Safety Legislation Update
Issue 69
October 2013
Author:
Suzanne Taberneso
Safety Legislation and Operational
Feedback Advisor
RSSB
Block 2, Angel Square
1 Torrens Street
London EC1V 1NY
020 3142 5492
suzanne.taberneso@rssb.co.uk
Safety Legislation Update No. 69; October 2013
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. No representations
are made as to the accuracy and completeness of the information provided.
How to use this update
The Legislation implementation and update status table
This provides details on the proposed implementation dates of the updated/new 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 15%
shading.

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.
Railway Safety Legislation Committee – Terms of Reference
The purposes of the Railway Safety Legislation Committee (RSLC) are to:

Alert RSSB members to actual and potential changes to safety related legislation likely to
impact on their operations or business; and

Seek to influence and respond in such a way as to ensure that RSSB member interests
are recognised, promoted and protected.
The RSLC will:

Disseminate early indications and subsequent information regarding legislative proposals
concerning operational or occupational safety or the management/ reporting thereof.
This includes European, UK national and rail industry specific legislation.

Identify and consider the implications of such proposals for the UK rail industry
Inform and/or review RSSB activity in promoting/protecting its members’ interests in
seeking to influence and/or responding to such 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 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
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
2
Contents
Foreword
2
How to use this update
2
Railway Safety Legislation Committee – Terms of Reference
2
Contents
3
Abbreviations and acronyms
4
Related websites
5
Legislation Implementation and update status
6
Section 1 - European Legislation (General)
7
Electro-Magnetic Fields Directive (2004/40/EC amended by 2008/46/EC)
Musculoskeletal Disorders
Section 2 - EU Legislation (Railways)
8
10
12
Safety Performance Working Group – Common Safety Indicators & Common Safety Targets 13
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods – Risk Evaluation & Assessment
16
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods – Conformity Assessment
19
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods – Monitoring & Supervision
22
The Fourth Railway Package
24
Section 3 - UK Legislation (General)
CD241 – Proposals to review HSE’s Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs)
27
28
CD242 – Proposals to exempt from health and safety law those self-employed whose work
activities pose no potential risk of harm to others
34
CD243 – Proposals to simplify and clarify Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous
Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR) reporting requirements.
36
CD248 – Proposal to remove the requirement for the HSE to approve first aid training and
qualifications under The Health and Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981 (as amended)
38
CD251 – Proposal to revise the guidance for duty holders to decide the appropriate
arrangements for the provision of first-aid under The Health and Safety (First-Aid)
Regulations 1981 (as amended)
40
Enforcement procedures against drink drivers and other offences
41
Section 4 - UK Legislation (Railways)
Level crossing legislation
Section 5 - Other railway related consultations
ORR’s Approach to Transparency
Section 6 – News
43
44
46
47
49
News
50
Key Diary Dates
51
Court Cases
51
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
3
Abbreviations and acronyms
ACOP
Approved Code of Practice
ACSH
Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work
ATOC
Association of Train Operating Companies
CER
Community of European Railways
CSI
Common Safety Indicator
CSM
Common Safety Method
CST
Common Safety Target
DfT
Department for Transport
ECM
Entity in Charge of Maintenance
EMF
Electro-Magnetic Fields
ERA
European Railway Agency
HSE
Health and Safety Executive
HSWA
Health & Safety at Work Act
IAB
Impact Assessment Board
ICNIRP
International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection
IM
Infrastructure Manager
MoJ
Ministry of Justice
NSA
National Safety Authority
NRV
National Reference Value
NTR
National Technical Rule
ORR
Office of Rail Regulation
RE&A
Risk Evaluation and Assessment
RIDDOR
Reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences Regulations 1995
RISC
Railway Interoperability & Safety Committee
ROGS
Railways & Other Guided Transport Systems
RSD
Railway Safety Directive
RSSB
Rail Safety and Standards Board
RU
Railway Undertaking
SPG
Safety Policy Group
SPWG
Safety Performance Working Group
TSI
Technical Specification for Interoperability
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
4
Related websites
ATOC
www.atoc.org
BIS
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/depart
ment-for-business-innovation-skills
DCLG
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/depart
ment-for-communities-and-local-government
DEFRA
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/depart
ment-for-environment-food-rural-affairs
DfT
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/depart
ment-for-transport
European Commission
http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm
ERA
www.era.europa.eu/Pages/Home.aspx
Government News Network
http://www.knowledgeview.co.uk/node/10
HSE
www.hse.gov.uk
Law Commission
http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/index.htm
Network Rail
www.networkrail.co.uk
ORR
www.rail-reg.gov.uk
RAIB
www.raib.gov.uk
RSSB
www.rssb.co.uk
Scottish Law Commission
http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk
UIC
www.uic.org/
Ministry of Justice
https://consult.justice.gov.uk/
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
5
Legislation Implementation and update status
Legislation
Implementation date Updated in
(where known)
this issue?
EUROPEAN LEGISLATION (GENERAL)
Electro-Magnetic Fields Directive
October 2013

Musculoskeletal Disorders
Delayed indefinitely

Safety Performance Working Group – Common Safety Indicators &
Common Safety Targets
2nd set of CSTs
introduced Apr 2011

European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods
– Risk Assessment & Evaluation
July 2012 & May
2015

European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods
– Conformity Assessment
January 2011

European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods
– Monitoring & Supervision
June 2013

The Fourth Railway Package
Unknown

CD241 – Proposals to review HSE’s Approved Codes of Practice
By the end of 2013
CD242 – Proposals to exempt from H&S law, the self-employed
whose work activities pose no potential risk of harm to others
Throughout
and 2014


CD243 – Proposals to simplify and clarify the Reporting of Injuries,
Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR).
October 2013

CD248 – Proposal to revise the approval of first aid training and
qualification under the Health & Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981–
October 2013

CD251 – Proposal to revise guidance on the provision of first-aid
equipment under the Health and Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981
October 2013

Enforcement procedures against drink drivers and other offences
2014

September 2013

EUROPEAN LEGISLATION (RAILWAYS)
UK LEGISLATION (GENERAL)
2013
UK LEGISLATION (RAILWAYS)
Level crossing legislation
OTHER RAILWAY RELATED CONSULTATIONS
ORR’s Approach to Transparency
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
Unknown
6
Section 1 European Legislation (General)
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
7
Electro-Magnetic Fields Directive (2004/40/EC amended by
2008/46/EC)
BACKGROUND
This is the third Directive of the suite of physical agents’ Directives. Directive 2004/40/EC
was published in 2004, but was never fully transposed by member states (including the UK)
on the advice of the Commission.
On 29 June 2013, the European Commission repealed Directive 2004/40/EC and published
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) (20th
individual Directive within the meaning of Article 13(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC). The
published
document
is
available
here:
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:179:0001:0021:EN:PDF.
Member states have been given 3 years up to 1st July 2016 to transpose the Directive into
national law.
MAIN PROVISIONS
Provisions cover risk assessments; control of exposure (with laid down action values and
exposure limit values); health surveillance and information, instruction and training.
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 producing 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.
CURRENT STATUS
HSE, on behalf of the UK, will continue working with stakeholders to ensure that all
legislative requirements are addressed. They anticipate that a significant number of
requirements will already be incorporated into UK law through the Management of Health
and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, keeping the introduction of any new legislative areas
to a minimum.
The EU will publish a Practical Guide early in 2016, supporting the Directive. HSE are
working with stakeholders to ensure any practical guidance required to support UK
implementation will also be available.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB and LUL representatives will continue to participate in the transposition process,
development of UK guidance and attend industry meetings to confirm the railway’s position
that the legislation should be proportionate to the risk.
The Vehicle Train Energy System Interface Committee has indicated that further research
may be needed to update this report in the light of the revised Directive. Therefore a new a
new Research and Development project (T1051 – Investigation into the effects of applying
the Physical Agents (EMF) Directive in the UK railway system) is in development. For more
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
8
information please contact
david.knights@rssb.co.uk.
the
project
technical
lead
–
David
Knights;
OTHER INFORMATION
An RSSB report into the implications of the original Directive is available at:
http://www.rssb.co.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/pdf/reports/research/T515_rpt_final.pdf
DATE UPDATED:
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
9
Musculoskeletal Disorders
BACKGROUND
Following consultation exercises in 2004 and 2007 into the best way to provide increased
protection against musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), the European Commission (EC)
proposed a new Directive which would merge the existing Manual Handling and Display
Screen Equipment Directives.
In November 2008 the EC’s Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH)
established a working party including UK employers’ representatives to prepare an opinion
on the development of further legislative initiatives on MSDs. In 2011 the Commission
decided that a new Directive combining and extending the Manual Handling Directive and an
updated Display Screen Equipment Directive should be developed.
Publication of the draft Directive had been expected in April 2012 following scrutiny of the
impact assessment by the Commission’s Impact Assessment Board (IAB) on 28 March
2012. However, the IAB rejected the proposal/assessment, because of concerns over the
impact of the proposal on small and medium enterprises. The IAB requested that DG
Employment Health & Safety Unit (DG Employment) resubmit a revised impact assessment
(IA).
Late in 2012 the European Commission announced that it was considering options to
progress work on this dossier. It appears that the EC is actively considering producing a
council recommendation rather than a new Directive.
The HSE expected the EC to consult on this proposal in spring 2013.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The proposal requires all tasks with a physical component to be assessed using four risk
factors: repetitive motion, awkward postures, force and contact stress –these are likely to be
added to. Vibration is not included, however, as this is covered by the Physical Agents
Directive. More workplaces are likely to be covered than hitherto (e.g. train driving cabs).
CURRENT STATUS
On the 2 October 2013 the EU announced under its Regulatory Fitness and Performance
Programme (REFIT) that there is now no possibility of a new musculoskeletal disorders
directive being drafted. This follows a screening of the commission’s entire stock of EU
legislation and its plans to make EU law “fit for purpose” by reducing or repealing
unnecessary legislation and proposals.
UK POSITION
It is not yet known what the impact of the announcement made on the 2 October 2013 will be
on the UK.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB’s research called ‘T940 - Identifying, quantifying and managing the risk of
musculoskeletal injuries and illness among train drivers’ was published on 17th April 2012.
The
research
brief
can
be
viewed
at:
http://www.rssb.co.uk/sitecollectiondocuments/pdf/reports/research/T940_rb_final.pdf
The launch of the MAT Tool (Musculoskeletal Disorder Risk Assessment for Train Drivers)
took place in March 2012, and was held at RSSB’s offices. The event was targeted at
individuals who are involved in assessing and managing health risks in train drivers.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
10
The tool is available to RSSB member companies who employ train drivers and supports
companies in the assessment and management of MSD risk factors associated with the cab
design, the driving task and individual factors.
RSSB human factors specialists developed a guidance tool by drawing together information
from existing sources such as:

HSE's Assessment of Repetitive Tasks (ART) tool

People size (2008) anthropometric data

Health and safety legislation and guidance

Musculoskeletal disorder management guidance

Data supplied from train operators relating to: repetition involved in operating controls,
forces involved in operating controls and vibration exposure

Information from standards

Methodology for measuring anthropometric dimensions and train cab dimensions

Bespoke training material developed for the tool
The tool was authorised for publication by the project steering group and endorsed by the
ATOC Safety Forum and the Operations Focus Group, which has sponsored this research
OTHER INFORMATION
The HSE and the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) produced a downloadable tool called
The Assessment of Repetitive Tasks (ART) tool. This tool helps organisations reduce the
likelihood of their employees suffering from MSDs of the upper limbs associated with
repetitive tasks. The tool can be found here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/msd/uld/art/.
For more information see:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/europe/euronews/dossiers/msd.htm
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
11
Section 2 EU Legislation (Railways)
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
12
Safety Performance Working Group – Common Safety Indicators &
Common Safety Targets
BACKGROUND
The Railway Safety Directive (2004/49/EC) requires that ERA sets Common Safety Targets
(CSTs) for each member state. Member states are required to provide Common Safety
Indicators (CSIs) data to ERA on an annual basis (as per Annex 1 of the Safety Directive).
MAIN PROVISIONS
Common Safety Targets apply to all member states. Because of the different levels of safety
performance across the EU, ERA has supplemented these with National Reference Values
(NRVs), which are specific to each state. NRVs reflect baseline levels of safety in each state
and performance is assessed against these to ensure that safety levels are at least being
maintained.
NRVs and CSTs are expressed in terms of fatalities and weighted serious injuries
normalised by a measure of exposure, such as train km, and cover six areas: passengers,
workforce, unauthorised persons, level crossing users, others, and whole society.
The CSIs are primarily used to assess performance against the CSTs and NRVs, although
additional information is collected, for example on accident precursors and accident costs.
CURRENT STATUS

Common Safety Targets:
ERA published the 2013 Assessment of Achievement of Common Safety Targets in
March. It assesses performance for the calendar year 2011. UK performance was
deemed acceptable in all of the areas covered by CSTs / NRVs.
The ERA Task Force on the Common Safety Method (CSM) for Assessment of
Achievement of Safety Targets met for the third and final time on 12 September 2013. It
submitted its Evaluation and Recommendations Report for the Safety Performance
Working Party (SPWP) to consider at its 1 October 2013 meeting. The SPWP welcomed
the report and determined that a new Task Force should be set up to implement the
recommendations by proposing amendments to the CSM by April 2014.
The report concluded that, given the limitations of the data, the current method provides
a reasonable basis for ERA’s annual assessment of performance against the NRVs. The
assessment aims to ensure that safety is at least being maintained in each member
state. However, the report proposes some amendments for the next revision of this CSM
(which must be submitted to the EC by June 2015) and raises other issues for longer
term consideration or that are beyond its scope.
The main amendments proposed for this revision of the CSM are:
i.
Adding a new target relating to the number of collisions and derailments.
ii. Combining some existing targets, for example the targets for passengers and
employees would be combined into a single target for internal users.
iii. Changing the tolerance level used in the assessment process to reduce the chance
that a member state with good performance will fail as a result of statistical variation.
iv. Providing clarity on what happens when a member state records a possible or
probable deterioration in performance.
v. Taking the relative performance of a member state into account when determining
these follow-up actions.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
13
vi. Removing ambiguous terms from this CSM such as risk acceptance criteria, which
has a different meaning in the CSM on Risk Evaluation and Assessment.
vii. A commitment from ERA to publish the results of the assessment earlier (in
November each year).
UK representatives generally supported the proposed amendments, with the exception
of (ii): other than the categories of trespass and suicide, which we support combining in
ERA data, we believe it would be preferable to retain the current categories.
Other proposals in the report include:
I.
Further work to assess the pros and cons of changing the definition of serious injury
and of changing the weighting of serious injuries in relation to fatalities.
II. The introduction of ‘soft’ safety targets, specified outside the CSM, to encourage
safety improvement and achieve a convergence in performance across member
states.
III. The (voluntary) introduction of national safety plans to support the achievement of
‘soft’ safety targets and monitoring against them.
These proposals need further discussion, and UK representatives cautioned against the
imposition of arbitrary improvement targets, which might bring unacceptable costs into
the industry and damage the competitiveness of rail.
Peter Moran (ORR) is the UK representative on the Safety Performance Working Party.
The next meeting will be on 10 April 2014.

Common Safety Indicators guidance
The ERA published updated CSI guidance on its website in June 2012
Additional proposals to revise Annex 1 (the main proposal relates the classification of
level crossings) have been agreed by the Safety Performance Working Party and should
be presented to the RISCC on 22/23 October 2013, with the vote planned for February
2014
Following the results of a questionnaire circulated to NSAs, ERA has simplified the
section of Annex 1 covering ATP and TPS systems. The current draft of Annex 1 has a
CSI for percentage of track km covered by ATP/ TPS. This was opposed by a number of
NSAs as the data was not currently collected by RUs and would be difficult to collect as
different trains have different levels of protection depending on what equipment the
infrastructure is equipped with. Similarly, a number of NSAs opposed the inclusion of
percentage of train-km run with the on-board TPSs isolated or not functioning as they felt
it was virtually impossible to collect the data.
ERA agreed to withdraw the indicator related to the number of planned and performed
safety audits.
ERA suggested dividing other (killed and seriously injured persons) as those on
platforms and those outside platforms. Since 2010, the CSI guidance contained the
recommendation to report the other casualties under the two sub-categories. The idea
was to isolate the casualties occurring on platform (in connection with railway accidents).
TRL study into precursors also identified the “persons killed by protruding (part of)
running train” as a gap in current reporting practice under CSI. Some NSAs argued that
while it is not difficult to collect this data, the case for data collection should always be
made. As in this case, if there is no particular reason for data collection, it should be
skipped.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
14
ERA agreed to delete the proposed CSI for percentage of fenced lines.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
The railway industry is responsible for providing CSIs to the ORR by the end of June each
year. RSSB co-ordinates the collation of CSI data and reports this direct to ORR: there is no
longer a requirement for transport operators to include CSI data in the Annual Safety
Reports they submit to ORR. ORR submitted the national CSI data at the end of September
2013 as part of its Annual Safety Report to ERA.
The industry’s Annual Safety Performance Report 2012/13, published by RSSB, which can
be found here: http://www.rssb.co.uk/SPR/REPORTS/Pages/default.aspx presents a
provisional assessment of GB performance against the NRVs/CSTs for 2012 and concludes
that safety performance in all categories was acceptable.
Please pass suggestions for changes to Annex 1 to George Bearfield
george.bearfield@rssb.co.uk ; CER Deputy, or Peter Moran peter.moran@orr.gsi.gov.uk;
UK rail representative. So they can be logged with ERA for consideration by Safety
Performance Working Party; or
Please pass suggestions for changes to the method of assessing performance against
CSTs/NRVs to Marcus Dacre marcus.dacre@rssb.co.uk for consideration by the CST Task
Force. The first meeting of the Task Force is likely to take place in November 2013, once the
text of the recast Railway Safety Directive has been finalised.
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
15
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods – Risk
Evaluation & 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.

Original Regulation
The CSM on Risk Evaluation & Assessment was developed according to Article 6(3)(a)
of Directive 2004/49/EC (Safety Directive). The Regulation has applied since 1 July 2012
to all significant changes to the railway system – ‘technical’ (engineering), operational
and organisational. The Regulation can be found here: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:108:0004:0019:EN:PDF

Revised Regulation
Following the work of the CSM on Risk Evaluation & Assessment working group and its
task forces, in January 2013, a revised version of the Regulation was adopted by the
Railway Interoperability & Safety Committee (RISC). The revised version was published
in the Official Journal of the European Union on 3 May 2013 and will apply from 1 May
2015. 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
The ORR guidance will be amended in due course.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The CSM on Risk Evaluation and Assessment (CSM on RE&A) was developed by the ERA
based on an examination of existing methods for safety risk management in the Member
States. There are several task forces engaged with looking at how to interpret the current
and revised Regulations, they are 
Significant Change
The task force is dormant but has not been disbanded.

Roles and Responsibilities of independent Assessment Bodies (ABs).
To ensure trust in risk assessments, ABs should either, be accredited /certified or
recognised by the Member State. The accreditation scheme will be based on recognised
standards (ISO 17020 or EN45001) with additional specific requirements for competence
and independence.
ORR accepts the view that for projects intended for the international market, the use of
an accredited assessment body should be mandatory. However, we are proposing the
development of less rigorous requirements for purely domestic projects, which would
allow the use of internal assessment bodies.
At the final working group meeting the issues around the lesser requirements for
assessment bodies for significant changes which do not require mutual recognition were
dealt with by the insertion of some text to make it clear that only the requirements of
paragraph 1 of Annex II were to be relaxed i.e. those relating to compliance with
EN17020 ‘General Criteria for the Operation for Various Types of Bodies Performing
Inspection’
The following text for ‘domestic changes’ has been agreed in the revised Regulation:
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
16
“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.”

Risk Acceptance Criteria
ERA has circulated a document outlining a plan to take forward development of an
explicit harmonised RAC to be a part of a future revision of the CSM on RE&A. Initially
ERA has requested that concerned actors (NSAs, Representative Bodies, RUs, IMs etc.)
validate their proposed definition for the future RAC. They then plan to circulate a first
draft of the RAC as soon as possible. RSSB will coordinate a UK industry view to inform
ORR’s response to this paper.
During the next revision of the CSM on RE&A, ERA intended to include further RAC for
technical systems. CER/ EIM has launched an exercise to try and take the RAC forward
and feed into ERA’s work. RSSB has responded to a CER questionnaire.
ERA held a workshop on 25 to 26 June to discuss the CSM RAC. CER proposed a
longer timescale for their validation work as there consider there are a number of
questions and issues that ERA needs to address. However, ERA want to stick to the
existing plan and deadline of mid-October for input to the RAC validation. RSSB gave a
presentation outlining that validation needs to consider whether the functional failure rate
(less than or equal to 10-9) will be acceptable if achieved and what development process
could be accepted as appropriate demonstration for each level of functional integrity.
RSSB will submit previous work on validation tailored to the RAC outlined in the ERA
proposals, and outlining clearly the assumptions made regarding the crucial RAC issues
as part of this work. The UK work may form part of the CER submission depending on
progress with clarification of RAC issues within CER, EIM and ERA. As the ERA has
stated that it is willing to accept submissions from any group or individual, if this is not
possible the work will be submitted by RSSB, rather than as part of the CER submission,
although CER would be kept informed in this circumstance. The deadline for submission
of validation work was 15 October. A further RAC-TS workshop will be held by ERA on 4
December 2013.

RAC for risks related to human actions
The first meeting of the new ERA task force for RAC for risks related to human actions
took place in March 2012. Part of the terms of reference for the task force is to use the
outcome of the MTO Safety study as a basis for the development of further harmonised
RAC in the framework of the CSM on RE&A. Huw Gibson; huw.gibson@rssb.co.uk is
one of the TF participants.
As part of the work stream for the provision of a harmonised RAC for risks related to
human actions ERA has launched a Study on the assessment and the acceptance of
risks related to human errors within the European railways. The results are expected
soon and a group including NSA and GRB representatives will assess how they should
be taken forward and feed into a future revision of the CSM.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
17
CURRENT STATUS
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
As risk assessment is a familiar concept in the UK, it is not expected that the application of
the current and revised CSM on RE&A will require any major changes in approach.
The ORR is required to report on the implementation of the CSM on RE&A in its annual
safety report to ERA.
In October 2013 RSSB published the first three guidance documents on the application of
the CSM on REA –

Planning an application of the CSM on REA

System definition

Hazard identification and classification
The remaining guidance documents:

Independent Assessment

Risk evaluation and acceptance

Safety requirements & hazard management
Will be published in the coming months and in March 2014 all the documents will be
published as Rail Industry Guidance Notes in the Railway Group Standards Catalogue.
The Office of Rail Regulation has published Guidance on how to apply the CSM on REA,
and in particular the use of the three risk acceptance principles, this document can be found
here - ORR guidance on the CSM on REA.
OTHER INFORMATION
Further information can be sourced from RSSB’s Management of Engineering Change
website page:http://www.rssb.co.uk/ManagementOfEngineeringChange/pages/default.aspx
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
18
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods –
Conformity 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.
The CSMs on Conformity Assessment have been developed according to Article 6(3)(b) of
Directive 2004/49/EC (Safety Directive).
The CSM for assessing conformity with the requirements for obtaining railway safety
certificates was published on the 10 December 2010 and came into force across Europe on
3 January 2011. It can be found here: http://www.era.europa.eu/DocumentRegister/Documents/Regulation_1158_2010-CSM_on_Conformity_assessment.pdf
The CSM for assessing conformity with the requirements for obtaining railway safety
authorisations was published on the 11 December 2010 and came into force across Europe
on 3 January 2011. It can be found here: http://www.era.europa.eu/DocumentRegister/Documents/Regulation_1169_2010-CSM_on_Conformity_assessment.pdf
MAIN PROVISIONS
The CSMs on conformity assessment sets out the criteria that National Safety Authorities
(NSAs) will use to assess railway undertakings and infrastructure managers safety
management systems (SMS) and network specific requirements. In order to be granted
access to the infrastructure, a railway undertaking and infrastructure manager must hold a
safety certificate or authorisation respectively. The package will contain the following
elements –

Safety Certification Part A – SMS Assessment Criteria and Procedures;
– This is a standard European Certificate – designed to be transferable between
member states.

Safety Certification Part B – Harmonised Requirements, Assessment Criteria and
Procedures;
– This is a network-specific certificate to be issued to cover the particular requirements
of a member state’s network.

Safety Authorisation – SMS Assessment Criteria and Procedures, network specific
Harmonised Requirements, Assessment Criteria and Procedures;
– This is guidance and criteria for the assessment of safety authorisations for
infrastructure managers.
CURRENT STATUS
The new European assessment criteria can be found here:(http://www.railreg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1520), and the revised ORR guidance document was published
on
13
April
2011,
which
can
be
viewed
here:
http://www.railreg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/cert_auth_criteria_mainline.pdf
It is not foreseen that the new assessment criteria will mean many changes to existing safety
management systems, although there will be some changes to the information that needs to
be provided in support of an application for a safety certificate / authorisation.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
19
Further amendments to the CSMs are possible due to the difficulty some NSAs are
experiencing with the award of safety certificates under the Railway Safety Directive
2004/49/EC.
A peer review on authorisations for placing into service took place in the UK in early 2011. A
final report was produced in November 2011.

Migration Strategy
As required by the Railway Safety Directive, the ERA has been planning a migration
strategy to a single safety certificate, valid across the EU. The ORR responded to the
ERA’s consultation on the migration strategy during May 2011. There was a workshop
held by the ERA on 29 June 2011 which discussed the results of the consultation
exercise and the Agency’s proposal for the migration to a single European safety
certificate. The Commission asked ERA to set out in a recommendation what changes to
the Safety Directive will be required, and if any new Regulations will be needed. This is
now in the current draft of the revised safety Directive, under consultation as part of the
Fourth Railway Package. ERA has also committed to produce a progress report on the
implementation of the migration strategy, and intends to set up a programme board to
bring together input from work streams such as risk assessment and operational rules.
The CSM also requires the NSA’s to supervise Infrastructure Managers and Railway
Undertaking in a consistent manner across Europe. This has been achieved through
Commission Regulation No 1077/2012 (CSM for Supervision, see page 22), which came
into force on 7 June 2013 setting out the NSAs’ obligations.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
The general position expressed by the sector at the workshop was largely positive in that the
concept of a move towards a single safety certification could be a step forward in the longer
term. However there was a degree of caution expressed by certain sector bodies (including
CER) that it may be too soon to make such a significant change given that the current
system has not yet been fully implemented in all Member States and that there is still a wide
degree of variation in both experience and understanding in implementing the requirements
of the RSD.
There is not currently a high degree of technical standardisation across
Europe, which implies some on-going need for Part B assessment.
These concerns were mitigated in part by the ERA stating that the timescales for introducing
a single safety certificate would be 2020 and that there would be a robust development and
transition strategy in place accordingly.
The EC has included the recommendation to introduce single safety certification in the 4th
Railway Package. The Commission has proposed that ERA – not NSAs – will issue single
safety certificates. ORR sees clear benefits in introducing single safety certificates, but to be
done by NSAs rather than ERA.
A proposal is being considered by the October RISC meeting for an EC task force on the
single safety certificate
OTHER INFORMATION
ERA SMS Task Force has created SMS guidance to assist duty holders:
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/application-guide-for-SMS.aspx
New SMS web pages from the SMS Task Force are on the ERA Website:
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/Welcome-to-the-European-RailwayAgency-Safety-Management-Systems-Wheel.aspx
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
20
Application guide for the design and implementation of a Railway Safety Management
System was published in May 2013 and can be found here:
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/ERA-GUI-10-2013SAF%20V%201.pdf
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
21
European Regulation on the Common Safety Methods – Monitoring
& Supervision
BACKGROUND
The Railway Safety Directive 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.
CSMs on Monitoring and Supervision have been developed according to Article 6(3)(c) of
Directive 2004/49/EC (Safety Directive).
The Regulations were published in the official journal on 17 November 2012 and apply from
7 June 2013.
Regulation 1078/2012 CSM on monitoring can be found here:
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:320:0008:0013:EN:PDF
http://eur-
Regulation 1077/2012 CSM on Supervision can be found here:
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:320:0003:0007:EN:PDF
http://eur-
MAIN PROVISIONS
As part of the CSM on monitoring, rules will be created, focussing on railway undertakings’
and infrastructure managers’ self-supervision and audit to ensure on-going compliance with
safety management systems after the award of a safety certificate. As this necessarily
affected the approach National Safety Authorities (NSA) should take to monitoring the SMS,
the working group also considered the NSAs’ role. This included developing harmonised
principles for post award supervision by NSAs in the CSM on Supervision.
CURRENT STATUS

Monitoring
The industry sector taskforce agreed that the CSM on Monitoring shall be applied by
RUs, IMs and ECMs who will also ensure that the risk control measures implemented by
their sub-contractors are also monitored in compliance with the CSM.
RUs, IMs and ECMs who already have methods or tools in place for monitoring may
continue to apply them so long as they are compatible with the provisions of the
Regulation and described in the SMS of the RU/IM or described in the system of
maintenance of the ECM.
The main requirements of the CSMs on Monitoring and Supervision are that Transport
Operators will need to write strategies and plans for monitoring, to be included in their
SMS or be referenced within the SMS. These should coordinate the various monitoring
activities such as audits, measuring SPIs, inspections and recommendations from
accident investigations. The monitoring should prioritise resources on the basis of risk
and should lead to action plans to do the following where relevant:
–
correctly implement controls
–
improve existing controls
–
add new controls
RSSB has published guidance for industry on the CSM for monitoring which can be
found here:
http://www.rssb.co.uk/NP/Documents/CSM%20Regulation%20A4%20Leaflet.pdf
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
22

Supervision
The separate task force drafting the Regulation on Supervision by NSAs agreed that all
NSAs undertake some sort of planning in order to carry out inspections and audits, and
that they are, or should be, risk-based. The NSA task force issued a draft Regulation for
task force members to review. ERA proposed that the CSM contains a general
requirement for NSAs to produce a strategy on how to supervise RUs and IMs and this
links to their supervision plan; however NSAs will be given freedom on how the
supervision plan is drawn up and executed, and on how they manage the competence of
their staff in order that they are appropriate to the NSA and the IM / Rus.

Under the Regulation, an NSA will be required to:

Have a strategy and plan(s) for supervising IMs and RUs;

Have clear techniques for how to conduct their supervisory activities;

Have clear links between the assessment for safety certificates / authorisations and
supervision activity;

Operate a competence management system for those conducting supervision
activities;

Utilise decision making criteria when evaluating IM and RU activities;

Where necessary (such as cross border railway operation activity) that two or more
NSAs cooperate and coordinate their supervisory activity.
A Task Force made up of representatives across the NSA’s has met regularly, to develop
guidance on how the supervision will be conducted. The International Liaison Group of
Government Railway Inspectorates (ILGGRI) has currently held three supervision task force
meetings. ERA has also held a task force and has produced guidance on how an NSA can
use the CSM to implement a supervision system it can be found here:
http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/ERA-GUI-04-2012SAF_Guidance%20on%20CSM%20Supervision%201%200-clean.pdf
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
The CSM is seen as high level and fits well with the current practices of the ORR and duty
holders, including ORR’s Risk Management Maturity Model (RM3): http://www.railreg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/management-maturity-model.pdf
OTHER INFORMATION
In August 2013 RSSB published Safety Assurance guidance to assist transport operators
with the CSM for monitoring requirements. The document can be found here http://www.rssb.co.uk/NP/SMS/Documents/50817%20Safety%20Assurance%20Guide%20H
ARDCOPY%20V12%20WEB.PDF
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
23
The Fourth Railway Package
BACKGROUND
The ERA published proposals for the ‘Fourth Railway Package’ on 31 January. The
package
is
a
complex
series
of
proposals,
summarised
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kallas/headlines/news/2013/01/fourth-railwaypackage_en.htm
There are three main components to the technical pillar of the package, where new
proposals for safety legislation are put forward:
•
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
The proposals in the Fourth Railway Package focus on four key areas, summarised by the
Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of transport as:

Standards and approvals that work:
The Commission wants to cut the administrative costs of rail companies and facilitate the
entrance of new operators into the market. Under the new proposals, the European Rail
Agency will become a “one stop shop”, issuing EU wide vehicle authorisations for placing
on the market as well as EU wide safety certificates for operators. Currently rail
authorisations and safety certificates are issued by each Member State. The stated
expectation is that these proposed measures would allow a 20% reduction in the time to
market for new railway undertakings and a 20% reduction in the cost and duration of the
authorisation of rolling stock, leading overall, to a saving for companies of €500 million
by 2025.

Better quality and more choice through allowing new players to run rail services:
To encourage innovation, efficiency and better value for money, the Commission is
proposing that domestic passenger railways should be opened up to new entrants and
services from December 2019. Companies will be able to offer domestic rail passenger
services across the EU: either by offering competing commercial services or through
bidding for public service rail contracts, which account for a majority (over 90%) of EU
rail journeys and will become subject to mandatory tendering. The stated expectation is
that these proposals would bring clear benefits to passengers in terms of improved
services, increasing choice that, combined with structural reforms, could by 2035
produce more than €40 billion of financial benefits for citizens and companies involved
and would allow provision of up to an estimated 16 billion additional passenger-km.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
24

A structure that delivers:
To ensure that the network is developed in the interests of all players, and to maximise
operational efficiencies, the Commission is proposing to strengthen infrastructure
managers so that they control all the functions at the heart of the rail network – including
infrastructure investment planning, day-to-day operations and maintenance, as well as
timetabling. Faced with numerous complaints from users, the Commission considers
that the infrastructure managers must have operational and financial independence from
any transport operator running the trains. This is essential to remove potential conflicts of
interest and give all companies access to tracks in a non-discriminatory way. It is stated
that, as a general rule, the proposal confirms institutional separation as the simplest and
most transparent way to achieve this. Rail undertakings independent of infrastructure
managers will have immediate access to the internal passenger market in 2019.
However, the Commission can accept that a vertically integrated or “holding structure”
may also deliver the necessary independence, with strict firewalls to ensure the
necessary, legal, financial and operational separation. Compliance Verification Clause:
To safeguard this independence, in view of full passenger market opening in 2019, rail
undertakings forming part of a vertically integrated structure could be prevented from
operating in other Member States if they have not first satisfied the Commission that all
safeguards are in place to ensure a level playing field in practice, and a fair competition
is possible in their home market.

A skilled workforce:
A vibrant rail sector depends on a skilled and motivated workforce. Over the next 10
years, rail will face the combined challenges of attracting new staff to replace the third of
its workforce which will retire, while responding to a new and more competitive
environment. Experience in Member States which have opened their markets shows this
should lead to new and better jobs. Under the EU regulatory framework, Member States
will have the possibility to protect workers by requiring new contractors to take them on
when public service contracts are transferred, going beyond the general EU
requirements on transfers of undertakings.
CURRENT STATUS
Negotiations between Members States and the Commission have continued on the
Technical Pillar focusing on the revision of the safety directive and ERA regulation.
Examination of the Political Pillar is scheduled to start in early 2014 (governance and public
service contracts).
Members of the European Parliament submitted over 2000 amendments to the Package by
the 16 September deadline. These amendments will now be coordinated and submitted for
adoption to the Transport Committee on 26 November 2013 and will be voted at the plenary
on for the plenary vote on 26 February 2014.
A general approach between Member States has already been reached on the proposed
revised Directive on rail interoperability and a compromise has been agreed for vehicle
authorisation 
Applicants operating vehicles in a single Member State would be able to choose whether
to address their request to the National Safety Authority in that Member State or to the
European Railway Agency.

In the case of cross-border operations, ERA would be the only body responsible for
awarding vehicle authorisation. ERA would also have an appeal role.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
25
This choice-based approach is now subject to ratification by the European Parliament prior
to being adopted. A similar compromise is also proposed in relation to safety certification
under the revision of the Safety Directive rather than the initial EC proposal to introduce a
single safety certificate issued by ERA to replace parts A and B.
More resources on the fourth railway package can be found on European Commission’s
website: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kallas/headlines/news/2013/01/fourthrailway-package_en.htm
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
In February 2013, the Commons Transport Select Committee launched a short inquiry into
the European Commission’s Fourth Railway Package. The Committee focussed on what
impact the package will have on rail in the UK. Evidence received from a number of parties,
including TFL, Network Rail and freight organisations, is published at:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmtran/writev/ec/contents.htm.
The CER ERA Steering Unit is currently working on a position paper on proposed
amendments for the Interoperability Directive, Safety Directive, and ERA Regulation, with
the finalisation expected mid April 20141. ATOC are inputting via this process. The DfT
have invited input though their ‘Interoperability Newsflash’ service, and are holding industry
workshops to consider the proposals under the technical pillar of the package. RSSB has
responded directly to this invitation where appropriate (particularly in relation to the
proposals relating to ‘national rules’).
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
1
October 2013
Paper not published yet
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
26
Section 3 UK Legislation (General)
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
27
CD241 – Proposals to review HSE’s Approved Codes of Practice
(ACOPs)
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
ACOPs are not law but do hold a special legal status (quasi-legal). By adhering to the
advice in ACOPs material in relevant circumstances duty holders can be confident they are
complying with the law.
HSE is currently reviewing its guidance and presenting it to users in increasing levels of
detail and specificity. These levels of guidance are arranged as follows:

Level 1 – Health and Safety Made Simple and the revised Essentials of Health and
Safety

Level 2 – The ‘brief guide to…’ hazard based leaflets which explain risks in more detail
and provide information on effective control

Level 3 – Guidance which goes into more detail and often includes case studies. This
includes:
a) Industry Guidance (INDGs) which are industry or topic based guidance leaflets aimed
at employers and workers.
b) Health and Safety Guidance (HSGs) which provide more comprehensive, detailed
advice often including case studies and can be either topic or sector based.

Level 4 – Legal series guidance which present Regulations, AcoP advice and guidance
This review aims to make sure that HSE’s portfolio of guidance is useful and balanced;
making it easier for employers to understand and therefore meet their legal responsibilities.
CURRENT STATUS
HSE has conducted an initial review of 32 of its 52 ACOPs. The remaining 20 ACOPs have
not been reviewed at this time as they are associated with ongoing sector specific
consolidations or other regulatory amendments and will be reviewed in the course of the
delivery of those processes. Only the ACOPs relevant to the rail industry are listed
below:
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
28
Section 1 – Proposals to revise, consolidate or withdraw ACOPs; to be delivered by end-2013
The initial review identified 15 ACOPs that HSE proposes to revise, consolidate or withdraw. If agreed these proposals will be taken forward by the review for delivery by
the end of 2013
Consultation
Proposal and HSE consultation page
Consultation
status
Dangerous substances and explosive atmospheres
L134 Design of plant, equipment & workplaces – Dangerous Substances &
Explosive Atmospheres Regs 2002
L135 Storage of dangerous substances – Dangerous Substances &
Explosive Atmospheres Regs 2002
CD241 - Consolidate into a single revised ACOP (L138) to be published by
end-2013.
http://consultations.hse.gov.uk/consult.ti/cd241/viewCompoundDoc?docid=6
6420&sessionid=&voteid=&partId=66932
L136 Control & mitigation measures – Dangerous Substances &
Explosive Atmospheres Regs 2002
Closed 14/09/13
L137 Safe maintenance, repair & cleaning procedures – Dangerous
Substances & Explosive Atmospheres Regs 2002
L138 Dangerous Substances & Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002
CD258 - Publish an updated ACOP on Legionnaire’s disease: ‘The control
of legionella bacteria in water systems’.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd258.htm
Legionella
L8 Legionnaires’ disease
ORR input – advised HSE to include a link in the new ACOP to useful
railway industry guidance.
NA
CD255 - Consolidate into a single revised ACOP (L143) to be published by
end-2013. http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd255.htm
Closed 30/09/13
CD252 -Proposed that L56 is retained and revised to make it clearer what
dutyholders can do to comply with legal requirements and to reduce
Closed 30/07/13
Asbestos
L127 The management of asbestos in non-domestic premises
L143 Work with materials containing asbestos
Gas safety
L56 Safety in the installation and use of gas systems and appliances
Safety Legislation Update No. 69; October 2013
29
Consultation
Proposal and HSE consultation page
COP20 Standards of training in safe gas installation
duplication of other more targeted guidance. COP20 is withdrawn and any
material it contains that is still relevant (paragraphs 13 and 14) incorporated
within L56 http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd252.htm
Hazardous substance
CD259 - Revise this ACOP in combination with improvements to other HSE
COSHH guidance for low risk industries to be published by end-2013.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd259.htm
L5 The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002
Approved Code of Practice and Guidance
Workplaces
L24 Workplace health, safety and welfare
CD253 - Proposed that this ACOP is retained and revised to make it clearer
what duty holders must do to comply with legal requirements and reduce
duplication in the ACOP of duties covered in the legislation
Consultation
status
Closed 23/08/13
Closed 30/07/2013
http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd253.htm
Management of health and safety
L21 Management of health and safety at work
CD255 - To withdraw this ACOP and replace it with more specific, updated
guidance. http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd255.htm
Closed 30/09/13
Section 2 – Proposals to make minor revisions or no changes – to be delivered by end-2014
The initial review identified 15 ACOPs where HSE proposes to make minor revisions or no changes. Subject to the outcome of the consultation, these changes will be
taken forward separately to the review for delivery by end-2014. All are CD241 unless stated
http://consultations.hse.gov.uk/consult.ti/cd241/viewCompoundDoc?docid=66420&partid=67572&sessionid=&voteid=&clientuid=194529
Consultation
Proposal and HSE consultation page
Consultation
Status
Work equipment
L22 Safe use of work equipment
L112 Safe use of power presses
CD241 - Retained these three ACOPS, revise and update their contents and
Not open yet
make it clearer what dutyholders can do to comply with legal requirements.
L114 Safe use of woodworking machinery
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
30
Consultation
Proposal and HSE consultation page
Lifting equipment
CD241 - Retained and revised, contents update their contents and make it
clearer what dutyholders can do to comply with legal requirements.
Not open yet
CD241 - Retained and revised, contents update their contents and make it
clearer what dutyholders can do to comply with legal requirements.
Not open yet
CD241 - ACOP is retained and minor amendments made to make it easier
for dutyholders to understand what they can do to comply with legal
requirements.
Not open yet
CD241 - ACOP is retained and amended to reflect changes to relevant
legislation, remove material that duplicates guidance now made available on
the HSE website and make it clearer what dutyholders can do to comply
with legal requirements where required.
Not open yet
CD241 - It is proposed that no changes are required for this ACOP at this
time.
Not open yet
L113 Safe use of lifting equipment
Confined spaces
L101 Safe work in confined spaces
Pressure systems
L122 Safety of pressure systems
Hazardous substances
L132 Control of lead at work
Worker involvement
L146 Consulting workers on health and safety
Consultation
Status
Annex 1 – ACOPs to be revised or withdrawn
Consultation
Proposal and HSE consultation page
Lift trucks
These Two ACOPs were identified for revision or withdrawal without
consultation, either because changes had been consulted on prior to the
Löfstedt review or because the legal provisions with respect to which the
ACOP was approved have been revoked.
L117 Rider-operated lift trucks: Operator training
Chemicals
L130 The compilation of safety data sheets
Consultation
status
N/A
L117 has been incorporated into HSE guidance HSG6 - Safety in working
with lift trucks http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l117.pdf
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
31
Annex 2 – ACOPs not reviewed due to ongoing sector specific consolidations of legislation or other regulatory amendments
20 ACOPs have not been reviewed at this time as they are associated with ongoing sector specific consolidations or other regulatory amendments and will be reviewed in
the course of the delivery of those processes.
Consultation
Proposal and HSE Consultation page
Consultation
status
No information available
N/A
Details here
http://consultations.hse.gov.uk/consult.ti/cd239/viewCompoundDoc?docid=6
2900&partId=64916&sessionid=&voteid=
N/A
No information available
24/09/13
No information available
N/A
No information available
N/A
Construction
L144 Managing health and safety in construction
Docks
COP25 Safety in docks
Explosives
L139 Manufacture of storage of explosives
Flammable substances
L93 Approved tank requirements – The provisions for bottom loading and
vapour recovery systems of mobile containers carrying petrol
L133 Unloading petrol from road tankers
COP6 Petroleum-spirit (plastic containers) Regulations 1982
Radiation
L121 Work with ionising radiation
First Aid
See CD248 and CD251
L74 First aid at work
L74 was reissued on 1 October 2013
N/A
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
32
The Management of the Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 ACOPs was
considered by the HSE Board at their January 2013 meeting where they agreed the ACOPs
could be taken forward for withdrawal. The HSE propose to replace the ACOPs with
structured and well signposted guidance in revised versions of the following publications:

Health and Safety Made Simple; which can be found here:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg449.pdf

The guidance previously branded as “Essentials”;
http://www.hse.gov.uk/toolbox/index.htm

The Five Steps to Risk Assessment;
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg163.pdf; and

Management for Health and Safety (HSG65), which will now focus on a ‘Plan, Do,
Check, Act’ approach and include useful guidance on:
which

The core elements of managing for health and safety;

Deciding if you are doing what you need to do; and

Delivering effective arrangements.
which can be found here:
can
be
found
here:
This will be published later in 2013 (not issues yet)
The HSE has decided to proceed with the withdrawal, despite 52% of those who responded
to the consultation opposing it. The MHSWR themselves will remain unchanged, but the
ACOPs will cease to have effect following its withdrawal on 31 July 2013.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
OTHER INFORMATION
The ACOP review process is quite a large fluid one with updates and consultations being
issued regularly. We will continue to update the RSLU on the changes made, but as the
RSLU is only published quarterly we recommend that readers subscribe to the HSE update
service http://press.hse.gov.uk/subscribe/ to up to date on progress.
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update No. 69; October 2013
33
CD242 – Proposals to exempt from health and safety law those selfemployed whose work activities pose no potential risk of harm to
others
BACKGROUND
In response to a recommendation in the Lofstedt Report, the Government asked the HSE to
take urgent action to draw up proposals for changing the law to remove health and safety
burdens from the self-employed in low-risk occupations, whose activities represent no risk to
other people.
The HASWA (section 53) gives a broad definition of a self-employed person. It states a “selfemployed person means an individual who works for gain or reward otherwise than under a
contract of employment, whether or not he himself employs others”.
MAIN PROVISIONS
Lofstedt’s recommendation centres on exempting those self-employed whose work activities
pose no potential risk of harm to others and thus it is appropriate to remove the unnecessary
application of health and safety law.
There were three options considered to implement Lofstedt’s recommendation and option 2
was agreed as the way forward.
Option 2 – Exempting from health and safety law, the self-employed who pose no potential
risk of harm to others (see option 1), and who do not work in a high risk sector as prescribed
by the Secretary of State. The ‘prescribed sectors’ who are out of scope of this exemption
are

Agricultural activities

Mining;

Construction

Diving;

Quarries;

COMAH

Offshore activities;

sub-COMAH sites;
CURRENT STATUS
In March 2013 HSE published the consultation responses, they can be viewed at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd242-responses.pdf
A final impact assessment has been carried out by the HSE following the consultation, it can
be found here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd242-update.pdf
The HSE Board has now agreed proposals for self-employed people whose work activities
pose no risk of harm to others to be exempted from health and safety law.
Self-employed workers in a defined list of high hazard industries or those carrying out high
risk activities where there is the potential to cause significant injury to others will remain in
the scope of the law. The change is expected to take 800,000 self-employed people out of
the scope of health and safety Regulations. ORR has asked for railways to be included in
the list of sectors that will not be covered by the proposed exemption.
The Deregulation Bill was published on 1 July 2013, which includes at Clause 1 an
amendment to HASAW to deliver option 2. The effect will be to alter the application of the
HASWA so that it applies to self-employed persons who conduct a relevant undertaking.
A relevant undertaking will include those of a prescribed description and those where other
persons are affected and, therefore, potentially exposed to risk.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
34
ORR has asked HSE to include railways as a prescribed sector and therefore a relevant
undertaking for the purposes of the proposed amendment to the HASWA.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
Industry feels that this proposal will have a limited impact as if contactors are exempt from
this proposal, they will still fall under individual Transport Operator’s Contractor Management
policies.
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
35
CD243 – Proposals to simplify and clarify Reporting of Injuries,
Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR)
reporting requirements.
BACKGROUND
Following the recommendations made from the Lofstedt review of Health & Safety
Regulations in November 2011 the HSE is leading a review of the Reporting of Injuries,
Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR).
Although the Regulation recently changed the requirement for reportable injuries for
workforce from +3 days to +7 days lost, HSE have prioritised another review, and they have
consulted on proposals for further changes to the RIDDOR Regulations.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The aim of the HSE’s proposal was to revise what is reported under RIDDOR in response to
the Lofstedt review and to clarify and simplify RIDDOR, as well as to provide a reporting
mechanism which is appropriate for HSE’s current and anticipated needs.
Under the proposals, the HSE intended to remove five reporting requirements:
1. Cases of occupational disease, other than those resulting from a work-related exposure
to a biological agent
2. Non-fatal accidents to people not at work
3. Dangerous occurrences outside of higher risk sectors or activities
4. The reporting by self-employed persons of injuries or illnesses to themselves.
5. Suicides on the relevant transport system.
The current requirement if there is a major injury to a worker is to notify the enforcing
authority by the ‘quickest practicable means’ and follow this up with a written report within 10
days. However, the HSE selects RIDDOR incidents for investigations against published
selection criteria (http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/incidselcrits.pdf) The HSE proposed to
simplify the list of reportable major injuries to align with the incident selection criteria (apart
from item 10) as follows:
1. Any fracture other than to fingers, thumbs or toes
2. Any amputation
3. Crush injuries leading to internal organ damage
4. Head injuries that result in a loss of consciousness (guidance to be issued explaining
that fainting, seizures etc. that lead to head injuries would not be included in the major
injury category)
5. Burns or scalds covering more than 10% of the body
6. Permanent blinding in one or both eyes
7. Any degree of scalping
8. Any asphyxiation from whatever cause
9. Any injury arising from working in a confined space resulting in hypothermia, heatinduced illness, requiring resuscitation or admittance to hospital for more than 24 hours
10. Any diagnosed illness requiring medical treatment, which is reliably attributed to a workrelated exposure to a biological agent or its toxins or infected material (this enacts a
specific requirements of an EU Directive).
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
36
CURRENT STATUS
The HSE invited consultation on their proposals to simplify and clarify how businesses
comply with the requirements under the RIDDOR 95. The outcome of the consultation can
be viewed at: www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/meetings/hseboard/2013/300113/pjanb1304.pdf
The impact assessment of the consultation was published in May 2013 and can be found
here http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd243-update.pdf
The HSE dropped its proposal that employers and other duty holders should no longer have
to report occupational diseases, as agreed at a closed meeting on 30 January 2013. The
HSE board agreed to retain the duty to report non-fatal work-related accidents to members
of the public. The reforms to major injuries, dangerous occurrences and self-employed
workers have gone ahead. Duties to report fatal injuries to workers and the public, and +7
day injuries to workers, remain unchanged. The HSE board advised the minister to accept
the modified package. The regulations will come into force on 1 October 2013 and can be
found here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1471/contents/made.
The HSE had proposed removing the requirement to report occupational diseases except
where they result from exposure to biological agents. Following concerns raised at
consultation, it decided that employers will have to report occupational cancers, diseases
attributable to biological agents and six short-latency diseases (hand-arm vibration
syndrome, dermatitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, severe cramp of the arm, tendonitis and
occupational asthma). The HSE had also proposed removing the requirement to report workrelated non-fatal injuries to members of the public who are taken to hospital for treatment. In
light of this the HSE has retained this requirement although it will make the reporting
stipulations and threshold clearer through improved guidance. The other reforms proposed
in the consultative document have gone ahead::

The list of major injuries will be simplified and reduced to 10 types, so that it is more
closed aligned with the HSE’s incident selection criteria;

The list of 25 dangerous occurrences will be simplified and reduced to 20 so that they
focus on higher-risk sectors and activities; and

Self-employed workers will no longer have to report injuries to themselves.
On the 1 October 2013 the HSE published a guide to RIDDOR INDG453, which can be
found here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg453.pdf
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB has concerns about the implications and costs of changing the Safety Management
Information System (SMIS), and how the changes in definitions may affect historic data.
RSSB are currently developing options to change SMIS to automatically report reportable
injuries to the revised definitions contained in the revised RIDDOR regulations.
It should be noted that the change to the definitions in RIDDOR does not impact upon the
mandatory requirement for all Railway Group Members to report into SMIS all injuries to
workforce, passengers and public, as defined in Railway Group Standard GE/RT8047
OTHER INFORMATION
On the 1 October 2013 ORR has published Railway specific guidance to RIDDOR 2013,
which can be found here http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/riddor-guidance.pdf. This
includes a new reporting mechanism, which removes the monthly ‘bulk’ reporting of certain
dangerous occurrences.
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
37
CD248 – Proposal to remove the requirement for the HSE to
approve first aid training and qualifications under The Health and
Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981 (as amended)
BACKGROUND
Following the recommendation made from the Lofstedt review of Health & Safety
Regulations in November 2011 the HSE are revising the Health & Safety (First Aid)
Regulations 1981.
The Regulations currently stipulate that the training and qualifications for the appointed firstaid person must be approved by HSE. The Lofstedt report says that this appears to both go
beyond the requirements of the Directive and have little justification. So long as
organisations meet a certain standard, allowing businesses to choose training providers
should allow them greater flexibility to choose what is right for their workplace, and possibly
reduce costs.
The review also found that a number of organisations felt the requirement under the
Regulations to have a qualified first-aid person appointed in the workplace was an
unnecessary requirement for low-risk workplaces.
Lofstedt also suggested that there should be a revision of guidance clarifying what is suitable
for different environments to help businesses adopt measures that are suitable for their
workplace, and that explains clearly what the Regulations actually require. It was therefore
recommended that HSE amends the Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981 to
remove the requirement for HSE to approve the training and qualifications of appointed firstaid personnel.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The policy objectives for the revision of the Regulations are:

Removal of HSE approval of First Aid Training providers, to reduce the burden on
business;

To ensure that businesses can identify first aid courses that are appropriate for their
workplaces and select suitable training providers
To implement the recommendation there is a requirement to change legislation in order to
amend the Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981.
CURRENT STATUS
On the 1 October 2013 the Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981 were amended to
remove the requirement for the HSE to approve first aid training and qualifications.
On the 1 October 2013 the HSE published new supporting guidance on the regulations
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l74.pdf. This guidance provides specific information on
Managing the provision of first aid (first-aid kit, equipment, rooms etc)

Requirements and training for first-aiders

Requirements for appointed persons

Making employees aware of first-aid arrangements

First aid and the self-employed

Cases where first-aid regulations do not apply
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
38
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
The industry welcomes this revision and the possible cost reductions that could result from it.
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
39
CD251 – Proposal to revise the guidance for duty holders to decide
the appropriate arrangements for the provision of first-aid under
The Health and Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981 (as amended)
BACKGROUND
The HSE consulted in late 2012 on proposals to amend the Health and Safety (First Aid)
Regulations 1981. This was in response to Professor Ragnor Lofstedt’s recommendation in
his review of health and safety legislation Reclaiming health and safety for all: an
independent review of health and safety legislation to remove the requirement for HSE to
approve first aid training and qualifications.
MAIN PROVISIONS
This consultation sought views on the content of revised guidance to help duty holders
decide on appropriate arrangements for the provision of first aid at the business.
CURRENT STATUS
On the 1 October 2013 the HSE published new supporting guidance on the regulations
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l74.pdf. This guidance provides specific information on
managing the provision of first aid (first-aid kit, equipment, rooms etc)

requirements and training for first-aiders

requirements for appointed persons

making employees aware of first-aid arrangements

first aid and the self-employed

cases where first-aid regulations do not apply
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
Industry considers that this change will not require any changes to those operators who have
currently taken into account passenger first aid provisions at stations.
For those operators who haven’t taken passenger first aid provisions into account they
should consider this proposal and make a conscious decision as to whether it applies to their
operation.
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
40
Enforcement procedures against drink drivers and other offences
BACKGROUND
In June 2010 Sir Peter North wrote a report on the review of drink and drug driving law, and
in November 2010 the Transport Select Committee wrote a report on Drink and Drug Driving
Law. The Government responded to both reports in March 2011 proposing legislative
changes on drink and drug driving1.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The legislative changes proposed in this consultation relate to Great Britain. The proposals
are consistent with the devolution of the drink drive limit in Scotland, through the Scotland
Act 2012.
The Government sought a view on the following proposed changes –

The withdrawal of the ‘statutory option’;2

Changes as to when preliminary breath tests are needed;

Changes to the testing procedures in hospital;

Changes to who can assess if someone is under the influence of drugs;

Amendments to the regimes for aviation, rail and shipping which mirror the road regime.
CURRENT STATUS
The results from the consultation were released on 24 July 2013. The original consultation
paper
and
full
outcome
can
be
found
here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/enforcement-procedures-against-drink-driversand-other-offenders.
The consultation took the form of a questionnaire and composed of 10 questions. These
were:
Q1-4 Removal of the statutory option and the retention of the current blood to breath ratio.
Q5
Changes to when preliminary breath tests are required outside police stations and
hospitals.
Q6
Allowing registered healthcare professional to take blood samples from suspected
drink and drug drivers.
Q7
Allowing registered healthcare professionals to provide an assessment whether a
condition is due to the presence of drugs in the body.
Q8
Whether the above proposals should be implemented in other transport sectors, e.g.
rail, aviation and shipping.
Q9
Whether or not to extend post court rehabilitation schemes to other offences
Q10 Respondents to agree to evaluation of the use of extended driving tests and other
competence tests with a view to considering their use more widely for offences.
From the rail sector, Eurostar and RSSB responded to this consultation (questions Q1-4, Q5,
Q6 and Q8 only) – see link above for detailed response to each question.
The main changes would be to the Road Traffic Act 1988 – repeal Sections 8(2), 8(2A), 8(3) and
change Sections 8(1)
2 The current prescribed limit for driving with excess alcohol is expressed in terms of alcohol
concentration sin breath, blood and urine. The statutory option allows suspects whose breath
alcohol concentrations readings do not exceed 50 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 microgrammes
of breath (the prescribed limit is 35) to ask for a blood or urine test (named the statutory option)
1
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
41
An impact assessment was conducted in October 2012 researching into the two possible
outcomes, these being:

Option 1 – removal of the statutory option without any changes in prescribed limits;

Option 2 – removal of the statutory option with revised prescribed limits for blood and
urine based on a different implied blood to breath alcohol concentration ratio.
The summary of the preferred option was to withdraw the statutory option, without changing
any of the prescribed limits for drink-driving (option 1). The preferred timing would be at a
similar time to the introduction of mobile evidential breath testing equipment in 2014. This is
dependent on parliamentary time being found for legislative changes.
The legislative changes would be likely to be commenced shortly after the Royal Assent of
the relevant legislation. The government is working with the Association of Chief Police
Officers (ACPO) to ensure the timing of implementation is co-ordinated with the necessary
changes to police procedures. It is also considering the implications for the far rarer police
testing arrangements in the aviation, rail and shipping sectors.
Post-legislative scrutiny requirements for primary legislation require a review five years after
the relevant Act is passed. Drink drive casualties, proceedings and breath tests are all
monitored continuously with annual statistics being produced. The DfT would propose to
use these and work with the CPO to monitor the effects of removing the statutory option and
introducing mobile evidential breath testing equipment, when the changes are made and
after two and five years.
This policy is next set to be reviewed in December 2016.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB will continue to monitor this legislative change and update this paper as and when
new information is received.
OTHER INFORMATION
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
42
Section 4 UK Legislation (Railways)
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
43
Level crossing legislation
BACKGROUND
Following a joint submission by ORR and DfT. The Law Commission, together with the
Scottish Law Commission, agreed to carry out a review of the law relating to level crossings
as part of the Law Commission’s Tenth Programme of Law Reform. The project covers level
crossings in the GB rail network. The Law Commission is a statutory independent body
whose role is to keep the law under review and recommend reform where needed.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission are carrying out a project which
examines the legal framework relating to level crossings, with a view to simplify and
modernise. The legislation governing level crossings is complex and antiquated, much of it
dating back to the nineteenth century. At present, the provisions relating to level crossings
are scattered amongst legislation relating to different areas of law. With the legislation
currently contained in public Acts, private special Acts, bye-laws or subordinate legislation,
there is a requirement to attempt to consolidate the law in this area.
This consultation proposes a complete overhaul of existing level crossings legislation, and
particularly looks at:

The creation of level crossings

Rights of way and access issues

Current Regulation of level crossings

Criminal offences

Level crossing closures

Signs and highway code
CURRENT STATUS
On 25 September 2013 the law commission published a report which can be found here
http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc339_level_crossings.pdf. The report explains and
sets out recommendations, together with a draft Level Crossings Bill, draft Level Crossing
Plans Regulations, an analysis of consultation responses and an economic impact
assessment. The recommendations would:

Create a new, more streamlined procedure to close individual level crossings where it is
in the public interest to do so.

Bring safety regulation entirely under the umbrella of the Health and Safety at Work etc
Act 1974.

Provide tools to support this under health and safety regulations, including level
crossings plans, enforceable agreements between railway operators and other duty
holders, and a power for the Secretary of State to issue directions if necessary.

Improve the balance of convenience to all level crossing users by imposing a statutory
duty upon railway and highway operators to consider the convenience of all users when
carrying out their obligations in respect of level crossings.

Improve efficiency and level crossing management by imposing a statutory duty on
highway and railway operators to make arrangements to co-operate with each other in
carrying out their obligations in respect of level crossings.

Provide clarity in certain areas of land law about the position of statutory level crossings.

Disapply statutory provisions relating to safety at level crossings, which have been
superseded by more recent law or are otherwise obsolete.
This report concludes the law commission level crossings project.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
44
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB, Network Rail and ATOC responded to the consultation process.
OTHER INFORMATION
The ORR is currently in correspondence with Network Rail concerning AOCLs, and it will
also press the Sentencing Guidelines Council to increase the suggested penalties for level
crossing misuse by motorists.
The Commons Transport Select Committee has launched an enquiry into safety at level
crossings. This enquiry was outlined in the committee’s recent report which set it out it future
work
programme
for
2013-14.
The
report
can
be
viewed
here
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmtran/438/438.pdf
DATE UPDATED
October 2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
45
Section 5 Other railway related consultations
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
46
ORR’s Approach to Transparency
BACKGROUND
Openness and Transparency are both crucial elements in delivering the Governments’
objectives for strengthened public accountability; public service improvement; and
encouraging wider economic growth through the development of products and services
based on public sector information. Transparency is also a key factor in the Governments’
strategy, which was laid out in its document ‘Better Choices: Better Deals’. In support of this
strategy, the DfT published a Command Paper in March 2012 called ‘Reforming our
Railways: Putting the Customer First’: http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/reforming-ourrailways/, which details how this kind of approach could be used within the rail industry.
The ORR has supported this view of transparency in the railways and ‘believes it has a vital
role to play in driving the behavioural changes necessary for industry reform, delivering
better value for money and delivering a customer focussed industry’. In May 2011 the ORR
launched the National Rail Trends (NRT) Portal, which provides the public access to a wide
variety of rail statistics. The NRT has a report wizard which enables users to query detailed
data and see key data via tables and charts.
MAIN PROVISIONS
The ORR has published a consultation document to gain views on the ORR’s approach to
transparency. They believe transparency is important in driving the behavioural changes
necessary for industry reform, delivering better value for money and a more customer
focussed industry.
The ORRs vision for the development of more transparency in the rail industry is:

Hold the sector to account by reputation in absolute terms and by comparison;

Hold ORR to account in how they discharge their statutory responsibilities, in the
substance of their decisions and what they spend;

Exposure where the industry spends the money it receives and on what, to enable
passengers, funders and taxpayers to consider whether they are getting value for money
and to support informed choices about future spends including at local level;

Enable passengers and freight customers to exercise choice where available and to
match the service or product to their needs; and

Stimulate the design and introduction of new consumer led services and products by
third party developers with potential downstream commercial applications.
CURRENT STATUS
The ORR has published a consultation document which describes why they believe
transparency is so important, and outlines the current focus and activities of ORR and the
industry. They are seeking views on how they should go about assessing the risks and
benefits of more transparency and what factors they should take into account, including how
we should measure whether their objectives are being achieved.
The consultation closed on 19 October 2012 and the responses can be viewed here:
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.10984
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
47
ORR held a stakeholder workshop on 10 December 2012, which was attended by Colin
Dennis of RSSB and other industry stakeholders. This conference discussed what
transparency means in the context of the railways and how they can work together to deliver
the benefits that transparency can bring to passengers, taxpayers and the industry.
RAILWAY INDUSTRY POSITION
RSSB responded to the consultation. Their response can be viewed here http://www.railreg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.10984
OTHER INFORMATION
In 2013 ORR are establishing a way in which to evaluate their effectiveness. Results of this
evaluation will be published in Spring 20131.
ORR published two reports on 23 November 2012. The first report compared the
expenditure of the 19 franchised Train Operating Companies (TOC’s). The second report
provided an analysis comparing TOCs in GB to those in other European countries, Both
reports can be viewed here: http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.11052
DATE UPDATED
1
January 2013
Not published yet
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
48
Section 6 – News
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
49
News
Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007; Changes to regulations and
ACoP to be consulted on
The HSE is expected to consult in the near future on proposals for changes to the
Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007 and the associated ACoP”. There
is no date set for this yet but the proposals are currently undergoing the usual government
clearances before publication.
Slips trips and falls; Updated HSE guidance
The
HSE
have
updated
http://www.hse.gov.uk/slips/ in order
to improve clarity, and have added
content. HSL are also offering 1 day
workshops on STFs and another on
Stairs which may be useful in
understanding the causes of these accidents, more details are on the HSL website at
http://www.hsl.gov.uk/health-and-safety-training-courses/slips-and-trips.aspx
Maintaining portable electrical equipment; Updated HSE
guidance
This guidance has been updated to clarify what the legal
requirement for maintenance of portable electrical equipment
means in practice. The table of suggested frequencies has
been updated and now includes clearer information for all types
of business including construction. It covers equipment that is
connected to the fixed mains supply or a locally generated
supply. It outlines a recommended maintenance plan based on
a straightforward, inexpensive system of user checks, formal
visual inspection and testing.
The
document
can
be
downloaded
here
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg107.pdf . For “low-risk” environments, e.g. offices
refer to Maintaining portable electric equipment in low risk environments in the first instance,
which can be found here -. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg236.pdf
HSE guide calls for improved dust risk control
HSE has published Construction Information Sheet No 36
(Revision 2 June 2013) http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis36.pdf
highlighting that the dust generated on construction projects can
seriously damage the health of those working in this environment.
The guidance provides a clear strategy for meeting legal duties
(under COSHH 2002) by identifying the wide range of high risk
tasks and how the dust and risk can be controlled.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
50
Notified National Technical Rules
The website page describing the list
of the UK’s list of Notified National
Technical Rules (NNTRs) has just
been updated to reflect the latest list
of NNTRs which has been notified to
the Commission.
Transport Operators should update
their Part B Safety Certificate with the
revised list during their next review.
The current list of NNTRs can be
downloaded as an MS Excel
spreadsheet from the website - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-interoperabilitycurrent-notified-national-technical-rules
Key Diary Dates
Date
Item
5 April 2014
HSE Health and Safety law poster 1999 version must be replaced by the 2009
poster or leaflet. The new version can be downloaded from
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/lawposter.htm
29 Oct 2018 Train Driving Licences and Certificates Regulations 2010 (TDLCR) –
Requirement for existing drivers (cross-border and domestic) to hold licences
and certificates comes into effect
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.2447
Court Cases
Network Rail fined £125,000 following death of Essex track worker
Network Rail has been fined £125,000 and ordered to pay costs of £85,000 following a
prosecution brought by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) for breaches of health and safety
law which were identified following the death of Malcolm Slater, a Network Rail track
maintenance worker, in June 2008.
On 11 June 2008, Network Rail track maintenance workers were repairing damaged
overhead lines at Margaretting, near Chelmsford in Essex. They were working at a height of
approximately 15 feet on a mobile elevated platform attached to a vehicle, when the platform
became detached and fell to the ground. All three occupants of the platform sustained
injuries in the fall including fractured bones and bruising, while one, Malcolm Slater, suffered
far more serious injuries and died on 1 July 2008.
The sentencing at Chelmsford Crown Court follows an extensive ORR investigation into the
incident which found that Network Rail had failed in its duty to provide suitable work
equipment for its employees and therefore failed to properly plan the repair work. The court
heard that Network Rail had not provided its staff with training on working within the platform
and did not identify that the overload alarm had been switched off despite evidence showing
the platform weight limit of 350kg had been significantly exceeded on a regular basis.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
51
Network Rail pleaded guilty to charges brought in connection with the incident at Chelmsford
Crown Court on 30 August 2013.The full ORR report can be found here http://www.railreg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.11251
Train operator First Capital Connect fined £75,000 for
failing to protect safety of passengers
First Capital Connect (FCC) has been fined a total of
£75,000 and ordered to pay costs of £27,718 following a
prosecution brought by the Office of Rail Regulation
(ORR) after the company failed to protect the safety of
passengers trapped on a broken down train at Dock
Junction, London, in May 2011.
During the evening rush hour on 26 May 2011, an FCC
service from Brighton to Bedford lost power and became
stranded for approximately three hours, with around 700
passengers on board, at Dock Junction between St
Pancras International and Kentish Town stations in North
London. ORR’s investigation found that FCC had not
adequately planned its response to deal with stranded
trains or provided those on board with accurate
information, working ventilation or toilet facilities. Passengers were forced to call National
Rail Enquiries for updates and throughout the three hour period were repeatedly informed a
rescue train would be arriving in ten minutes. Inaccurate passenger information updates and
poor conditions on board resulted in many passengers opening the doors and leaving the
train.
The risk of passengers taking independent action to leave the train in conditions such as
these had already been recognised by the rail industry. FCC failed to act on relevant
guidance developed after previous incidents of stranded trains. FCC pleaded guilty to a
charge under section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.
For more information please read the RAIB report on the incident available here http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/120523_R072012_Kentish_Town.pdf
Two companies fined over £360,000 following falling advertising hoarding, echoing a
similar accident at a railway station 2 years ago
A prominent London developer and a Middlesex sign company have been ordered to pay
over half a million pounds in fines and costs for safety failings after a pedestrian sustained a
permanent brain injury when parts of a decaying advertising sign fell onto her head.
The victim was hit by a section of a sign advertising the luxury St George Wharf
development as she walked along the pavement at Vauxhall Cross, near Vauxhall Bridge, on
22 March 2008.
She was hospitalised for five weeks, including several days in intensive care, and required
significant brain surgery. She is no longer able to work and continues to suffer from multiple
permanent effects of her injury.
St George South London Ltd (SGSL), an agent for site owner St George Plc, and A E Tyler
Ltd (AETL), then trading as Allsigns, who supplied, erected and carried out cosmetic
maintenance of the sign, were both prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
for allowing it to become a safety risk.
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
52
The HSE investigation established that the sign had a design life of two years, but had been
in position for over nine years and had never once in that time been checked for structural
soundness parts of the timber sign, measuring approximately 12 metres by 3 metres and
positioned more than 3m above the pavement, had decayed to the point that it was blown
down by a strong gust of wind..
The full press release may be found at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2013/rnn-ldn-sgsl-
aetl.htm?eban=govdel-public-sector&cr=26-Sep-2013
Safety Legislation Update; October 2013
53