27/10/15
System operation – a consultation on making better use of
the railway network
ORR
2/10/15
Carriage of dangerous goods regulations: 2015 ADR and
RID updates
DfT
12/11/15
Post implementation review of ROGS – Consultation
ORR
13/10/15
Consultation on ORR's health and safety compliance and
enforcement policy statement 2015
ORR
19/09/15
46
Consultation on the implementation of
Directive 2013/35/EU on the minimum
health and safety requirements
regarding the exposure of workers to the
risks arising from physical agents electromagnetic fields (EMF)
Background
The Directive addresses the protection of workers exposed to electromagnetic fields and
the carrying out of effective and efficient risk assessments, proportional to the situation
encountered at the workplace.
It also defines a protection system that graduates the level of risk in a simple and easily
understandable way, and commits the European Commission to produce practical
guidelines to assist employers in meeting their obligations under the Directive. The
Directive contains technical annexes setting out the exposure limit values. Member
States have the option of maintaining or adopting more favourable provisions for the
protection of workers, in particular the fixing of lower values for the ‘action levels’ or the
‘exposure limit values’ for electromagnetic fields.
Consultative document CD276 is issued by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in
compliance with its duty to consult under section 50 (3) of the Health and Safety at
Work Act 1974.
Current status
Member states have been given until 1 July 2016 to transpose the Directive into national
law. The EU will publish a Practical Guide early in 2016, written under contract by Public
Health England, and HSE are working with stakeholders to develop some practical
guidance to support UK implementation.
HSE consultation deadline is 3 December 2015 and RSSB will be responding in line with
the interests of the railway industry.
47
Railway industry position
The Vehicle Train Energy System Interface Committee has commissioned research
project T1051 Investigation into the effects of applying the Physical Agents (EMF)
Directive in the UK railway system. Reporting in December, a key recommendation was
the development of rail specific guidance.
RSSB will provide industry guidance on this complex directive which comes into effect on
1/7/2016.
For further information please contact the project technical lead, David Knights:
david.knights@rssb.co.uk
Other information
An RSSB report into the implications of the original Directive is available here:
http://www.sparkrail.org/Lists/Records/DispForm.aspx?ID=9662
Date updated
October 2015
48
Consultation on the proposal to
withdraw the Railway Safety
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations
1997, Railway Safety Regulations 1999
and Railway Safety (Miscellaneous
Amendments) Regulations 2001
Background
ORR has consulted on reviewing existing railway safety regulations. This review is part
of the Government’s ‘Red Tape Challenge’ to reduce secondary legislation.
Main provisions
The regulations being reviewed are the Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Regulations 1997, Railway Safety Regulations 1999 and Railway Safety (Miscellaneous
Amendments) Regulations 2001. ORR is proposing to replace them with new
regulations, which would:
 Retain the prohibition on the operation of trains on a railway without a train
protection system for that train and railway
 Introduce a new requirement to have a management system for the train protection
system to ensure safe performance
 Retain the prohibition on the operation of Mark 1 rolling stock unless certain
modifications have been made to improve crashworthiness
 Retain the duty on persons in control if infrastructure or transport systems to prevent
unauthorised access to the railway
 Retain the obligation to provide passengers with a means of communication with the
train driver or conductor for use in an emergency
 Remove duties or prohibitions that are either covered by other more recent
regulations, have been superseded, or are out of date
ORR also consulted on a proposal to introduce flexibility to the current arrangements for
the allocation of health and safety functions for railways.
Further details on the proposals (including the new regulations and impact assessment)
can be found in the consultation document available:
49
http://orr.gov.uk/consultations/policy-consultations/open-consultations/revisingrailway-safety-regulations
Current status
The ORR has published its response and next steps towards the revision of three sets of
railway safety regulations which were consulted upon last autumn.
The comments of consultees and ORR feedback may be downloaded from:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/17317/final-consulation-responsessummary.pdf
The ORR sent the final draft of the regulations and impact assessment to the
Department for Transport in June 2015 which will enable the regulations to be laid
before Parliament. The regulations and impact assessment will now go through the
Department's clearance processes and the effective date for the new regulations was
expected to be later in 2015 but target date is unknown. In the meantime ORR are
preparing draft guidance to the regulations and intend to consult the industry on this
guidance.
Date updated
October 2015
50
Section 4: News
News
Storage and Handling of Flammable Liquids
The HSE have updated their guidance documents, the links to the revised documents are
highlighted below:
HSG176 – Storage of flammable liquids in tanks (Second edition)
This guidance applies to above and below ground fixed bulk storage tanks. It applies to
premises where flammable liquids are stored in individual tanks or groups of tanks. The
guidance has been updated to align with the recommendations of the Buncefield report.
HSG51 – Storage of flammable liquids in containers (Third edition)
This guidance is for those responsible for the safe storage of flammable liquids in
containers at the workplace. The guidance now contains discrete topic areas which
outline the potential risks and recommended control measures for a number of different
types of business.
HSG140 – Safe use and handling of flammable liquids (Second
edition)
This guidance explains the fire and explosion hazards associated with flammable liquids
and will help you determine how to control the risks in your workplace. This revision
incorporates information and cites relevant standards in relation to publications which
have been withdrawn.
Keeping electrical switchgear safe
The HSE have published guidance aimed at owners and operators of electrical
switchgear in industrial and commercial organisations. It should help managers,
engineers and others to understand their responsibilities and duties in the selection,
use, operation and maintenance of high-voltage switchgear.
Some knowledge of electrical switchgear and distribution systems is necessary to gain
most benefit from this document. It may be downloaded from:http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg230.pdf
51
The HSE have updated their answer to the question:Are turban-wearing Sikhs exempt from the need to
wear head protection in the workplace?
(Formerly the exemption only applied to construction sites, however, it has now been
extended to all workplaces, which would include train maintenance depots for
example.)
Yes. Sections 11 and 12 of the Employment Act 1989
as amended by Section 6 of the
Deregulation Act 2015
exempts turban-wearing Sikhs from any legal requirement to
wear head protection at a workplace. A workplace is defined broadly and means any
place where work is undertaken including any private dwelling, vehicle, aircraft,
installation or moveable structure (including construction sites).
There is a limited exception for particularly dangerous and hazardous tasks performed
by individuals working in occupations which involve providing an urgent response to an
emergency where a risk assessment has identified that head protection is essential for
the protection of the individual eg such as a fire fighter entering a burning building,
dealing with hazardous materials.
The exemption applies only to head protection and Sikhs are required to wear all other
necessary personal protective equipment required under the Personal Protective
Equipment Regulations 1992. The exemption does not differentiate between employees
and other turban-wearing Sikhs that may be in the workplace, eg visitors. However, it
applies solely to members of the Sikh religion and only those Sikhs that wear a turban.
Employers are still required to take all necessary actions to avoid injury from falling
objects by putting in place such safe systems of work, control measures and engineering
solutions eg restricting access to areas where this may be an issue. Where a turbanwearing Sikh chooses not to wear the head protection provided, the exemption includes
a limitation on the liability of the duty-holder should an incident occur.
Fit for work
From 8 September 2015 all employers across England and Wales became able to refer
employees facing long-term sickness into the new support service, known as Fit for
Work. Designed to help working people who face lengthy sickness absence return to
work, Fit for Work provides the services of occupational health professionals to
employed people if they have been, or are likely to be, off work for four weeks or more.
The service is already open to employers in Scotland. More information.
52
ISO 450001 replacing 18001
A new ISO standard, ISO 45001, on occupational health and safety management system
requirements is being produced by a Project Committee, ISO PC 283, to replace ISO
18001. The standard will be aligned with ISO 9001 (Quality Management) and ISO 14001
(Environmental Management).
The committee will meet a number of times to develop the standard further and to
ensure agreement between stakeholders. The final standard is expected to be available
towards the end of 2016.
ORR quarterly occupational health update (October
2015)
This may be found at:http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/19485/occupationalhealth-update-october-2015.pdf
The topics in this issue include: Stress – New case study and what are you doing for National Stress Awareness Day?
 Is Occupational Health just a NICE to have or business critical? Sometimes the figures
do the talking – see next item
 Training- Raising the competence of managers and supervisors
 Dust – Do you know the score – New guidance site available
The NICE issue new guidance on health in the
workplace
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published a new
guideline on workplace policy and management practices to improve the health and
wellbeing of employees. One of the key features is that they have provided a ‘ready
reckoner’ to help businesses visualise the economic impacts of different types of
occupational health interventions with respect to both the health of employees, and the
financial impact on the firm. RSSB is developing a similar tool to evaluate health
interventions.
53
The Guidance may be accessed at http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng13,
from where the associated tools and resources may also be obtained. The ORR have
indicated that there are obvious links to RM3 Occupational Health elements (see below).
ORR Occupational Health RM3 Guidance
The ORR have updated their website guide to Occupational Health and RM3. The latest
pages may be viewed through:http://orr.gov.uk/what-and-how-we-regulate/health-and-safety/monitoring-andreporting/health-risk-management-assurance
New HSE guidance on occupational health in the
construction industry
The construction industry has launched new guidance to encourage better management
of occupational health risks: New construction guidance to stop workers dying each
week from occupational disease . HSE is urging the industry to put an end to the
deaths of hundreds of construction workers from occupational diseases every month.
Safe Tea Break 2015 – free discussion packs
3M, in association with Safety Groups UK, has launched SafeTea Break 2015 to engage
workforces in discussions about health and long latency occupational diseases. For
more information and to download free discussion packs visit SafeTea Break 2015.
(Note you will have to register to access the resources)
The Sentencing Council: Health and Safety, Corporate
Manslaughter and Food Safety and Hygiene Offences
Definitive Guidelines
The Guidelines on Health and Safety, Corporate Manslaughter and Food Safety and
Hygiene Offences, has been published by the Sentencing Council in accordance with
section 120 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. This guideline will come into force on
1 February 2016 and is applicable to all offenders aged 18 and older and
organisations. A wide range of offences is covered by the guidelines, including offences
under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide
54
Act 2007, and the Food Safety and Hygiene Regulations (England) 2013 and the Food
Hygiene (Wales) Regulations 2006.
The guidelines may be obtained from:http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/HSoffences-definitive-guideline-FINAL-web.pdf
Comments and responses to the consultation, which included those of the ATOC, may
be viewed here:- http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/Health-and-Safety-Offences-response-paper-FINALweb.pdf
UIC publish Annual Safety Report for 2014
The UIC have published the report taken from their European safety database, which
shows improving trends virtually across the board. It may be found at:http://safetydb.uic.org/IMG/pdf/SDB_2015_public.pdf
HSE survey on first aid provision
The requirement for HSE to approve first aid training providers and qualifications was
removed in October 2013. To help review the impact of this policy on business we are
asking employers to answer a short online survey that should take no more than 10
minutes to complete: First aid at work – training provision survey. The information
provided will be completely anonymous.
The ORR issues improvement notice to West Coast
Rail Company
A Press release on 21st May stated “Safety on the railways is ORR's absolute priority, and
we will not allow services to run where we see safety risks. Following the serious
incident where a West Coast Railway Company (WCRC) train passed a signal warning at
danger near Wootton Bassett Junction on 7 March 2015, ORR inspectors have carried
out an extensive investigation into the standards of safety on their passenger services.
The regulator's initial investigation found shortfalls in the WCRC's safety management
system and in response the company has introduced enhanced safety procedures and
appropriate staff competence regimes. ORR inspectors have been on site examining the
new safety arrangements and inspecting WCRC passenger services to ensure that the
necessary changes are being fully implemented by the company.
55
ORR has issued an Improvement Notice to ensure WCRC delivers further improvements.
This will ensure workers are provided with suitable training and effective systems to
control safety risks and have clearly defined performance indicators in place. ORR will
closely monitor the company and will not hesitate to step in if any non-compliance with
the Improvement Notice is found.”
The decision letter to West Coast Railway Company can be read in full here:
http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/17973/wcrc-safety-certificate-letter190515.pdf
The Improvement Notice can be read in full here:
http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/17975/wcrc-improvement-notice-may2015.pdf
Rail Accident Investigation Branch – Annual Report
2014
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch’s (“RAIB’s”) Annual Report for the 2014 calendar
year was published in June (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/raib-annualreport-published-2015).
The Report is published in two sections: Section I covers RAIB’s work in 2014 and
includes a review of the industry responses to the areas of risk identified by its
investigations; Section II covers the implementation status of RAIB’s
recommendations. It notes that, during 2014, RAIB published 29 investigation reports
and 1 Safety Bulletin and has initiated a further 19 investigations.
Office of Rail Regulation- Annual Report and Accounts
2015
The ORR has published its Annual Report for 2014-15, which recognises that the industry
is one of the safest railways in Europe, but with increasing rail traffic must not become
complacent. It may be obtained from:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/18154/annual-report-2014-15-web.pdf
Station management at Network Rail London Bridge
station between January and March 2015
London Bridge (LBG) mainline station experienced crowding several times between
January and March 2015. In particular, the events of the first week of January, and 3rd
March were widely reported in the media and resulted in high-profile commitments by
Network Rail to resolve problems.
56
Inspectors from RSD carried out a series of inspections of Network Rail’s station
management arrangements. These inspections included the role of Southern Trains on
the management of the suburban platforms. The inspections had 3 aims:
1.
Investigate whether the events of 3rd March represented a failure to manage
safety at LBG.
2.
Assess the day-to-day operation of LBG.
3.
Assess the interaction between the Thameslink Programme and station
operations, involving a wider consideration of NR’s management of change.
Conclusion
Our investigation has not found any evidence that people at LBG were put at risk. Since
the incident, NR and Southern have learned from the incidents and made a number of
changes designed to improve management at LBG. Some of the changes are matters
that could have been put in place to better manage risks that were largely foreseeable.
The events show the importance of robust risk assessment and planning, and the
importance of unified management of large stations to maximise passenger throughput
and effective crowd control. The events also show how the vulnerable the station is to
managing disruption occurring after significant changes. NR and the train operating
company should consider whether changes and re-opening dates could be timed to
avoid re-opening into full peak service. These conclusions, and those mentioned above
are aimed at preventing a recurrence and/or improving the management of LBG during
disruption.
The HSE issue safety alert
Railway depots may have in use 'Norfolk Range' large dry powder fire extinguishers,
manufactured before 2009, and these may be affected by moisture ingress at a
threaded joint at the base of the unit, rendering the unit inoperable. The problem may
not be identified during routine service inspections.
Users should identify if their extinguishers are likely to be affected. If yes and the
extinguisher has been left exposed to adverse conditions since its last extended service,
the condition of the elbow joint at the base of the unit should be examined by a
competent service engineer.
If you are unsure if your extinguishers are affected by this safety alert, consult Britannia
Fire Ltd.
Service engineers should closely examine, and if necessary, remove the elbow to
confirm if there is evidence of water ingress to the discharge tube. If there is any doubt
about moisture affecting the powder in the discharge tube, consider subjecting the
57
extinguisher to an extended service including full replacement of the dry powder. Full
details may be viewed at:http://www.hse.gov.uk/safetybulletins/norfolk-large-wheeled-dry-powder-fireextinguishers.htm?ebul=hsegen&cr=2/17-aug-15
Evaluation of trends in RIDDOR reportable injury data
reported to HSE by dutyholders pre- and post-change
to over-7-day reporting
The HSE commissioned a statistical study (RR1054) to look into the accuracy and extent
of the information reported to the HSE by employers via RIDDOR. Based on a sample of
employer notifications of non-fatal injuries made during the first half of 2012, the
injured person in each case was contacted about the injury, and their view on the
incident and outcome compared to the employer report. Results were aggregated, so
individual employee responses could not be identified.
The study responds to several aims. Firstly, as the HSE publishes many RIDDOR statistics
based on employer reports, it helps provide a fuller understanding of possible
limitations in the data provided by the employer, compared to the injured person
themselves. Secondly, there was legal change to RIDDOR in April 2012, whereby the
reporting threshold for incapacitation changed from over 3 days to over 7 days. Thirdly,
each respondent was asked to provide the actual number of days off work as a result of
the injury (RIDDOR does not require this).
The HSE and ORR statisticians will use the findings of this study, for example to provide
contextual information when providing users with statistics, or in support of European
statistics developments. It may be found at:http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr1054.pdf
New telephone number for reporting RIDDORs
The HSE has introduced an alternative 0345 phone number to report fatal and specified
injuries, helping to cut the cost of telephone calls for the public. The new number for the
RIDDOR Incident Contact Centre is 0345 300 9923. Railway group members are reminded that
railway incidents are to be reported to the ORR directly, however, reports may come via the
public using the number above.
The HSE publish revised guidance on dermatitis
INDG233 – Preventing contact dermatitis and urticaria at work (rev2) has been revised
(July 2015).
58
This guidance is about preventing work related dermatitis and urticaria for employers
and employee representatives. The leaflet explains what the law requires, and which
jobs present most risk. The guidance has been simplified and streamlined in this
revision.
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health- COSHH
Essentials
The HSE have replaced their web based system for performing COSHH assessments with
a new one, to incorporate changes to labelling and hazard statements etc, additionally
they have published a series of industry/ task specific information sheets to assist
companies to comply, an example is Motor/ Vehicle Repairs (which would equally apply
to Depots), this may be accessed at : http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/essentials/directadvice/mvr.htm
Other activities include servicing, retail and welding and may well replace the
cumbersome systems which may be found across the industry.
Where tasks are not already covered the web system may be accessed at:
http://www.coshh-essentials.org.uk/entryoptions.asp
Web guidance on powered gates
The HSE have updated their website information and guidance for safety on the design,
construction, supply, and use, inspection, and maintenance of powered gates. It is
intended to assist all those responsible for powered gate safety meet their legal duties,
including manufacturers, suppliers, installers, owners, landlords, and anyone working on
this type of machinery. The link is http://www.hse.gov.uk/work-equipmentmachinery/powered-gates/introduction.htm?eban=govdel-equipment-at-work&cr=04-Jun-2015
HSE report on hand-arm vibration
This 2015 report: RR1060 – A critical review of evidence related to hand-arm vibration
syndrome and the extent of exposure to vibration describes a systematic literature
review on the nature of the exposure-response relationship between hand-transmitted
vibration and the elements of hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS), ie the vascular,
neurosensory and musculoskeletal components.
The HSE publish research on stubble and facemasks
RR1052 – The effect of wearer stubble on the protection given by Filtering Facepieces
Class 3 (FFP3) and Half Masks has been published (2015) which may be of interest for depot
59
safety managers. ORR and HSE Inspectors routinely come across workers with various degrees of
stubble growth using respiratory protective masks, despite guidance to the contrary. This
research studied the effect of 0-7 days stubble growth on the protection given by FFP3 filtering
facepieces and half masks.
Development of a Health Risk Management Maturity
Index (HeRMMIn) as a performance leading indicator
within the construction industry
The HSE has published (2015) research (RR1045) which extends the concept of
management maturity into Occupational Health one of the key areas of interest and
development by the ORR. To date, OH culture maturity has not been fully considered as
separate from safety culture maturity. However, challenges specific to OH such as the
latency between exposure and harm and the visibility of the hazard may warrant that
the two are separated out. Although the study concentrates on the construction
industry some of the ideas and concepts may be transferrable. The report may be
downloaded from: http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr1045.pdf
GRIP
The Health & Safety Laboratory has developed a footwear slip resistance rating system
called GRIP, which it is hoping footwear manufacturers will take up to assist workplaces
to identify the most suitable soles for their environment. Details and current ratings may
be obtained from: http://www.hsl.gov.uk/products/grip?ebul=gd-welding&cr=5/Mar15
Office of Rail Regulation re-named Office of Rail and
Road
The Office of Rail Regulation is now using the name Office of Rail and Road to reflect
new responsibilities from 1 April 2015 for monitoring the efficiency and performance of
England's strategic road network.
ORR’s Health and Safety Regulatory Strategy
The ORR has revised (February 2015) and republished the strategy for its vision of
achieving zero fatalities or major injuries through application of targeted regulatory
activities, and its ambition to be the world’s leading health and safety regulator for the
industry. The document explains how activities are prioritised across the whole industry
in order to achieve these aims. It may be obtained from:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/17019/health-and-safety-regulatorystrategy.pdf
60
UK railway safety statistics 2001-2014
DfT has published their annual updates, on a financial year basis (in a series of excel
spreadsheets). They may be obtained from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/rai05-rail-accidents-and-safety
Court cases
£200k corporate manslaughter fine after worker dies
in wall collapse
Hertfordshire building firm, Linley Developments has been sentenced for the corporate
manslaughter of a worker who was crushed when a structurally unsound retaining wall
collapsed. The company’s managing director and project manager were both also given
suspended prison sentences after pleading guilty to breaching CDM Regulations.
It was heard in court how 28-year-old Gareth Jones died instantly on 30 January 2013
when a wall collapsed on him in on Mile House Lane in St Albans.
Two days before the incident, managing director Trevor Hyatt visited the site to find that
the foundations for the store room would leave the floor at a higher level than in the
adjoining building. Project manager Alfred Baker suggested putting in a step but the
client said he would prefer them at the same level.
Two workers told Mr Hyatt that, if they were to dig lower, they might need to underpin
the footing of the existing wall. He told them to dig to a lower level regardless.
An investigation found that:
Linley Developments, failed to carry out a risk assessment or create a method statement
for the excavation;
Linley Developments had not installed supports or buttresses to prevent the wall falling
forward as the trench deepened; and the wall was inherently unsafe because, during
construction a year before, the foundations had not been bonded with it.
Trevor Hyatt, 50, of Letty Green, Hertford was given a six month prison sentence,
suspended for two years, after pleading guilty to breaching Regulations 28 and 31 of the
Construction (Design and Management) Regulations. He was also fined £25,000 with
£7,500 in costs. Judge Bright said he had considered disqualifying him as a director but
did not believe it “necessary, proportionate or just to do so”.
Alfred Barker, 59, of Gazeley, Suffolk was given a six month prison sentence, suspended
for two years, after pleading guilty to breaching Regulations 28 and 31 of the
61
Construction (Design and Management) Regulations. He was ordered to pay costs of
£5,000.
Mr Hyatt and Mr Baker also faced charges of gross negligence manslaughter, but they
were not proceeded with after they pleaded guilty to the two CDM breaches.
Linley Developments was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000 after
pleading guilty to corporate manslaughter on 7 September. It was allowed to pay the
fine over six years. The judge also made a publicity order against the company.
Hugo Boss fined for fatal negligence in store
Following health and safety investigations into a fatality by Cherwell District Council’s
Public Protection Team, Oxford Crown Court Judge Peter Ross fined Hugo Boss UK
Limited £1.1 million for offences under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and a
further £100,000 for offences under the Management of Health and Safety Work
Regulations 1999. The poor health and safety management led to the tragic death of
four-year Austen Harrison who was crushed by an unsecured, seven foot, 18 stone
three-way mirror within a Hugo Boss store at Bicester Village.
In passing sentencing the judge emphasised Hugo Boss Ltd’s failure to conduct their
business in a manner ensuring persons not in their employment were not exposed to
risks to their health and safety. Failure to make and give effect to such arrangements
for effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the preventative
and protective measures for the shop resulted in a second charge.
Investigations found that this was not an isolated incident in terms of mirrors falling or
being in an insecure and dangerous state. Failure to heed previous warnings by
employees and health and safety representatives along with the haste and commercial
demands of opening up the store without proper planning contributed to a collection of
aggravating factors.
The case highlighted extensive management failures at the store and above. Judge Ross
concluded that “the breach rose to the top of the company, not because of the absence
of a health and safety system, but the failure to operate and manage that system and to
secure appropriate compliance. He further concluded that the company failed to give
health and safety a proper profile at board level and the company lacked a culture of
health and safety management”.
It is important to remember that shareholders have an obligation to hold directors
responsible for their directorial duties which include health and safety. It is not an
excuse to form a “glass ceiling” that insulates the responsibilities of those at senior
management level from those at local level.
Companies have a legal responsibility to their staff and customers to ensure that health
and safety requirements are met to the legislative standards. It is not optional, nor is it
62
negotiable. Hugo Boss UK Limited failed in that responsibility. Not only were these
breaches systemic, they also reached the highest level of management.
Fine due to lack of protection from falling
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was sent footage by a member of the public of a
young employee fixing a workshop roof without any protection from falls in place.
The employee was 17 when he was spotted working on the roof of Harbex Metal
Processing Ltd’s High Oak Hill Works in Sittingbourne, Kent on 4 July 2014.
He had been lifted onto the roof in a metal cage but had climbed out to make repairs.
There were no safety measures in place to prevent him from falling off or through the
roof.
HSE immediately issued the company with a Prohibition Notice preventing further use of
the metal cage and prosecuted Harbex Metal Processing Ltd for safety breaches.
Maidstone Magistrates’ Court yesterday (11 June) heard the work had been planned by
employees who were not trained in this type of work and had not identified the risk of
falling from or through the roof. In addition, an untrained and unsupervised young
person had been tasked to carry out the work.
Harbex Metal Processing Ltd, of Bloors Lane, Rainham, Gillingham, Kent, was fined a
total of £15,000 and ordered to pay £2,300 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching
Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and Regulation 19(1) of the
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Construction firm sentenced after dumper truck
topple
A construction firm has been sentenced after a worker was injured when a 10 tonne
dumper truck he was driving over turned and landed in an open excavation.
Peterborough Magistrates’ Court heard Turner Construction (Midlands) Ltd failed to put
in place measures such as stop blocks to prevent vehicles from falling into the
excavation, failed to plan and implement a safe system of work, and inadequately
trained the dumper truck driver.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuting said the incident could have easily
been avoided by putting simple safety measures in place.
Turner Construction (Midlands) Ltd of Commerce Drive, Penkridge, Stafford admitted a
breach of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007, Regulation
13(2) and Regulation 9 (1) of Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998
63
and was fined £7,000 for each charge (£14,000 total) and ordered to pay full prosecution
costs of £1607.
After the hearing, Samantha Wells the HSE Inspector who investigated and prosecuted
this case, said: “Accidents can be prevented by ensuring construction work is planned,
managed and monitored in a way that ensures it is carried out safely from the start,
including for example the use of stop blocks at the edge of excavations”.
Company fined after electricity cable while digging a
trench worker hit
A man sustained serious, life-changing injuries after striking a 415v electricity cable
during work to refurbish a pharmacy in central London.
The labourer struck the underground cable while digging a trench during work to lay a
new sewage pipe. After suffering burns to his body and throat, the 41-year-old man is
unable to work and is now registered disabled.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated the incident in Edgware Road, in July
2013, and prosecuted the company in control of the work, Medpharma Ltd, after
deciding it contravened health and safety laws.
At Southwark Crown Court today, Medpharma Ltd was fined £60,000 and ordered to
pay £40,000 in costs after being found guilty at an earlier trial to breaching the
Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Stephron Baker Holmes said: “This case
follows a terrible incident that left a man seriously injured, with consequences that he is
still living with two years later.
“Where digging work is liable to disturb underground services it is vital to take suitable
and sufficient steps to control the risks. Guidance on these steps is freely available
online .
64