Risk Profile Bulletin version 6
This report is issued by:
Rail Safety and Standards Board
If you would like to give feedback on any of the material contained in this
report, or if you have any suggestions for future editions, please contact:
George Bearfield
RSSB
Block 2, Angel Square
1 Torrens Street
London EC1V 1NY
020 3142 5464
risk@rssb.co.uk
© RAIL SAFETY AND STANDARDS BOARD LTD. 2009 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
This publication may be reproduced free of charge for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is
subject to it being reproduced and referenced accurately and not being used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged
as the copyright of Rail Safety and Standards Board and the title of the publication specified accordingly. For any other use of the material
please apply to the Risk Team for permission. This publication can be accessed via the RSSB website www.rssb.co.uk.
Printed June 2009
Page left blank intentionally
Contents
Contents
Executive Summary
vii
1
Introduction
1
2
SRM Objectives
3
3
System Boundaries and Changes to the SRM
4
3.1
Overview
4
3.2
Key assumptions and exclusions
5
3.3
Significant changes to SRMv6
5
4
Total Risk on the Mainline Railway
6
5
Overall Risk Profiles
9
5.1
6
7
Discussion
10
HLOS Requirements
14
6.1
Passenger safety metric
15
6.2
Staff safety metric
15
Detailed Risk Profiles
16
7.1
Risk by accident type
16
7.1.1
Train accidents
16
7.1.2
Movement accidents
18
7.1.3
Non-movement accidents
20
7.1.4
Trespass accidents
22
7.2
Risk by person type
24
7.2.1
Passenger risk
24
7.2.2
Workforce risk
27
7.2.3
Public risk
29
8
SSP Key Risk Areas
31
9
Individual Risk
34
9.1
Introduction
34
9.2
Fatality risk
35
9.3
Passengers
35
9.4
Workforce
37
9.4.1
Track workers
38
9.4.2
Passenger train drivers
38
9.4.3
Freight train drivers
39
9.5
10
Members of the public
40
Multiple Fatality Risk: The F-N Curve
41
10.1 F-N results
41
10.2 F-N modelling approach
42
Version 6.1 – June 2009
i
Contents
11
Passenger Train Derailments
45
11.1 Impact of changes upon risk
45
11.1.1
Overall change from SRMv4 to SRMv6
45
11.1.2
Contributions from derailment speeds
46
11.1.3
SRMv6 consequences with and without containment
47
12
Using Risk Information to Support Decisions
48
13
SRM Governance and RPB Updates
50
13.1 SRM practitioners working group
50
13.2 Independent review of the SRM
50
13.3 Update history
51
13.4 Future updates
51
14
Injury Weightings
53
15
Access to the model and its outputs
54
15.1 The SRM
54
15.2 The RPB document
54
15.3 SRM guidance
54
15.4 Templates
54
15.5 Assistance
55
16
Contributors
56
17
References
57
18
Glossary
58
List of Acronyms
62
Appendix A: SRMv6 Risk Estimates by Hazardous Event
65
Appendix A1
A.1
Appendix A2
SRMv6 results by hazardous event
65
Frequency, consequence, and risk estimates by hazardous event
65
Changes in the risk profile
106
A.2.1
Passenger risk
106
A.2.2
Workforce risk
108
A.2.3
Public risk
110
A.2.4
Assaults risk
111
Appendix B: Table B1
113
Appendix C: Key Risk Areas and Selected Risk Groupings
115
Appendix D: Individual Risk
117
Appendix E: Modelling Approach
122
E.1
ii
Risk at level crossings
123
E.1.1
Overview
123
E.1.2
Background
123
E.1.3
Level crossing hazardous events and sub-hazardous events
123
E.1.4
Road vehicle collisions (HET-10 and HET-11)
124
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Contents
E.2
E.3
E.4
E.1.5
Passenger and MOP collisions (HEM-11 and HEM-27)
126
E.1.6
Non-movement hazardous events (HEN-44, HEN-46 and HEN-75)
126
Derailment risk
127
E.2.1
128
Details of Passenger train derailments
Use of loading and timetable data in the SRM
130
E.3.1
SRM train loadings
131
E.3.2
Changes for SRMv6
131
Risk inside possessions
133
E.4.1
Train accident risk inside possessions
133
E.4.2
Movement accident risk inside possessions
135
E.4.3
Non-movement accident risk inside possessions
136
E.4.4
Possession risk figures
136
E.5
Normaliser data
139
E.6
Revised approach to trending using normalisers
141
E.6.1
142
Example of the normalised event count technique in HEM/HEN analysis
Appendix F: Key Assumptions and Hazardous Event Definitions
Version 6.1 – June 2009
145
iii
Contents
List of Charts
Chart 1.
Chart 2.
Chart 3.
Chart 4.
Chart 5.
Chart 6.
Chart 7.
Chart 8.
Chart 9.
Chart 10.
Chart 11.
Chart 12.
Chart 13.
Chart 14.
Chart 15.
Chart 16.
Chart 17.
Chart 18.
Chart 19.
Chart 20.
Chart 21.
Chart 22.
Chart 23.
Chart A1.
Chart A2.
Chart A3.
Chart A4.
Chart E1.
Chart E2.
Chart E3.
iv
System boundaries
Total risk profile for passengers, workforce, and MOP
Combined risk profile in FWI/year
Combined risk profile in fatalities/year
Risk profiles for train accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for movement accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for non-movement accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for trespass accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for passenger accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for workforce accidents in FWI/year
Risk profiles for public accidents excluding trespass in FWI/year
Breakdown of SRMv6 by risk area group (inner ring) and risk area (outer ring)
HSE individual risk targets
Fatality risk for each person type
Passenger individual risk by event type
Fatality risk for the workforce
Track worker individual risk
Passenger train driver individual risk
Freight train driver individual risk
Frequency of train accident-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities (events/year)
F-N Curve for all train accident hazardous events
Average speed of passenger train derailments
Timeline for future updates of the SRM and the RPB
Top 10 risk changes in passenger risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 – FWI/year
Top 10 risk changes in workforce risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 – FWI/year
Top 10 risk changes in public risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 – FWI/year
Change in assaults risk profile – from SRMv5.5 toSRMv6
Distribution of derailment speeds
Distribution of train km by time of day and train loading.
Use of normalised event counts for analysis of HEN-14: PSTRUNSPEE.
4
8
11
13
17
19
21
23
26
28
30
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
39
42
43
45
52
107
109
111
112
128
132
142
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Contents
List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Table 12.
Table 13.
Table 14.
Table 15.
Table A1.
Table A1.
Table A1.
Table A2.
Table A3.
Table A4.
Table A5.
Table B1.
Table C1.
Table C2.
Table C3.
Table D1.
Table E1.
Table E2.
Table E3.
Table E4.
Table E5.
Table E6.
Table E7.
Table E8.
Table E9.
Table E10.
Table F1.
Table F2.
Total risk by accident category
6
Total risk by person category
7
Total risk to each person type from each accident category
7
Event type description
9
Grouped risk figures for SRMv6
31
Selected SRMv6 risk groupings
33
Total passenger individual risk
36
Workforce individual risk
38
Frequency of train-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities
41
Return periods of train-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities
41
SRMv4 to SRMv6 differences
46
Contribution from derailment speeds (on open track only)
46
Impact of containment on SRMv6 risk (open track only)
47
SRM update history
51
Injury degrees and weightings
53
List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HETs)
67
List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HEMs)
73
List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HENs)
81
Reasons for changes in reported frequency and risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6
89
Change in passenger risk
106
Change in workforce risk
108
Change in public risk
110
Cause precursor risk contributions
Available electronically
Grouped precursor risk contributions
Available electronically
Grouped precursor fatality contributions
Available electronically
Selected risk groupings – summary of Table C2
115
Individual risk data for SRMv6
119
The Crossing types considered for each hazardous event
125
Typical event tree end descriptions
130
Train loading bands
131
Final train loadings for SRMv6
132
SRMv6 HEN possession figures
136
Possession risk for all train hazardous events (HETs) for SRMv6
137
Possession risk for movement hazardous events (HEMs) for SRMv6
137
Possession risk for non-movement hazardous events (HENs) for SRMv6
138
Normaliser data for SRMv6
139
Normalisers used for SRMv6 HEM/HEN analysis
143
Assumptions relating to the SRM modelling processes
145
Hazardous event definitions
Available electronically
Version 6.1 – June 2009
v
Page left blank intentionally
vi
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The Safety Risk Model (SRM) consists of a series of fault tree and event tree models
representing 120 hazardous events which, collectively, define the overall level of risk on the
mainline railway. It provides a structured representation of the causes and consequences of
potential accidents arising from railway operations and maintenance. The reported risk
estimates relate to the network-wide risk situation, and they indicate the current level of
‘residual risk’ (i.e. the level of risk remaining with the current risk control measures in place
and with their current degree of effectiveness).
Version 6 of the model (SRMv6) comprises a full update of all train accidents (HETs),
movement accidents (HEMs), and non-movement accidents (HENs) using data from
incidents up to and including September 30th 2008. In addition to this data refresh, a number
of substantial modelling changes have been undertaken.
The Department for Transport (DfT) and the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) are using the
outputs of SRM as the primary means of measuring the performance of the industry against
the High Level Output Specification (HLOS) safety metrics. The risk estimates provided in
SRMv6 therefore provide the initial baseline against which safety performance through
Control Period 4 (April 2009 to March 2014) will be compared. In light of this, SRMv6 was
subjected to an independent peer review conducted by the Health and Safety Laboratory
(HSL), and the recommendations from the review were incorporated into SRMv6.
Headlines
Overall Risk
SRMv6 indicates that the overall level of risk predicted for the railway is 141.3 FWI/year
(excluding suicides). This represents a decrease of 3.4% from the figure of 146.3 FWI/year
reported in SRMv5.5 (May 2008). Note that these figures now include the risk from assaults
which was previously excluded (due to data quality issues that have now been resolved).
Risk by Person Type
The overall figure of 141.3 FWI/year can be broken down by each exposed group as follows:
Passenger
54.4 FWI/year
Workforce
29.8 FWI/year
Member of public
57.2 FWI/year
Passenger risk has increased by 3% since version 5.5. However, over the same period
passenger journeys have increased by 4%. Therefore, this increase in risk is mainly due to
the use of industry data (passenger journeys and passenger kms) to normalise the risk
estimates and is therefore not considered to be indicative of any real increase in underlying
risk. This new method of modelling has been implemented in response to one of the
recommendations made in the independent SRM peer review and the risk estimates are now
considered to be more robust than before.
Workforce risk is now 29.8 FWI/year, representing a 10% reduction since version 5.5. This
reduction is largely considered to be a real change in the underlying risk. It is due to a
Version 6.1 – June 2009
vii
Executive Summary
number of risk reductions across the models, but is mainly accounted for by decreases in the
following event types:
Workforce slip, trip or falls
Workforce struck by object outside station
Workforce struck/crushed due to structural collapse
Workforce assault
Track worker struck/crushed by train
Risk to the public also shows a reduction, in this case 5%, when compared with the version
5.5 figure. Given the tolerances associated with the risk estimates, this is not considered to
indicate any significant change in the underlying risk.
Risk by Accident Type
Alternatively, the overall risk figure of 141.3 can be broken down by accident type as follows:
Train accidents (HETs)
7.7 FWI/year
Movement accidents (HEMs)
56.1 FWI/year
Non-movement accidents (HEMs)
77.5 FWI/year
HETs have seen a 21% reduction in risk since version 5.5, the majority of which is due to a
genuine risk reduction (a small amount of which is attributable to improved modelling). HEMs
and HENs have seen reductions of 3% and 2% respectively.
HLOS Safety Metrics
The SRMv6 figures have been used to derive the baseline HLOS safety metrics. These have
been calculated as follows:
Baseline passenger safety metric - 1.070 FWI per billion passenger kilometres
Baseline workforce safety metric - 0.134 FWI per million worker hours
The risk results from SRMv6 are presented as a measure of the absolute risk on the mainline
railway. As with any risk assessment, the results are estimates and should only be
considered as a guide to the overall risk and the relative risk contributions from each of the
120 identified hazardous events. The risk estimates should therefore only be used as an
input into, and not as a substitute for, decision taking.
viii
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Introduction
1
Introduction
RSSB works with its members to support the development of safety strategies, set
standards, and monitor and report on the safety performance of the industry. An
understanding of the overall risk level and risk profile of the railway is a key foundation for
this role. We support our members – the railway industry – by providing risk information to
help them benchmark their performance. This in turn helps them formulate their own safety
policies, plans, and measures. The Safety Risk Model (SRM) provides the network-wide risk
profile and this information is communicated to the industry in a range of ways, the primary
one being this Risk Profile Bulletin (RPB).
Version 6 of the SRM (SRMv6) consists of a series of fault tree and event tree models
representing 120 hazardous events, which collectively define the overall level of risk on the
mainline railway. It provides a structured representation of the causes and consequences of
potential accidents arising from railway operations and maintenance on the mainline railway
as well as other areas where RSSB has a commitment to record and report accidents.
The SRM has been designed to take account of both high-frequency, low-consequence
events (occurring routinely, and for which there is a significant quantity of recorded data) and
low-frequency, high-consequence events (occurring rarely, and for which there is little
recorded data). The results for each hazardous event are presented in terms of the
frequency of occurrence (number of events per year) and the risk (number of fatalities and
weighted injuries (FWI) per year). The FWI weightings equate injuries of differing degree
with a fatality event, which allows all of the risk on the railway to be totalled and contrasted in
comparable units. Section 14 contains a more detailed explanation and definition of the
current FWI weightings in use.
The risk estimates presented can be used to support particular risk assessments and for
judging how the risk relating to particular operations compares with and contributes to the
network-wide risk.
The information contained in this document relates to the network-wide risk on the mainline
railway covering all running lines, rolling stock types, and stations currently in use. Risk
associated with non-mainline areas, such as with yards, depots, sidings, or station car parks,
is not included. The system boundaries for SRMv6 are detailed in Section 3. The risk
estimates are for the current level of ‘residual risk’ on the mainline railway. ‘Residual risk’
means the level of risk remaining with the current risk control measures in place and with
their current degree of effectiveness. The cut-off date for incident data used to inform the
model was September 30th 2008.1
Because of the network-wide nature of the SRM, it is necessary to make average
assumptions that represent the general characteristics of the network. The model also hinges
on the definitions of the hazardous events and precursors by which risk estimates are
reported. These assumptions and definitions are included in Appendix F, and a thorough
understanding of them is essential to the correct interpretation and use of the risk information
reported here. Risk profiles for specific lines of route and train operating companies are not
1
There are two hazardous event models that are exceptions to this data cut-off: HEM-25 and HEM-31.
The nature of the incidents covered by these models means that confident coding of events contained
within them necessitates an earlier data cut-off date.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
1
Introduction
provided through the SRM. Without further localised analysis, the information in this bulletin
should not be considered to be representative of the risk for any particular line of route or
train operating company.
The SRM Practitioners Working Group (SRMPWG) is the industry governance body for the
SRM. It was formed under the authority of the Safety Policy Group (SPG) to engage
stakeholders in the development and control of future versions of the SRM and its related
outputs. Section 13 contains more information regarding this group and its aims.
The DfT is using the outputs of SRMv6 as the primary means of measuring the performance
of the industry against the HLOS safety metrics, rather than using a measure of safety
performance based solely on accident statistics. The risk estimates provided in SRMv6
therefore provide the initial baseline against which to compare safety performance through
Control Period 4 (April 2009 to March 2014).
The main part of the document sets out:
The objectives of the SRM (page 3)
System boundaries and changes for version 6 (page 4)
Total risk on the mainline railway (page 6)
Overall risk profile (page 9)
Details of the HLOS requirements (page 14)
Detailed risk profiles (page 16)
Access to the model and its outputs, can be found on page 54 (Section 15), where details on
how to download parts of the following appendices may be found.
Appendix A contains frequency, consequence and risk estimates for each hazardous event
(Table A1), and describes the changes since version 5.5 in detail (Table A2).
Appendix B contains frequency and risk contributions for all precursors leading to each
hazardous event (Table B1 – this is contained within a separate volume).
Appendix C contains a breakdown of risk into the key risk areas (Table C1: available for
download) plus selected risk groupings (Table C2: available for download).
Appendix D contains details of the key assumptions used in calculating individual risk along
with a summary of the calculations for each person type (Table D1).
Appendix E contains details of the modelling approach implemented for version 6.
Appendix F contains a list of all of the assumptions and definitions (Table F1: available for
download) related to the analysis and update of the hazardous events for version 6.
2
Version 6.1 – June 2009
SRM Objectives
2
SRM Objectives
The primary objectives of the SRM are:
To provide an understanding of the nature of the current risk on the mainline railway.
To provide risk information and risk profiles relating to the mainline railway.
The SRM has been developed and published to support RSSB members. Its specific
purpose is to provide risk estimates for use in risk assessments, appraisals, and decisions
throughout the railway industry. This includes:
To enable ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable) assessments and cost-benefit
analyses to be carried out to support decisions taken about:
•
Additional control measures which would reduce risk.
•
Technical modifications and upgrades such as new infrastructure investment.
•
Revision of Railway Group Standards (RGS), in terms of their contribution to risk
mitigation (including development of impact assessments for proposed changes to
RGS).
To provide useful risk information to support:
•
The development of priorities for the industry’s Strategic Safety Plan (SSP) [Ref. 1].
•
Prioritisation of areas for research on the railway.
•
Transport operator risk assessments, as required by the ROGS (Railways and
Other Guided transport Systems) regulations.
•
Identification and prioritisation of issues for audit.
To provide an understanding about the contribution of a particular item of equipment or
failure mode to the overall risk.
To provide risk estimates to be used as the basis of the HLOS safety metrics.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
3
Changes to Version 6
3
System Boundaries and Changes to the SRM
3.1
Overview
The SRM includes the safety risk from incidents which could occur during the operation and
maintenance of the mainline railway within the boundaries defined in Chart 1 below. There
have been no changes in scope for version 6.
Chart 1.
System boundaries
IN SRM SCOPE
NOT IN SRM SCOPE
People
People
-
Passengers on trains.
-
The SRM does not quantify the
risk to staff due to long-term
occupational health issues.
-
Railway workers on trains.
-
Risk associated with terrorist
activity is excluded.
-
Railway workers involved in road traffic accidents
while on duty.
-
MOP (not passengers) outside the mainline railway or
legitimately crossing the mainline railway (i.e. on level
crossings).
Passengers at stations within areas to which they have
legitimate access.
Railway workers in public areas at stations.
Railway workers working on or near the line.
Railway workers in signal boxes, signalling centres, or
electrical control offices.
-
MOP who enter the mainline railway with no legitimate
purpose (e.g. trespassers including passengers who
enter areas for which they have no legitimate access).
-
Events associated with vandalism and MOPs falling or
trespassing on the mainline railway are also included.
-
Suicides and MOP assaults are quantified but not
included in the overall results discussion.
Yards, sidings and depots
-
Events occurring within yards,
sidings, and depots are not
included within the SRM.
-
However, those events relating to
the movement of trains entering
and leaving yards, sidings, and
depots, and events relating to the
condition of trains joining the
system from the depots have been
included.
In Stations
-
Non-public areas at stations, i.e.
the work side of a ticket office
(however, where a member of the
workforce is assaulted by a
member of the public who is on the
public side of the office, this has
been included).
-
Retail outlets within stations.
-
Offices.
On Trains
-
All on-train events.
-
All accidents related to the movement of OTP that
occur within possessions.
Events on the mainline railway which affect trains
including level crossings.
In Stations
-
4
All public areas associated with the movement of
passengers and staff inside the physical boundaries of
stations.
Station toilets.
Everything road-side of stations
(e.g. station access roads, car
parks and forecourts, and taxi
ranks).
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Changes to Version 6
3.2
Key assumptions and exclusions
Table F1 (in Appendix F) lists key assumptions that are applicable to the SRM, including
exclusions from the model setup. Further clarity on the definitions and assumptions
applicable to individual hazardous events can be provided on request.
3.3
Significant changes to SRMv6
A number of significant changes have been made for this update of the SRM. SRMv6
comprises a full update of all train accidents (HETs), movement accidents (HEMs) and nonmovement accidents (HENs) using data from incidents occurring up to and including
September 30th 2008.2 In addition to this data refresh a number of substantial modelling
changes have been undertaken as follows:
The level crossing models (HET-10 and HET-11) have been substantially re-modelled
to align with the All Level Crossing Risk Model (ALCRM). For more information, see
Section E.1 in Appendix E.
The train derailment models (HET-12 and HET-13) have been restructured to include
better modelling of high-speed derailments. Separate models now exist for low-speed
(0-15mph), medium speed (15-75mph), and high-speed derailments (75-125mph).
For more information see Section E.2.
All train loading distributions have been updated for consistency with the loading
assumptions used in the Network Modelling Framework (NMF) model [Ref. 2]. For
more information see Section E.3.
Previously, the SRM included specific sub-hazardous events for ‘on-track plant’
(OTP) operation. SRMv6 dispenses with on-track plant risk to concentrate on ‘inside
possession’ and ‘outside possession’ risk. For more details of the modelling change,
see Section E.4.
The model for collision of train with object on line (not resulting in derailment) (HET04) now includes all incidents where passengers or train crew are struck by objects
that are thrown through windows (previously HEM-04 and HEM-18).
Previously, the risk from train fires that originated on trains outside stations (HET-18)
was modelled separately from train fires originating inside stations (HET-17). Both of
these models have now been amalgamated into a single model HET-17 Fire on
passenger trains.
In a number of cases the analysis of movement and non-movement accidents has
been modified to take account of normalised event counts. This results in the data
trends for SRMv6 being analysed using these normalised event counts, rather than
using only the observed event counts as in previous versions of the SRM. This
change results from a recommendation made in the independent review of the SRM
[Ref. 3]. More information on this approach is provided in Section E.6.
2
There are two hazardous event models that are exceptions to this data cut-off: HEM-25 and HEM-31.
The nature of the incidents covered by these models means that confident coding of the events
contained within them necessitates an earlier data cut-off date.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
Total Risk on the Mainline Railway
4
Total Risk on the Mainline Railway
This section presents the overall risk results for the 120 hazardous events on the mainline
railway which are considered within the SRM. The risk results are separated into train
accidents (HETs), movement accidents (HEMs), and non-movement accidents (HENs) – see
Table 1. They are also presented in terms of passengers, workforce, and members of the
public (MOP) – see Table 2.
It should be noted that total figures presented here exclude the direct risk from MOP suicides
and attempted suicides. However, all other passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from these
events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing a suicide or attempted suicide, or secondary
injuries received in attempting to prevent suicide, have been included. Total risk figures for
version 5.5 in Table 2 and Table 3 have been adjusted to include assaults. In addition, ontrack plant (OTP) incidents inside possessions are now modelled as inside possession
(POS) risk and OTP incidents outside possessions are now modelled as non-passenger train
risk. This means that the figures in Table 1 cannot be directly compared with version 5.5.
Table 1.
Total risk by accident category
Accident Category
FWI/year
Fatalities/
year
Major
injuries/
year
NonReportable
Class 1
Class 2
reportable
minor
shock/
shock/
minor
injuries/yr
trauma/yr trauma/yr
injuries/yr
Train Accidents (excl POS)
Movement Accidents (excl
POS and Trespass)
Non-movement Accidents
(excl POS and Trespass)
7.4
5.6
14.1
74.3
36.2
1.3
24.0
24.7
13.9
65.6
312.7
1554.1
209.9
53.3
59.0
8.0
335.0
1580.4
7538.6
1.5
2026.2
Inside possession
9.9
2.1
60.2
149.2
1027.5
2.0
4.5
40.3
37.3
26.7
19.3
9.8
28.4
1.1
141.3
67.0
501.5
2136.0
10166.2
243.2
2109.1
Trespass
Total
Note: The risk from MOP suicides and attempted suicides has been excluded, but all passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide, has been included.
Figures in Table 1 show that the total risk from the 120 hazardous events on this basis is
assessed to be 141.3 FWI/year. The details of the breakdown of this figure are shown in the
table. In particular, this includes 67.0 fatalities/year.
This compares to 146.3 FWI/year for version 5.5 (updated from the previously reported figure
of 137.4 FWI/year to include assaults).3 It is not possible to compare the breakdown with
version 5.5 directly, as explained above.
Table 2 shows the risk to each person category on the railway. Despite a 5% reduction since
version 5.5, MOP risk still forms the greatest proportion of the total risk, at 57.2 FWI/year.
This is mainly due to a large number of fatalities from trespassing events. Total MOP risk is
closely followed by the total passenger risk, which has seen an increase of 3% from 52.8 to
54.4 FWI/year.
3
Due to a data quality research project undertaken by RSSB and BTP, culminating in better data
quality, passenger and MOP assaults have been significantly remodelled – see Appendix A for details.
6
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Total Risk on the Mainline Railway
Table 2.
Total risk by person category
Version 6
Person
category
Fatalities/
FWI/year
year
Major
injuries/
year
Version 5.5
NonReportable
Class 1
Class 2
reportable
minor
shock/
shock/
minor
injuries/yr
trauma/yr trauma/yr
injuries/yr
FWI/year
%
Change
Passenger
54.4
11.3
303.8
1387.4
4881.4
0.5
879.5
52.8
3%
Workforce
29.8
4.7
142.7
670.8
5094.1
241.2
1165.9
33.1
-10%
MOP
57.2
51.0
54.9
77.7
190.8
1.4
63.8
60.4
-5%
Total
141.3
67.0
501.4
2136.0
10166.2
243.1
2109.1
146.3
-3%
Note: The risk from MOP suicides and attempted suicides has been excluded, but all passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide, has been included.
The increase in passenger risk can be substantially attributed to the use of industry data
(passenger journeys and passenger km) to normalise the risk estimates (this is explained in
detail in Section E.6 in Appendix E) and is therefore not considered to be indicative of any
real increase in underlying risk. However, the workforce risk is now 29.8 FWI/year,
representing a 10% reduction since version 5.5, and is considered to be a real change in
underlying risk.
Table 3 presents the total FWI/year, broken down into person type and accident categories.
The table shows that HETs have seen a 21% reduction in risk since SRMv5.5. This large
reduction in risk is considered to be partly due to a genuine risk reduction, most notably a
reduction in derailments (see Appendix A2 for more detail), and partly due to modelling
changes (see Appendix E). HEMs and HENs have seen reductions of 3% and 2%
respectively and, as these contribute a large proportion of the risk, the total reduction in risk
since version 5.5 is 3%.
Table 3.
Total risk to each person type from each accident category
Hazardous
Passenger
event
FWI/year
Version 6
Workforce
MOP
FWI/year
FWI/year
Total
FWI/year
Version 5.5
% change
Total
FWI/year
HET
3.2
1.2
3.3
7.7
9.7
-21%
HEM
11.9
6.6
37.7
56.1
57.7
-3%
HEN
39.3
21.9
16.3
77.5
78.9
-2%
Total
54.4
29.8
57.2
141.3
146.3
-3%
Note: The risk from MOP suicides and attempted suicides has been excluded, but all passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide, has been included.
Chart 2 presents the total risk profile for passengers, workforce, and MOP. It shows that the
bulk of the total risk is split evenly between passengers and MOP, with 39% and 40%
respectively – the remaining proportion (21%) results from workforce incidents. The profiles
of the injuries in the person type categories have remained similar to version 5.5 with
approximately 50% of the risk to passengers and workforce resulting from major injuries.
Fatalities still dominate MOP risk with 90% of the risk – this is due to MOP trespass events
contributing 37.3 fatalities per year.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
7
Total Risk on the Mainline Railway
Class 1 shock/ trauma (4.1%)
Reportable minor injuries
(11.3%)
Non-reportable minor injuries
(17.1%)
Fatalities (15.7%)
Major injuries (48.0%)
Non-reportable minor injuries
(9.0%)
Class 2 shock/ trauma (1.6%)
Class 2 shock/ trauma (3.9%)
PASSENGER
39%
MEMBER OF
THE PUBLIC
40%
Fatalities (89.3%)
Reportable minor injuries
(0.7%)
Major injuries (9.6%)
WORKFORCE
21%
Major injuries (55.9%)
Reportable minor injuries
(12.8%)
Total risk profile for passengers, workforce, and MOP - including % of total
FWI/yr
Fatalities (20.8%)
Total risk = 141.3 FWI/yr
Chart 2.
Note: The risk from MOP suicide and attempted suicides has been excluded, but all passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide, has been included. The chart does not
show injury categories that contribute <0.5% of the risk for each person type, e.g. class 1 shock/trauma to passengers.
8
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Overall Risk Profiles
5
Overall Risk Profiles
In this section the hazardous events (HEs) have been grouped into 18 event types.
Combining the hazardous events in this manner allows us to identify readily the types of
events that contribute the greatest proportion of risk to the overall figure. The hazardous
events have been grouped as shown in Table 4.
Table 4.
Event type description
Event type
Description
Hazardous events
Assaults
Assaults on passengers, members of
the workforce and MOP.
HEN-64, 65, 66
Boarding and
alighting
HEs related to boarding and alighting
trains while in the station.
HEM-05, 06, 09, 16, 21,
23
Collision with road
vehicle at level
crossing
Collision with RVs by passenger trains,
non-passenger trains and OTP.
HET-10, 11
Contact with
object
Events relating to objects striking
passengers; members of the workforce;
or MOP.
HEM-20, 32, 38, 39, 42
Electric shock
HEs related to electric shock to
passengers, members of the workforce,
or MOP.
HEN-09, 10, 11, 30, 31,
32, 51, 52, 53
Fires and
explosions
Fires or explosions on trains; in
stations; or on the mainline railway.
HET-17, 20, 23, 24,
HEN-01, 02, 03, 04, 05,
48, 49
Lean or fall from
train in running
HEs relating to injuries caused by
passengers or staff leaning or falling
from trains in running.
HEM-03, 15, 17, 44
Machinery
operation
HEs relating to workforce injuries, e.g.
being trapped in machinery or burns
due to welding.
HEN-22, 27, 28
Manual handling
Injuries due to manual handling by
passengers or staff.
HEN-73, 74
On-train incidents
HEs occurring on trains not included in
any other category.
HEN-62, 63
Platform edge
incidents
Incidents occurring or originating on
platforms.
HEM-08, 10, 40, 41, 43,
HEN-13, 67
Slips, trips, and
falls (incl. from
height)
HEs relating to slips, trips, and falls for
passengers, staff, and MOP, including
falls from a considerable height (e.g.
roofs, scaffolding, etc).
HEN-14, 15, 16, 24, 25,
45, 46, 68
Struck/crushed by
large
object/structure
HEs relating to structural collapse,
injuries from level crossing equipment,
etc.
HET-21, HEM-29,
HEN-21, 23, 26, 35B, 44,
55, 56, 59, 75
Version 6.1 – June 2009
9
Overall Risk Profiles
5.1
Event type
Description
Hazardous events
Struck/crushed by
train
Passengers, members of the workforce
and MOP being struck at level
crossings on the mainline railways and
inside possessions.
HEM-11, 14, 19, 27
Suicide S/T
Suicide shock/trauma, excluding injuries
to the attempted suicide victim.
HEM-31
Train collisions
and derailments
Collisions between trains, collisions with
buffer stops and derailments, excluding
collisions with RVs at level crossing.
HET-01, 02, 03, 04, 06,
09, 26
Trespass
HEs relating to trespassing on the
railway.
HEM-12, 25, 26, 30,
HEN-36, 37, 38, 39, 40,
41, 42, 43, 71, 72
Other
HEs which do not fit easily into the
above categories.
HET-22, 25, HEM-01, 07,
13, 07, 08, 17, 22, 29, 33,
35A, 50, 54, 57, 58, 60, 61
Discussion
Chart 3 presents the risk profile in FWI/year and indicates the percentage change in risk
between versions 5.5 and 6 for each of the 18 hazardous event types listed above. The
greatest overall risk contribution results from Trespass with 40.3 FWI/year, which is
dominated by fatality risk.
However, this change, which relates mainly to HEM-25 Adult trespasser struck/crushed while
on the mainline railway, results predominantly from a modelling change rather than a
genuine change in risk. Review of the version 6 data for HEM-25 identified that the delayed
receipt of the coroner’s verdict in trespasser and suspected suicide cases results in
inaccuracies in the prediction of risk for these events. As a result, the end of 2007 was
chosen as the version 6 data cut-off time for these events, rather than the end of September
2008 (which applies to version 6 in general). In addition, a five-year dataset was used, rather
than the three-year dataset used in version 5.5, in order to more effectively reflect the longterm changes in the rate of trespass.
The next highest contribution results from Slips, trips, and falls, with 37.1 FWI/year – this
hazardous event has seen a slight overall decrease of 1% since version 5.5. However, the
passenger risk component has seen an increase of 6%. This increase can partly be
explained by the increased number of passenger journeys and how these have now been
modelled (see Section E.6 in Appendix E).
The group with the greatest increase in risk is Lean or fall from train in running, with an
increase of 244% since version 5.5. Although this is a large percentage change, the actual
increase is only 0.52 FWI/year. This is mainly due to an increase in the estimate of fatality
risk in this category – as the risk estimate is small it is very sensitive to changes in the
number of incidents observed. The next greatest increase in risk is from Platform edge
incidents, which have seen an increase of 18% to 4.6 FWI/year.
10
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
0.961 (+1%)
0.775 (+5%)
Suicide S/T
Fires, explosions
Machinery operation
0.363 (-6%)
0.727 (+244%)
0.983 (0%)
Other
Lean or fall from train in running
1.15 (-6%)
1.19 (-39%)
1.71 (-16%)
Manual handling
Electric shock
Contact with object
2.8 (-21%)
4.59 (-29%)
Train Collisions and derailments
5.85 (+5%)
12.2 (-2%)
15
10.7 (+4%)
7.43 (-6%)
4.61 (+18%)
Collision with road vehicle at level crossing
10
7.91 (-1%)
Platform edge incidents
On-train incidents
Struck/crushed by large object/structure
Boarding and alighting
Struck/crushed by train
Assaults
5
20
25
30
35
40.3 (-6%)
45
MOP
Workforce
Passenger
37.1 (-1%)
40
Chart 3.
Slips, trips and falls (incl from height)
Trespass
0
Overall Risk Profiles
Combined risk profile in FWI/year - includes % change from version 5.5
11
Overall Risk Profiles
The event type with the greatest decrease in risk is Electric shock, which has fallen 39%
since version 5.5. This is due to a decrease in the frequency of reported electric shock
events. Again, this risk estimate is small and is therefore sensitive to change in the number
of incidents. The next greatest decrease in risk is from Train collisions and derailments,
which has decreased to 4.59 FWI/year, dropping 29% from version 5.5. This is largely due to
a genuine reduction in our risk estimate for derailments of 1.2 FWI/year (HET-12 and 13).
The group that presents the highest risk to passengers is Slips, trips, and falls, which
contributes 25.4 FWI/year, or 47% of the overall risk to passengers, followed by Assaults
which contributes 8.0 FWI/year. The greatest workforce risk also comes from the Slips, trips,
and falls event type, with the second highest contribution coming from Struck/crushed by
large object/structure. The MOP risk contribution is dominated by trespass, which accounts
for 70% of the risk to MOP, followed by Struck/crushed by train with 13%.
Chart 4 shows the risk by event type in fatalities/year. Fatality risk is dominated by Trespass
events, which accounts for more than half, (37.3 fatalities/year). The group with the second
highest fatality contribution is Struck/crushed by train which contributes 10.3 fatalities per
year, a rise of 4% since version 5.5. Despite seeing a reduction of 20% in fatality risk, Slips,
trips, and falls is the third highest contributor, although this is a far smaller contribution when
compared to the FWI risk/year.
The group with the greatest increase in fatality risk is Lean or fall from train in running, which
has displayed a 430% increase since version 5.5. As there are so few fatalities in this
category (0.56 fatalities/year), estimates of fatality risk are sensitive to change, hence large
percentage changes can occur. The group with the greatest decrease in overall risk is
Contact with object, with a 73% decrease since version 5.5. Again, this is sensitive to small
changes because it only contributes 0.013 fatalities/year.
12
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
0.95 (-37%)
Electric shock
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
Manual handling
Suicide S/T
0.0128 (-73%)
Contact with object
0 (0%)
0.0773 (+10%)
Machinery operation
On-train incident
0.433 (-7%)
0.524 (+14%)
Other
Struck/crushed by large object/structure
0.542 (+5%)
Fires, explosions
0.555 (+430%)
1.05 (+8%)
Lean or fall from train in running
2.4 (-22%)
3.11 (+23%)
1.74 (+39%)
Boarding and alighting
Assaults
Collision with road vehicle at level crossing
Platform edge incidents
Train Collisions and derailments
Slips, trips and falls (incl from height)
3
4.59 (-3%)
4.78 (-20%)
6
9
10.3 (+4%)
12
37
Public
Workforce
Passenger
37.3 (-6%)
40
Chart 4.
Struck/crushed by train
Trespass
0
Overall Risk Profiles
Combined risk profile in fatalities/year - includes % change from version 5.5
13
HLOS Requirements
6
HLOS Requirements
The government’s white paper Delivering a Sustainable Railway [Ref. 4] sets out the High
Level Output Specification (HLOS). This describes the improvements in safety, reliability, and
capacity that the government wants the industry to deliver during Control Period 4 (CP4,
April 2009 to March 2014) and the Statement of Funds Available (SoFA) to secure these
improvements.
The improvements in safety are quoted in terms of a reduction in two safety metrics. These
state that there should be a 3% reduction in the national level of risk for both passengers and
workforce over Control Period 4. The passenger risk is expressed as fatalities and weighted
injuries (FWI) per billion passenger kilometres, whilst the workforce risk is expressed as FWI
per million employee hours.
The Department for Transport (DfT) is using SRMv6 as the primary means of measuring the
performance of the industry against these safety metrics, rather than using a measure of
safety performance based on accident statistics. This is because for rare high-consequence
events the rate of occurrence of accidents over any given period does not provide a good
measure of underlying safety performance. The risk estimates from SRMv6 are being used in
order to calculate the baseline risk from which the 3% reduction will be measured.
As agreed with the DfT and ORR, the metrics exclude SRMv6 risk estimates for non-physical
assaults. In addition, the workforce risk estimate does not include the risk from Workforce
involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty (HEN-35A) as this is not considered to be
within the scope of the SRMv6 safety monitoring in relation to the operation and maintenance
of the railway.
DfT has confirmed that the HLOS metrics exclude the risk associated with ‘High Speed 1’
services. Although SRMv6 does not include any specific model of the train accident risk
associated with these services, some of the hazardous event risk estimates in SRMv6 make
use of Eurostar incident data. Therefore, some risk associated with movement and nonmovement accidents has been extracted from the SRMv6 risk estimate used as the basis of
the HLOS metrics.
According to the scope definition of SRMv6 passengers who are killed or injured whilst they
are in places they are never authorised to be (for example any passenger injured whilst
taking a short-cut across the tracks) are considered to be trespassers. This risk is grouped
with other trespass risk in the SRMv6, which relates to members of the public. The risk from
these types of incidents is therefore also excluded from the HLOS passenger safety metric.
The normalisation figure for passenger kilometre has been taken from ORR national rail
trends (2007 Q4 - 2008 Q3). This figure aligns with the data cut-off date for SRMv6
(September 30th 2008). For the purposes of producing a comparable risk estimate at the end
of Control Period 4, the SRM data cut-off date is proposed as September 30th 2013 and that
the passenger kilometre figure used for normalisation will be the ORR reported figure for
2012 Q4 -2013 Q3.
Normalisation data for workforce hours has been collected, as agreed with Safety Policy
Group (SPG). The estimate of workforce hours is based on industry responses received by
14
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HLOS Requirements
RSSB. Some of the figures supplied – especially those relating to contract staff – are based
on best estimates.
6.1
Passenger safety metric
The estimate of the absolute risk to which passengers are exposed is:
53.72 FWI/year
The annual number of passenger kilometres for the purpose of normalisation is estimated to
be 50.2 billion.
The baseline passenger safety estimate is therefore:
1.070 FWI per billion passenger kilometres
The normalisation figure for passenger km has been taken from ORR national rail trends
(2007 Q4 - 2008 Q3), which aligns with the data cut-off for SRMv6 (September 30th 2008).
6.2
Staff safety metric
The estimate of the absolute risk to which workforce are exposed is:
28.18 FWI/year
The annual number of worker hours for the purpose of normalisation is estimated to be
210 million.
The baseline workforce safety metric is therefore:
0.134 FWI per million worker hours
The estimate of worker hours that was used to calculate this metric is based on industry
estimates available to RSSB (for the calendar year 2008), and supplemented by RSSB
estimates where data has not be supplied. As previously agreed with the SPG, the estimate
of workforce hours does not include those hours associated with management and
administration staff.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
15
Detailed Risk Profiles
7
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.1
Risk by accident type
Chart 5 – Chart 8 present the risk profiles for train accidents, movement accidents, nonmovement accidents, and trespass accidents respectively. These risk profiles exclude the
direct risk from MOP suicide and attempted suicide. However, all other passenger,
workforce, and MOP risk from these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide
or attempted suicide or secondary injuries received in attempting to prevent suicide, have
been included. Passenger and public assaults are now included in the total risk figures as
they were modelled using enhanced data (compared to previous versions of the SRM).
7.1.1
Train accidents
Chart 5 shows the risk profile for train accidents in FWI/year and also as the percentage
change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6. Notable modelling changes are discussed in
detail in Appendix E. Note that the only train accidents that were updated for version 5.5
were train fires (HET-17 and HET-20) and so the percentage change of the other train
accidents relate to changes in risk estimates from version 5 to version 6.
HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing has become the largest
risk contributor to train accident risk, whereas in version 5 it was HET-12: Derailment of
passenger trains. Overall the risk for train accidents has reduced by 21%, with 13 of the 18
hazardous events showing reductions in risk. The most significant reductions are from:
HET-04: Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment) – the risk has
decreased by 40%, to 0.68 FWI/year. Note that HET-04 now includes HEM-04:
Passenger struck by object through train window and HEM-18: Train crew hit by object
through train window – version 5 figures have been adjusted accordingly. The change in
risk is mainly due to a change in the injury weightings (as a result of a weightings error in
version 5.5) and a reduction in consequences.
HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing – the risk has
decreased by 21% to 2.4 FWI/year. This is due to a combination of modelling changes
and a reduction in frequency. The reduction is due to a fall in the number of level crossing
incidents and the expert judgement that the consequence from such incidents has
reduced when compared to the version 5 risk figure.
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains – the risk has decreased by 37% to 1.98
FWI/year. Again, this is due to a combination of modelling changes and a reduction in
frequency. The reduction is generally due to a fall in incident data. A small proportion of
the reduction is due to a change in modelling approach – see Section E.6 in Appendix E
for more details.
HET-02: Collision between non-passenger and passenger train has seen a large increase in
risk of 75% since version 5. This is due to a small increase in the frequency and modelling
changes discussed in detail in Section E.3 (in Appendix E).
For a more detailed explanation, Table A2 (Appendix A) provides a set of explanations of the
changes in train accident hazardous event risk estimates from version 5 to version 6.
16
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
0.0387 (0%)
0.0359 (-32%)
0.0117 (-47%)
0.0113 (-12%)
0.0063 (+39%)
0.00501 (+10%)
HET-22: Structural collapse at station
HET-20: Fire on non-passenger train
HET-26: Collision between a failed train and an assisting train
HET-25: Train divisions (not leading to collision)
HET-21: Train crushed by structural collapse or large object (not at station)
HET-23: Explosion on passenger train
0.0488 (-34%)
HET-06: Collision between two passenger trains in station
0.123 (-35%)
HET-03: Collision between two non-passenger trains
0.0688 (-1%)
0.136 (-6%)
HET-24: Explosion on freight train
0.548 (-6%)
0.63 (+75%)
0.434 (-17%)
0.146 (+50%)
1
0.679 (-40%)
0.406 (-20%)
HET-09: Collision with buffer stops
HET-17: Fire on passenger train
HET-11: Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
HET-01: Collision between two passenger trains
HET-13: Derailment of non-passenger train
HET-02: Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
HET-04: Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment)
0.5
1.5
2
1.98 (-37%)
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
2.4 (-21%)
2.5
3
Chart 5.
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains
HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for train accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from SRMv5.5
17
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.1.2
Movement accidents
Chart 6 shows the risk profile for the top 20 movement accidents in FWI/year, and also the
change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6. Again, this excludes the direct risk from MOP
suicide and attempted suicides. However, all other passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide or
secondary injuries received in attempting to prevent suicide, have been included.
It is apparent that the highest risk contribution for movement accidents comes from HEM-27:
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing. This is broadly similar to version
5.5 and is still by far the largest contributor, standing at 7.32 FWI/year.
The hazardous event that has seen the largest absolute increase in risk is HEM-10:
Passenger struck by train while on platform, with an increase of 0.8 FWI/year (157%) since
version 5.5. This is predominantly due to the range of incidents in the updated data which
has increased the average consequences per event.
The largest percentage change in risk comes from HEM-15: workforce fall from train in
running, with an increase of 285%. Although this is a large increase, the absolute change in
risk is quite small with an increase of 0.17 FWI/year to 0.236 FWI/year. This is due to
observed increases in both the frequency and average consequences since version 5.5. As
the risk is low, the estimate is sensitive to small changes in the underlying rate of observed
incidents.
The greatest reductions in risk come from:
HEM-06: Passenger fall between train and the platform – the risk has reduced by 12%
and now stands at 1.77 FWI/year.
HEM-16: workforce injury while boarding/alighting train – this hazardous event has seen
a reduction in risk of 18%, which results in a risk of 0.81 FWI/year.
HEM-19: Track worker struck/crushed by train – the risk has continued to decrease, with
a drop of 11% from version 5 to 5.5 and 12% from version 5.5 to 6. This results in a risk
of 2.05 FWI/year.
For further details, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of explanations of the
changes in risk estimates for movement hazardous events from version 5.5 to version 6.
18
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEM-03: Passenger struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
HEM-20: Workforce struck by flying object
HEM-41: MOP fall between train and platform
HEM-40: MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
HEM-23: Train door closes on workforce
HEM-15: Workforce fall from train in running
HEM-44: Passenger jump from train in running
0.0938 (+110%)
0.124 (+11%)
0.127 (New HE)
0.19 (+4%)
0.211 (-11%)
0.236 (+285%)
0.386 (New HE)
0.433 (+21%)
0.535 (+6%)
HEM-21: Workforce fall between train and platform
HEM-14: Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train
0.541 (-3%)
0.712 (+2%)
HEM-38: Passenger injury due to braking or lurching
HEM-05: Train door closes on passenger
0.809 (-18%)
0.91 (+105%)
HEM-11: Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on crossing
HEM-16: Workforce injury while boarding/alighting train
1.03 (-7%)
1.32 (+157%)
HEM-39: Train crew injury due to braking or lurching
HEM-10: Passenger struck by train while on platform
1.77 (-12%)
2.05 (-12%)
HEM-19: Track worker struck/crushed by train
HEM-06: Passenger fall between train and platform
2.19 (-7%)
2
HEM-08: Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
1
3
3.87 (+8%)
4
7.32 (+2%)
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
7
8
Chart 6.
HEM-09: Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
HEM-27: MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for movement accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from
SRMv5.5
19
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.1.3
Non-movement accidents
Chart 7 presents the risk profile for the top 20 non-movement accidents in FWI/year and also
the change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6. This excludes the direct risk from MOP
suicide and attempted suicides. However, all other passenger, workforce, and MOP risk from
these events, such as shock/trauma due to witnessing suicide or attempted suicide or
secondary injuries received in attempting to prevent suicide, have been included.
The non-movement risk profile is dominated by HEN-14: Passenger slip, trip, or fall, with a
risk figure of 25.3 FWI/year. This represents an increase of 7% since version 5.5. The
second largest contributor is HEN-64: Passenger assault, with 8.08 FWI/year, which
represents a reduction of 5% since version 5.5. However, this change in passenger assault
risk is predominately due to a data quality research project undertaken by RSSB and BTP,
which has culminated in better data quality, along with detailed remodelling for version 6 –
see Appendix A2 for more details.
The greatest percentage increase in non-movement risk comes from HEN-66: MOP assault,
providing an increase of 142% since version 5.5. The change in MOP assault risk is due to
the same, aforementioned data quality research project – see Appendix A for more details.
The next greatest percentage increase is from HEN-35: Workforce involved in road traffic
accident while on duty, this has increased by 105% since version 5 due to an update of data
in the dataset for version 6.
The greatest reductions in non-movement risk are from:
HEN-24: Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m – the risk shows a reduction since version 5.5 of
10% (0.75 FWI/year) resulting in 6.74 FWI/year. This is due to a reduction in the
observed events for version 6.
HEN-68: MOP non-trespasser fall in station – the risk has reduced by 49% (0.7
FWI/year), resulting in 0.72 FWI/year. This reduction is due to changes in the number of
events recorded in the updated data which has reduced the frequency and
consequences since version 5.5.
For further details, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of explanations of the
changes in risk estimates for non-movement hazardous events from version 5.5 to version 6.
20
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
1.08 (-2%)
HEN-74: Workforce manual handling
HEN-26: Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle
HEN-35: Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty
0.326 (-3%)
0.365 (+105%)
0.384 (-28%)
HEN-10: Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
0.568 (-21%)
HEN-30: Workforce electric shock (conductor rail)
0.427 (+6%)
0.597 (-21%)
HEN-25: Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
HEN-46: MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing or footpath crossing
0.716 (-49%)
HEN-68: MOP non-trespasser fall in stations
0.889 (+142%)
1.14 (+6%)
HEN-23: Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
HEN-66: MOP assault
1.3 (+24%)
HEN-55: Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
1.8 (-14%)
2.41 (-18%)
HEN-56: Workforce struck by/contact with/ trapped in object not at station
HEN-21: Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large object
2.67 (-4%)
3.18 (+16%)
3.2 (-4%)
3.26 (-8%)
HEN-63: Workforce on-train incident (excl sudden train movement & assaults)
HEN-62: Passenger on-train incident (excl sudden train movement & assaults)
HEN-45: MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline railway
HEN-65: Workforce assault
HEN-24: Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
5
6.74 (-10%)
8.08 (-5%)
10
20
25.3 (+7%)
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
25
Chart 7.
HEN-64: Passenger assault
HEN-14: Passenger slip, trip or fall
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for non-movement accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from
SRMv5.5
21
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.1.4
Trespass accidents
Chart 8 shows the risk profile for the trespass accidents in FWI/year, along with the change
in risk from version 5.5 to version 6. It is apparent that hazardous events related to trespass
are likely to include a fatality, resulting in the charts being dominated by this type of injury.
The main contributor to the trespass risk profile is HEM-25: Adult trespasser struck/crushed
by train while on the mainline railway. Even with a reduction of 7% (1.9 FWI/year) since
version 5.5 it still contributes 24.0 FWI/year. However, this change, results from a modelling
change rather than a genuine change in risk. Review of the version 6 data for HEM-25
identified that the delayed receipt of the coroner’s verdict in trespasser and suspected
suicide cases results in accuracies in the prediction of risk for these events. As a result, the
end of 2007 was chosen as the version 6 data cut-off time for these events, rather than the
end of September 2008 (which applies to version 6 in general). In addition, a five-year
dataset was used rather than the three-year dataset used in version 5.5 to reflect the longterm changes in the rate of trespass more effectively.
The second highest contributor is HEN-38: Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail).
This has seen an increase of 10% resulting in 6.07 FWI/year.
The hazardous events with the largest percentage increases are HEN-39: Adult trespasser
electric shock (non-traction supply), with an increase of 1168%, and HEN-43: Child
trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply), with an increase of 1127%. These hazardous
events contribute relatively small amounts of absolute risk and are sensitive to small changes
in the risk profile. An extensive remodelling of the consequences for the electric-shock
events of the SRM was undertaken for the version 6 update. Therefore, these increases are
largely the result of improved consequence modelling rather than a genuine change in risk.
For further details, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of explanations of the
changes in risk estimates for trespass hazardous events from version 5.5 to version 6.
22
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
0.00582 (+1168%)
HEN-39: Adult trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
HEN-40: Child trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
0.00844 (+1127%)
0.11 (+140%)
HEN-43: Child trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
0.166 (+44%)
0.512 (-26%)
HEN-42: Child trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
HEN-72: Child trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway
0.604 (-23%)
HEN-37: Adult trespasser electric shock (OHL)
0.243 (-31%)
0.856 (-9%)
HEM-30: MOP fall while riding illegally on train
HEN-41: Child trespasser electric shock (OHL)
0.95 (-24%)
1.41 (+13%)
1.85 (-17%)
HEN-36: Adult trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
HEN-71: Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline railway
HEM-26: Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
HEM-12: Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
3
3.5 (-0.1%)
6
6.07 (+10%)
9
24 (-7%)
Shock/trauma class 2 injuries
Shock/trauma class 1 injuries
Non-rep minor injuries
Rep minor injuries
Major injuries
Fatalities
24
27
Chart 8.
HEN-38: Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
HEM-25: Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for trespass accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from
SRMv5.5
23
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.2
Risk by person type
This section presents the risk profile for passengers, workforce, and MOP broken down by
hazardous event. In many cases, the risk from a hazardous event includes more than one
person type. However, in this section, only the injuries associated with a single person type
are included. For example, HEM-11 Passenger struck while crossing track at station on
crossing includes only the passenger injuries and not the workforce shock and trauma
injuries associated with witnessing the event. This accounts for small differences in the risk
values described in Section 7.1.
7.2.1
Passenger risk
The total passenger risk is estimated to be 54.4 FWI/year, an increase of 3% from version
5.5. Chart 9 presents the current risk profile for the top 20 passenger hazardous events in
FWI/year and the change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6.
HEN-14: Passenger slip, trip, or fall is once again the major contributor to passenger risk with
25.3 FWI/year, or 47% of the overall passenger risk profile. This is dominated by major
injuries – 69% of the risk results from major injuries despite most slips, trips, or falls resulting
in minor injuries. The increase in risk is fundamentally due to the revised modelling approach
discussed in Section E.6 (in Appendix E). Other non-movement hazardous events include:
HEN-64: Passenger assault – the risk from this hazardous event is 8.04 FWI/year, which
has decreased by 5% since version 5.5 due to remodelling of the passenger assaults
(explained in Appendix A).
HEN-62: Passenger on-train incident (excl sudden train movement and assaults) – the
risk from this hazardous event is 3.18 FWI/year, representing an increase of 16% since
version 5.5. The increase is due to an increase in the frequency, of which the majority is
due to the use of normalisers to predict the risk estimate (see Section E.6).
HEN-55: Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station – the risk from this
hazardous event is 1.3 FWI/year, representing an increase of 24% since version 5.5. The
majority of the increase in risk is due to changes in the number of events recorded in the
updated data.
The hazardous event with the largest percentage change is HEM-10: Passenger struck by
train while on platform, with an increase of 160% since version 5.5, resulting in 1.3 FWI/year.
This is mainly due to changes in the observed data, which has lead to an increase in the
estimated average consequences, and also due to the new technique for using normalisers
(see Section E.6 for more details). Other significant changes in movement hazardous events
include:
HEM-11: Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on crossing, with an
increase of 104% resulting in 0.906 FWI per year. This is mostly due to a doubling in the
recorded frequency of the events in the update of the dataset.
HEM-06: Passenger fall between train and the platform, with a reduction of 12% in the
events recorded in the since version 5.5, resulting in a risk of 1.77 FWI/year. This is
principally due to the update of the dataset.
24
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Detailed Risk Profiles
HEM-08: Passenger fall from platform and struck by train, resulting in a risk of 2.17
FWI/year, a reduction of 7% since version 5.5. This is due to a reduction in the events
recorded in the update of the dataset.
HEM-09: Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train, which has a risk of 3.87
FWI/year, an increase of 8% from version 5.5. This is mainly due to the use of
normalisers to predict the risk estimate – see Section E.6 for more details.
Notable train accidents in the passenger risk include:
HET-02: Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train, which has
increased by 150% since version 5.5 and now contributes 0.385 FWI/year. This rise is
due to a revised assumption in the modelling where the increased probability of mixed
traffic in peak loaded times has resulted in an increase in the high consequence and
therefore an increased risk for HET-02 (see Section E.3 for more details).
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains, which is ranked 7th in the list (1.62 FWI/year).
This has decreased by 37% since version 5.5. The reduction is generally due to a fall in
incident data. A small proportion of the reduction is due to a change in modelling
approach (see Section E.2 for more details).
For more details, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of explanations of the
changes in hazardous event risk estimates from version 5.5 to version 6.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
25
26
0.279 (-52%)
0.25 (+26%)
HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
HET-13: Derailment of non-passenger train
0.12 (0%)
0.336 (-12%)
HET-01: Collision between two passenger trains
HEN-05: Explosion at station
0.382 (-29%)
0.385 (New HE)
HEM-44: Passenger jump from train in running
HEN-10: Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
0.385 (+150%)
HET-02: Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
0.541 (-3%)
0.712 (+2%)
HEM-05: Train door closes on passenger
HEM-38: Passenger injury due to braking or lurching
0.731 (-9%)
0.906 (+104%)
HEM-11: Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on crossing
HEN-13: Passenger fall from platform onto track (no train present)
1.3 (+160%)
HEM-10: Passenger struck by train while on platform
1.62 (-37%)
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains
1.3 (+24%)
1.77 (-12%)
HEM-06: Passenger fall between train and platform
HEN-55: Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
2.17 (-7%)
3.18 (+16%)
3.87 (+8%)
HEM-08: Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
HEN-62: Passenger on-train incident (excl sudden train movement & assaults)
HEM-09: Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
5
8.04 (-5%)
10
20
25.3 (+7%)
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
25
Chart 9.
HEN-64: Passenger assault
HEN-14: Passenger slip, trip or fall
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for passenger accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from
SRMv5.5
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.2.2
Workforce risk
The total workforce risk is estimated to be 29.8 FWI per year, which is a decrease of 10%
from version 5.5. Chart 10 presents the current risk profile for the top 20 workforce
hazardous events in FWI/year and the change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6.
The highest ranked hazardous event is HEN-24: Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m, with 6.74
FWI/year, a decrease of 10% since version 5.5. The next greatest percentage decreases in
risk come from:
HEN-65: Workforce Assault – the risk has decreased by 8% since version 5.5 and is now
3.26 FWI/year. This is due to a reduction in the frequency due to changes in the number
of events recorded in the updated data.
HEN-63: Workforce on-train incident (excl sudden train movements and assaults) – the
risk has decreased by 4% to 2.67 FWI/year. This is due to a reduction in the estimated
frequency from version 5.5 to version 6.
HEN-56: Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object not at station – the risk has
decreased by 18% and is now 2.41 FWI/year. This is due to a reduction in the estimated
frequency since version 5.5.
The main increases in risk are:
HEN-23: Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station – this is ranked
seventh in the top 20 workforce hazardous events with an increase of 6% resulting in
1.14 FWI/year. This is due to an increase in the estimated frequency since version 5.5 to
version 6.
HEM-31: MOP suicide or attempted suicide (open verdict) – this has increased by 1%
since version 5.5 and is now 0.955 FWI/year. All of this risk comes from either the
shock/trauma associated with witnessing a suicide or attempted suicide, or injury in trying
to prevent a suicide (i.e. strains and injuries).
The largest increase in risk comes from HEN-35: Workforce involved in road traffic accident
whilst on duty, which has risen by 105% since version 5.5, resulting in 0.365 FWI/year. It is
thought that this increase in risk is due to an increase in reporting of these types of
accidents.
The only train accident types to make the top 20 workforce profile are HET-12: Derailment of
passenger train, with 0.28 FWI/year, and HET-13: Derailment of non-passenger train, with
0.22 FWI/year. Both events have seen decreases in risk since version 5.5 (31% and 9%
respectively).
For more details, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of explanations of the
changes in hazardous event risk estimates from version 5.5 to version 6.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
27
28
0.955 (+1%)
HEM-31: MOP suicide or attempted suicide (open verdict)
HET-13: Derailment of non-passenger train
0.222 (-9%)
0.236 (+285%)
HEM-15: Workforce fall from train in running
0.365 (+105%)
HEN-35: Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty
0.282 (-31%)
0.433 (+21%)
HEM-14: Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains
0.535 (+6%)
HEM-21: Workforce fall between train and platform
0.326 (-3%)
0.568 (-21%)
HEN-30: Workforce electric shock (conductor rail)
HEN-26: Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle
0.597 (-21%)
HEN-25: Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
0.809 (-18%)
1.03 (-7%)
HEM-39: Train crew injury due to braking or lurching
HEM-16: Workforce injury while boarding/alighting train
1.08 (-2%)
2.05 (-12%)
4
3.26 (-8%)
2.67 (-4%)
3
2.41 (-18%)
1.8 (-14%)
2
1.14 (+6%)
HEN-74: Workforce manual handling
HEN-23: Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
HEN-21: Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large object
HEM-19: Track worker struck/crushed by train
HEN-56: Workforce struck by/contact with/ trapped in object not at station
HEN-63: Workforce on-train incident (excl sudden train movement & assaults)
1
5
6
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
6.74 (-10%)
7
8
Chart 10.
HEN-65: Workforce assault
HEN-24: Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for workforce accidents in FWI/year - includes % change from
SRMv5.5
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Detailed Risk Profiles
7.2.3
Public risk
The total MOP risk is estimated to be 57.2 FWI/year, excluding suicide. As trespass has
been discussed in detail in Section 7.1.4, this section focuses on MOP risk excluding suicide
and trespass, which is estimated to be 16.9 FWI/year. Chart 11 presents the current risk
profile for the top 20 MOP hazardous events (excluding trespass) in FWI/year and the
change in risk from version 5.5 to version 6.
The greatest contributor to the MOP risk profile is HEM-27: MOP pedestrian struck/crushed
by train on level crossing, with 7.28 FWI/year. This is a 2% increase from version 5.5. No
other movement accident is in the top ten.
The highest non-movement accident is HEN-45: MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto
the mainline railway, which is ranked second in the risk profile. This contributes 3.2 FWI/year
and has decreased by 4% from version 5.5. The next non-movement accidents in the list are:
HEN-66: MOP Assault – this contributes 0.889 FWI/year, an increase of 142% from
version 5.5. This is due to a data quality research project undertaken by RSSB and BTP,
which had culminated in better data quality. This has led to significant modelling changes
in the analysis of assaults for version 6.
HEN-68: MOP non-trespasser fall in stations – this contributes 0.716 FWI/year, a
decrease of 49% from version 5.5. This is due to a reduction in the frequency and
consequence from version 5.5.
The highest ranked train accident is HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle at
level crossing, which contributes 2.0 FWI/year to the MOP risk profile. Other train accidents
of note are:
HET-04: Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment) – this has decreased by
37% from version 5.5 and contributes 0.471 FWI/year. All this risk comes from train
collision with road vehicles not at level crossings which has seen a decrease due to
changes in the number of events recorded in the updated data.
HET-11: Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle at level crossing – this
contributes 0.384 FWI/year, representing a decrease of 18%.
For a more detailed explanation, Table A2 (in Appendix A) provides a complete set of
explanations of the changes in hazardous event risk estimates from version 5.5 to version 6.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
29
30
HEN-67: MOP fall from platform onto track (no train present)
0.0494 (+64%)
0.0579 (0%)
0.0753 (+36%)
HEN-59: MOP struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
HET-24: Explosion on freight train
0.0762 (-48%)
HET-12: Derailment of passenger trains
0.058 (-37%)
0.0768 (-46%)
HET-13: Derailment of non-passenger train
HET-03: Collision between two non-passenger trains
0.0987 (+28%)
0.1 (0%)
HET-02: Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
HEN-54: MOP exposure to hazardous substances leakage
0.126 (New HE)
0.19 (+3%)
HEM-40: MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
HEM-41: MOP fall between train and platform
0.3 (0%)
HEN-49: MOP exposure to explosion on the mainline railway
0.322 (+1%)
0.384 (-18%)
HET-11: Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
HEN-44: MOP struck / trapped by level crossing equipment
0.427 (+6%)
0.471 (-37%)
0.716 (-49%)
0.889 (+142%)
HEN-46: MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing or footpath crossing
HET-04: Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment)
HEN-68: MOP non-trespasser fall in stations
HEN-66: MOP assault
HET-10: Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
1
2
2 (-13%)
3
3.2 (-4%)
7
Shock/trauma class 2
Shock/trauma class 1
Minor Non-reportable
Minor Reportable
Major
Fatalities
7.28 (+2%)
8
Chart 11.
HEN-45: MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline railway
HEM-27: MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing
0
Detailed Risk Profiles
Risk profiles for public accidents excluding trespass in FWI/year - includes %
change from SRMv5.5
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Key Risk Areas
8
SSP Key Risk Areas
Effective safety planning requires a detailed understanding of risk areas – the activities or
circumstances where the safety risk profile for passengers, the workforce, and the public is
the greatest. This allows resources and effort to be concentrated where they will have the
greatest impact.
The Strategic Safety Plan 2009-2014 (SSP) [Ref. 1] considers nine key risk areas that have
been selected from the original breakdown of the SRM figures into 15 risk areas. These nine
risk areas represent the top 95% of the overall SRM risk and are thus considered to be the
key to understanding the causes of risk – hence the term ‘key risk area’ (KRA). A complete
breakdown of the version 6 figures into the 15 risk areas is shown in Table 5 and
diagrammatically in Chart 12 (the KRAs are indicated in both).
Table 5.
Grouped risk figures for SRMv6
Risk area
group
Risk
(FWI/yr)
% of SRMv6
risk
Risk
(FWI/yr)
3.41
0.28
1.95
0.03
0.19
22.78
3.13
53.95
4.07
% of SRMv6
risk
2.41%
0.20%
1.38%
0.02%
0.13%
16.12%
2.21%
38.18%
2.88%
Pedestrian user
8.52
6.03%
Road vehicle
user
3.05
2.16%
0.06
0.80
16.12
14.99
7.96
141.3
0.04%
0.57%
11.41%
10.61%
5.63%
100%
Risk area*
Infrastructure
Engineering
5.64
4.0%
Level Crossing
Rolling stock
Environment
0.22
0.2%
Passenger
behaviour
25.91
18.3%
Adjacent property/land
Weather
In stations
On trains
Crime
General
Public
behaviour
69.59
49.3%
Level
Crossings
Shunter
Workforce
behaviour
Signaller
39.93
28.3%
Station staff
Track worker
Train crew
Total
141.3
100%
*The nine KRAs reported in the Strategic Safety Plan (SSP) 2009-2014 are highlighted in bold. The remaining
risk areas add together to give the ‘other sources of risk’ reported in the SSP.
The 15 risk areas relate to the sources of risk. For example, the Track worker risk area
relates to the risk that arises from track workers carrying out their activities and their
behaviours in doing so, rather than the risk to track workers in their role. This means that the
risk areas relate to the causes of the SRM precursors and have therefore been assigned to
the relevant risk area accordingly.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
31
Key Risk Areas
In some cases, where a precursor has more than one cause, it has been necessary to assign
proportions of the precursor risk between two or more risk areas. Appendix C gives full
details of how the figures in Table 5 have been derived – it lists all of the precursors making
up each of the risk areas and gives the proportions that have been applied for any precursors
split between two or more risk areas.
The 15 risk areas can be further grouped into five higher level risk area groups – namely
engineering, environment, passenger behaviour, public behaviour, and workforce behaviour.
These groupings can also be seen in Table 5.
Table 5 provides valuable information to the industry regarding the significant causes of
hazardous events. Precursors, by definition, are the main contributors to the hazardous
events that ultimately lead to harm. Targeting the precursors through effective management
actions will lead to a reduction in risk for all the associated hazardous events.
Chart 12.
Breakdown of SRMv6 by risk area group (inner ring) and risk area (outer ring)
Infrastructure*
2.4%
Level crossing
0.2%
Rolling stock*
1.4%
Adjacent property/land
0.02%
Train crew*
5.6%
Weather
0.1%
Track worker*
10.6%
In stations*
16.1%
Workforce
28.3%
Station staff*
11.4%
Passengers
18.3%
Engineering
4.0%
On trains*
2.2%
Environment
0.2%
Signaller
0.6%
Shunter
0.04%
RV user
2.2%
Pedestrian user
6.0%
Level Crossing*
RV user + Pedestrian user
8.2%
General
2.9%
Public Behaviour
49.3%
Crime*
38.2%
* indicates that the risk area is one of the nine key risk areas reported in the SSP 2009-2014. The remaining risk areas add
together to give the ‘other sources of risk’ reported in the SSP.
32
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Key Risk Areas
It is also useful to group the hazardous event and precursor risk into high level groups that
relate to specific causes or areas of risk on the railway. Significant risk groupings include risk
from track faults, rolling stock faults, SPADs, and level crossings. Table 6 provides a
summary of the top level figures for a variety of groupings concerning these four broad
categories. It should be noted that these groupings are not mutually exclusive and the same
precursor risk contribution may be counted in more than one group.
Table 6.
Selected SRMv6 risk groupings
PT risk
(FWI/yr)
NPT risk
(FWI/yr)
Total Risk
(FWI/yr)
-
-
2.49
Track faults
2.31
0.20
2.52
Rolling stock faults
3.98
0.53
4.51
Cat A SPADs resulting in collision
0.43
0.30
0.73
Cat A SPADs resulting in derailment or level
crossing collision
0.02
0.02
0.04
Cat D SPADs/ runaways
0.01
0.27
0.29
-
-
11.81
2.40
0.38
2.78
Footpath crossings
-
-
3.83
Level crossings
-
-
7.96
Group description
Track faults - grouped for both passenger and
non-passenger trains
Level crossings
Level crossings (vehicle only)
Appendix C provides a complete breakdown of the figures in Table 6 and shows how they
have been derived.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
33
Individual Risk
9
Individual Risk
9.1
Introduction
‘Individual risk’ is defined as the probability of a fatality per year to which a type of individual
is exposed. Fatality risk is distinct from FWI risk, because it excludes the component of risk
relating to injuries and shock/trauma.
The Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) decision-taking process document Reducing Risks,
Protecting People (R2P2) [Ref. 5] specifies cross-industry targets for individual risk for
passengers, employees and members of the public (MOP). These ‘limits of tolerability’,
shown in Chart 13, provide a benchmark against which to compare the individual risk
estimates calculated in SRMv6, also shown in Chart 13.
Chart 13.
HSE individual risk targets
Unacceptable
(All)
Unacceptable (Passengers and MOP)
Tolerable (Employees)
1 in 10,000
Tolerable
(All)
Increasing individual risk
1 in 1,000
National profile
Prob. of
f atality
per year
9,986
1 in1 in9,986
1 in1 in
17,726
19,113
17,726
1 in 19,113
Number of
exposed
population
30,500
30,500
2,726
2,782
11,685
11,685
247,398
2,791,111
1 in1 in
247,398
2,791,111
11.46
1 in 1,000,000
Fatalities
per
year
3.97
3.05
0.15
0.15
0.61
0.61
11.28
Track worker
Freight train driver
Passenger train driver
Passenger
Broadly acceptable
(All)
R2P2 points out that these tolerability limits rarely ‘bite’, since they were originally derived for
activities for which individual risk is the most difficult to control. The limits also reflect
agreements reached at an international level, whereas most industries in the UK achieve
much better levels of safety. These assertions are corroborated by SRMv6, which calculates
individual risk at levels well within the appropriate tolerability limits.
The industry document Taking Safe Decisions [Ref. 6] and guidance from the Office of Rail
Regulation (ORR) [Ref. 7] clarify that the need to
satisfy risk tolerability targets is distinct
from the ALARP/SFAIRP4 duty of transport operators. It should also be noted that there is no
4
‘As low as reasonably practicable’ and ‘so far as is reasonably practicable’.
34
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Individual Risk
legal requirement to incorporate notions of risk tolerability into the formulation of ALARP
arguments and, in fact, it is illogical to do so.
9.2
Fatality risk
The predicted individual fatality risk from SRMv6 was analysed for each of the person types
listed below (refer to Appendix D for more details):
Passengers
Workforce
•
Track workers
•
Passenger train (PT) drivers
•
Freight train (FT) drivers
•
Other train crew
•
Other workforce
MOP
Fatalities on the railway are dominated by suicide and trespass, amounting to 90% of the
total fatality risk. Excluding these hazardous events (defined in Section 5), Chart 14 shows
the fatality risk for each person type.
Chart 14.
Fatality risk for each person type
Track workers
MOP
13.7 fat./yr
Passenger train drivers
Workforce
4.7 fat./yr
Passengers
11.3 fat./yr
Other workforce
Other train crew
Freight train drivers
In the following sections, the individual risk to each person type is discussed, along with a
comparison with SRMv5 (individual risk was not assessed in SRMv5.5).
9.3
Passengers
Of the population of train passengers, regular commuters have the greatest exposure to the
railway environment. The individual risk to a commuter is therefore assumed to be indicative
of the ‘worst-case’ for the whole population of train passengers.
It is assumed that, on average, each commuter makes 450 journeys per year (two journeys
per day, five days per week for 45 weeks per year). Further assumptions are shown in Table
7.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
35
Individual Risk
Table 7.
Total passenger individual risk
SRMv5
SRMv6
% change
11.53
11.28
- 2%
1,078,000,000
1,256,000,0005
Population size
2,395,556
2,791,111
Individual risk (probability of fatality per
year)
4.81 × 10-6
4.04 × 10-6
1 in 207,782
1 in 247,398
Total passenger fatality risk per year
No. of passenger journeys [Ref. 8]
+ 17%
- 16%
SRMv6 predicts a probability of fatality of 1 in 247,400 per year for regular commuters. As
shown in Table 7, a lower overall fatality risk (spread over a larger population) resulted in a
reduction of 16% in individual passenger risk since version 5.
Chart 15 shows the individual risk for a passenger, broken down by the event types defined
in Section 5.
Chart 15.
Passenger individual risk by event type
Electric shock
3%
Struck on / fall from
train in running
Other
2%
Probability of fatality =
1 in 247,400 per year
4%
Struck by train
while on platform
8%
Boarding / alighting
incidents
Falls at station
34%
9%
Level crossing
incidents
10%
Assault
13%
Train collision
and/or
derailment
17%
The main changes in risk since SRMv5 are as follows:
Fatality risk due to Falls at station6 has decreased by 11%, due to reductions in the
risk from HEM-08 Passenger fall from platform and struck by train and HEN-14
Passenger slip, trip or fall.
Fatality risk due to Train collision and/or derailment has decreased by 35%, primarily
due to the reduction in the risk from HET-12 Derailment of passenger trains. PT
5
6
2008 calendar year figure.
Falls at station includes falls from platform, wrong-side falls, and slips, trips, and falls.
36
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Individual Risk
derailments, however, remain the largest contributor to this risk category, with 1.2
passenger fatalities per year.
Fatality risk due to HEN-64 Passenger assault has increased by 27% since SRMv5,
attributed to better reporting of incidents through the British Transport Police.
The individual passenger risk due to Level crossing incidents shows a small increase
since version 5, even though it decreased across the UK railway as a whole. This is
due to improved modelling of the risk from high-speed passenger trains, thus
providing better fatality estimates.
Fatality risk due to Boarding / alighting incidents has improved by 44% since version
5, due to a reduction of 0.6 fatalities per year in HEM-06 Passenger fall between train
and platform. Although incidents of this type have increased in frequency, the
resultant injuries have significantly decreased in severity, creating the large drop in
fatality risk.
The biggest change in individual risk for passengers is due to HEM-10 Passenger
struck by train while on platform, which increased by 0.7 fatalities per year, or 347%
since SRMv5. This is due to an observed increase in fatalities due to passengers
standing too close to the platform edge and a corresponding increase in the predicted
consequence for this HE.
9.4
Workforce
The total workforce fatality risk calculated in SRMv6 was distributed into specific workforce
types in order to define their individual risk. During this process, a number of assumptions
were made (detailed in Appendix D). Based on these assumptions, the fatality risk for the
workforce was calculated, as shown in Chart 16.
Chart 16.
Fatality risk for the workforce
Track workers
3.1
Passenger train drivers
0.6
Other workforce
Other train crew
Freight train drivers
0.5
0.4
All figures are in
fatalities per year
0.2
Figures in Chart 16 show that the exposure to fatality risk for track workers and train drivers
represents 82% of the total workforce fatality risk. Population numbers for each of these
workforce types, estimated from Network Rail’s timesheet database and RSSB surveys of
each train operating company (TOC), are presented in Table 8 along with their individual risk.
A comparison of Table 7 with Table 8 shows that individual risk to the workforce is two orders
of magnitude greater than for passengers, due to the smaller population size and hence
greater individual exposure to each hazard.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
37
Individual Risk
Table 8.
9.4.1
Workforce individual risk
Person type
Population
Track workers
30,500
PT drivers
11,685
FT drivers
2,726
Individual risk per year
SRMv5
SRMv6
1.30 × 10-4
1.00 × 10-4
1 in 7,700
1 in 10,000
6.35 × 10-5
5.23 × 10-5
1 in 15,700
1 in 19,100
6.31 × 10-5
5.64 × 10-5
1 in 15,900
1 in 17,700
% change
- 23%
- 18%
- 11%
Track workers
SRMv6 predicts 1 fatality in every 10,000 track workers per year, which is a reduction of 23%
from the corresponding risk in SRMv5. Chart 17 shows the individual risk to a track worker,
broken down by the event types defined in Section 5.
Chart 17.
Track worker individual risk
Struck / crushed by large
object or machinery
Other
5%
6%
Probability of fatality =
1 in 10,000 per year
RTA (not at level
crossing)
6%
Slip, trip or fall
6%
Electric
shock
14%
Struck / crushed
by train or
other vehicle
63%
The risk of HEM-19 Track worker struck/crushed by train has been remodelled in SRMv6 in
order to distinguish the risk from incidents occurring inside possessions from those occurring
outside. This update, along with a new dataset, is responsible for the reduction of 0.6
fatalities per year for this event type.
9.4.2
Passenger train drivers
SRMv6 predicts 1 fatality in every 19,100 passenger train (PT) drivers per year, which is a
decrease of 18% from the corresponding risk in SRMv5. Chart 18 shows the individual risk to
passenger train drivers, broken down into the event types defined in Section 5.
38
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Individual Risk
Chart 18.
Passenger train driver individual risk
Probability of fatality =
1 in 19,100 per year
Other
14%
Electric
shock
Train collision
and/or
derailment
14%
38%
Struck/crushed
by train
33%
Fatality risk due to Train collision and/or derailment fell by 39% since version 5. As was
shown for passenger individual risk (Section 9.3), the biggest reduction was due to HET-12
Derailment of passenger trains, which also remains the biggest contributor to this risk
category, with 0.1 PT driver fatalities per year.
SRMv6 predicts 0.2 PT driver fatalities per year due to HEM-14 Workforce struck/crushed by
train. This is broadly equivalent to the corresponding value in SRMv5.
There has been a large increase in the risk from electric shock due to the increased
observed occurrence of this event.
9.4.3
Freight train drivers
Chart 19.
Freight train driver individual risk
Probability of fatality =
1 in 17,700 per year
Other
25%
Train collision
and/or
derailment
41%
Struck / crushed
by train
34%
Version 6.1 – June 2009
39
Individual Risk
SRMv6 predicts one fatality in every 17,700 freight train (FT) drivers per year, which is a
reduction of 11% from the corresponding risk in SRMv5. Chart 19 above shows the individual
risk to freight train drivers, broken down into the event types defined in Section 5.
Individual FT driver risk due to Train collision and/or derailment has decreased by 17% from
that in SRMv5 to 0.06 fatalities per year.
SRMv6 predicts 0.05 FT driver fatalities per year due to HEM-14 Workforce struck/crushed
by train. This is broadly equivalent to the value reported in SRMv6.
9.5
Members of the public
In hazardous industries where all operations occur within a discrete, clearly-defined,
geographical location, the numbers of exposed MOP, and therefore individual risk to MOP,
can be determined. For the GB railway, however, it is only possible to discuss fatality risk to
the MOP population as a whole.
The dominant fatality risk to MOP occurs at level crossings, equivalent to 9.3 fatalities per
year. This represents 83% of all MOP fatality risk and 34% of all fatality risk on the GB
railway. It is, however, a 5% improvement to the corresponding risk reported in SRMv5.
40
Version 6.1 – June 2009
The F-N Curve
10
Multiple Fatality Risk: The F-N Curve
10.1
F-N results
Whilst there are currently no specific criteria associated with the acceptability of the
frequency of train accidents that could potentially lead to multiple fatalities, it is important to
understand the vulnerability of the railway to such accidents. Using the event tree structures
within SRMv6, for all the train accident hazardous events with the potential to lead to multiple
fatalities, an overall F-N curve (frequency versus number of fatalities) for train accidents can
be produced. This curve is shown in Chart 21.
Predictably, the curve shows that as the number of potential fatalities associated with an
event increases, the frequency of occurrence of the event reduces rapidly. Key points on the
curve are given in Table 9 and Table 10 below. The latest figures for version 6 can be
compared with results from previous versions of the SRM (note: versions 2-4 are
incomplete).
Figures in Table 9 are represented graphically in Chart 20.
Table 9.
Frequency of train-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities
Incidents (events/year)
Number of fatalities
(passengers, staff and MOP)
SRMv2
(Jul-01)
SRMv3
(Feb-03)
SRMv4
(Jan-05)
SRMv5
(Aug-06)
SRMv6
(May-09)
>=5 fatalities
0.700
0.416
0.265
0.189
0.186
>=10 fatalities
0.320
0.180
0.127
0.110
0.065
>=25 fatalities
[not included]
[not included]
[not included]
0.021
0.020
Table 10. Return periods of train-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities
Time between incidents (years)
Number of fatalities
(passengers, staff and MOP)
SRMv2
(Jul-01)
SRMv3
(Feb-03)
SRMv4
(Jan-05)
SRMv5
(Aug-06)
SRMv6
(May-09)
>=5 fatalities
1.4
2.4
3.8
5.3
5.4
>=10 fatalities
3.1
5.6
7.9
9.1
15.3
>=25 fatalities
[not included]
[not included]
[not included]
48.5
50.2
The continued increase in time between train-related incidents that lead to multiple fatalities
can be seen from version 2 to version 6. The more recent reductions are due to generally
improving safety performance trends, as reflected in the SRMv6 train accident model results,
as well as changes and enhancements to the train accident models themselves.
For example, the train derailment models (HET-12 and HET-13) have been modified to
represent a greater spread of derailment speeds by the addition of a high-speed derailment
model. This results in a considerably more accurate representation of high-consequence
Version 6.1 – June 2009
41
The F-N Curve
derailment events. Similarly, the level crossing models (HET-10 and HET-11) have been
reviewed and significantly revised to align more closely with the All Level Crossing Risk
Model (ALCRM). These changes have resulted in a change in the consequence profile for
the expanded set of level crossing types, taking into account such issues as the effects of
road vehicle types, more accurate level crossing train speeds, etc.
Chart 20.
Frequency of train accident-related incidents leading to multiple fatalities
(events/year)
Estimated frequency of multiple fatality events
0.7
v2, Jul-01
0.6
events/year
0.5
v3, Feb-03
0.4
0.3
v4, Jan-05
v5, Aug-06
v6, May-09
0.2
0.1
0.0
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
>=5 fatalities
10.2
Jan-06
Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
>=10 fatalities
F-N modelling approach
The approach to F-N modelling has been reviewed for SRMv6, and minor adjustments have
been made to improve the accuracy of the results. However, these changes have not
significantly altered the overall F-N curve results. As in SRMv5, only the train accident
models have been considered as these are the main contributors to multiple fatality events.
Previous F-N figures in fact included all hazardous events, but it is considered that the
contribution of the non-train accident portion of these figures was in fact minimal.
SRMv3 F-N results were presented in two versions – ‘with’ and ‘without’ the effects of TPWS.
For comparison in this section the ‘without TPWS’ figures have been used, as SRMv3 was
produced during the transition period before TPWS had been fully implemented.
42
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Version 6.1 – June 2009
1.00E-07
1.00E-06
1.00E-05
1.00E-04
1.00E-03
1.00E-02
10
100
1,000
Chart 21.
1.00E-01
1.00E+00
1
Number of passenger, staff and member of public fatalities
The F-N Curve
F-N Curve for all train accident hazardous events
43
Cumulative frequency (events/year)
The F-N Curve
As in previous SRM versions, the basic F-N analysis would suggest that the frequency of
accidents leading to 25 fatalities has reduced dramatically. However, even though the
event trees within the SRM break down the hazardous events into a large number of different
potential outcomes, each consequence estimate still only represents a single ‘average’
consequence for that outcome. In reality a greater spread of consequences might actually be
possible. This is the case, for example, with MOP fatalities in models involving the spillage of
hazardous goods, where the possibility for very high consequence events exists, albeit with a
very low frequency.
Consequently, while the average risk associated with such outcomes is accurately modelled
within the SRM, the full range of higher and lower consequence outcomes that make up this
average is not always explicitly modelled. The F-N analysis has been adjusted for highfatality MOP events. The adjusted results have been calculated by redistributing the highfatality portion of MOP fatality events whilst maintaining the overall level of risk. As a result of
the correction the frequencies of higher fatality events are now considered to be more
realistically represented on the F-N curve.
44
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Passenger Train Derailments
11
Passenger Train Derailments
Passenger train derailments are the greatest contributor to passenger risk resulting from train
accidents, contributing 1.62 FWI/yr of a total 3.2 FWI/yr (51%). For this version of the SRM,
additional modelling of passenger train derailments was carried out to consider the risk from
high-speed derailments in greater detail. Chart 22 shows that the average speed of
passenger train derailments has increased over recent years – high-speed (lower likelihood)
passenger train derailments have therefore been modelled separately for the first time in
SRMv6.
Chart 22.
Average speed of passenger train derailments
Average derailment speeds
70
Speed (mph)
60
50
40
Average Speed (mph)
30
20
Linear (Average Speed
(mph))
10
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
0
average incident speed (by year)
The train derailment incidents have been divided into slow, medium, and fast derailment
categories. The greatest proportion of incidents is at lower speeds, with 45% occurring at a
slow speed. The medium speed group involves a further 41% of the derailments and the
remaining 14% have been classified as fast. In order to define these groupings, the
consequences of slow speed derailments are modelled as if they occurred at 15mph, the
medium speed derailments are modelled as if they occurred at 40mph, and the high speed
derailments are modelled as if they occurred at 100mph.
For more details, see Section E.2 in Appendix E. This section includes a chart showing the
distribution of derailment speeds.
11.1
Impact of changes upon risk
11.1.1
Overall change from SRMv4 to SRMv6
Both the frequency and consequences of passenger train derailments have reduced since
version 5. The reduction in estimated frequency is a result of a genuine reduction in the
number of passenger train derailment incidents in recent years. In 2006 there were four, in
2007 there were seven, and in 2008 there were five; the average rate over the last five years
is 6.2/year. The SRMv6 frequency takes account of passenger train derailments over a
period of up to 18 years, particularly where there is a shortage of precursor data. Therefore,
Version 6.1 – June 2009
45
Passenger Train Derailments
the final frequency is slightly higher than what the most recent data suggests, but
significantly lower than the frequencies in version 5. The average consequences per event
have also reduced, which is due to improved crashworthiness – this is discussed further in
Section 14.1.3, in terms of passenger containment.
The overall changes from version 4 to version 6 are described in Table 11.
Table 11. SRMv4 to SRMv6 differences
Frequency
(events/year)
Av. consequences
per event (FWI)
Risk
(FWI/year)
Version 4
(Jan 2005)
9.82
0.30
2.91
Version 5
(Aug 2006)
9.14
0.34
3.13
Version 6
(May 2009)
7.00
0.28
1.98
2.14 (-23%)
0.06 (-18%)
1.15 (- 37%)
Change from
SRMv5 to SRMv6
11.1.2
Contributions from derailment speeds
For ease of comparison between version 5 and 6 the figures in Table 12 relate to derailments
on open track only. The marked difference due to the new derailment speed modelling is
shown by considering the average consequences per event. For version 6, the average
consequence for a fast derailment is 0.99 FWI per event, whereas for version 5 the average
consequence was 0.47 FWI per event for fast derailments (which also covers medium speed
derailments).
The consequences of a slow derailment are only 4% of a fast derailment and the
consequences of a medium speed derailment are 21% of a fast derailment. This also shows
that the additional modelling of fast derailments, which represent only 14% of all passenger
train derailments now account for 56% of passenger train derailment risk.
Table 12. Contribution from derailment speeds (on open track only)
Frequency
(Events per Year)
Speeds
Slow
Version 5
4.34
Version 6
3.09
46
Med
Fast
4.00
2.78
0.94
Average Consequences
per Event (FWI)
Slow
Med
0.12
0.04
Fast
0.47
0.21
Risk (FWI / year)
Slow
Med
0.51
0.99
0.14
Fast
1.87
0.59
0.93
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Passenger Train Derailments
11.1.3
SRMv6 consequences with and without containment
An allowance has been made in the update of the passenger train derailment risk model for
improved containment of passengers within carriages in the event of trains falling on their
side. Modern rolling stock is fitted with laminated windows which have greater strength and
the carriages are much more likely to contain passengers in the event of overturning during
catastrophic events such as high-speed derailments. RSSB research report, T424
Requirements for train windows in passenger train vehicles, makes the following statement
regarding ejection from vehicles:
Investigations of the previous seven significant accidents on the UK mainline,
spanning from 1996-2006, indicated that there have been 12 fatalities due to
passengers being ejected through train body-side windows. All of the ejections
occurred in vehicles which rolled to 45 degrees or further in the lateral direction. In
those circumstances a loss of integrity of the window led to a loss of passenger
containment. It was found that if ejected from a body-side window there was a greater
than 50% chance of a passenger receiving fatal injuries.
To take account of the greater use of laminated glass, the passenger injury consequences
associated with the derailment end events, where carriages overturn, have been reduced
slightly. This was achieved by changing a proportion of previously predicted fatalities to
major injuries. The results of these changes are shown in Table 13 below:
Table 13. Impact of containment on SRMv6 risk (open track only)
Frequency
(Events per Year)
Average Consequences
per Event (FWI)
Risk (FWI / year)
Speeds
Slow
Med
Fast
Slow
Med
Fast
Slow
Med
Fast
Without
Containment
3.09
2.78
0.94
0.04
0.22
1.12
0.14
0.61
1.06
With
Containment
3.09
2.78
0.94
0.04
0.21
0.99
0.14
0.59
0.93
It can be seen from this table that the greatest benefits are achieved for the high-speed
derailments. This aligns with recent experience – for example, the Class 390 Pendolino EMU
that derailed at Grayrigg was fitted with laminated glass [Ref. 9]. Despite the accident
occurring at a high speed, most of the train windows withstood the accident and only a single
fatality occurred. This is less than might otherwise have been expected had a different type
of stock that did not have laminated glass been involved in the accident.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
47
Supporting Risk Decisions
12
Using Risk Information to Support Decisions
The principles that are applied to taking decisions in the GB railway industry are described in
the industry publication Taking Safe Decisions [Ref. 6]. The document describes how risk
information is used to support judgements about whether or not particular measures are
necessary in order to reduce risk to a level that is as low as is reasonably practicable
(ALARP).
There are various ways in which this judgement can be reached. If there is established good
practice, and it is valid and appropriate in the particular circumstances envisaged, then this
suggests that the practice is ‘reasonably practicable’. Where no established good practice
exists, then the judgement must be based on an estimation of costs and benefits. Risk
estimates and information are used to help decision takers apply the test of reasonable
practicability as outlined in case law:
…a computation must be made…in which the quantum of risk is placed on one scale
and the sacrifice involved in the measures necessary for averting the risk (whether in
money, time or trouble) is placed in the other [Ref. 10].
In practice, the ‘sacrifice’ is taken to be the costs of a potential measure and the ‘quantum of
risk’ is the safety benefit associated with that measure – a collective risk estimate quantified
in ‘fatalities and weighted injuries’ (FWI). The value of preventing a fatality (VPF) is used to
translate the safety benefit to a financial value. The value of the VPF for the calendar year
2008 was calculated by RSSB, from DfT guidance, to be £1,652,000. The VPF figure is recalculated annually and is available on the RSSB website [Ref. 11].
The balancing of costs and safety benefits can be undertaken qualitatively or quantitatively.
In some cases, simple inexpensive controls can be adopted on the basis of qualitative
analysis, using professional judgement. However, a more quantitative approach, using formal
cost-benefit analysis (CBA), may be used to support a judgement where issues are more
complex.
Often decisions involve investments in measures where costs and benefits will accrue over a
number of years. Therefore all relevant future costs and benefits must be calculated in
present-value terms. A discount rate is chosen to do this, and net present value calculated.
Further guidance on how to do this may be found in Taking Safe Decisions.
Ultimately the output of a CBA provides an indication of the relative scale of costs and
benefits and is only an input to assist in the taking of decisions. Judgement must be applied
to each individual case. Further guidance about how to take safety related decisions and how
to use the results of a CBA to inform decision making are provided in Taking Safe Decisions.
The SRM provides system-wide risk information that duty holders might use as an input to
their risk assessment and analysis activities, and hence CBA. However, in the final analysis
transport operators must satisfy themselves that any risk estimates they use to support their
decisions are valid given their particular circumstances.
48
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Supporting Risk Decisions
SRM templates can be obtained from RSSB to support this process. These templates can be
used to estimate risk from portions of the network. For example they can be used to estimate
the risk profile of a given train operator. RSSB is working towards the development of CBA
tools to help our members undertake these types of analysis.
For details of how to obtain more information about the support we can provide, please refer
to Section 14.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
49
SRM Governance and RPB Updates
13
SRM Governance and RPB Updates
13.1
SRM practitioners working group
The SRM Practitioners Working Group (SRMPWG) is the industry governance body of the
SRM. It was set up to facilitate a structured process for eliciting industry’s views on the
development and use of the SRM. The fundamental purpose of the SRMPWG is to provide
governance for changes to the SRM.
The SRMPWG was formed under the authority of the Safety Policy Group (SPG) to engage
stakeholders in the development and control of future versions of the SRM and its related
outputs which include the RPB, SRM Templates, and related documents such as the update
of Railway Group Guidance Note GE/GN 8561, now entitled Guidance on the Preparation of
Risk Assessments for transport operators. It comprises a range of industry representatives
including Network Rail, train operators, rolling stock manufacturers, infrastructure
maintenance companies and the ORR. The aims of the group are:
To ensure that the SRM and its outputs meet the needs of the industry.
To provide stakeholders with a formal opportunity to contribute to, oversee, and
recommend developments from the SRM, and to provide transparency for any
development activities carried out by RSSB.
To create a forum for industry to inform RSSB of changes to the network that should
be reflected in the SRM, thus ensuring that the SRM provides the best possible
representation of the underlying level of risk on the railway.
To enhance the channels through which RSSB delivers, promotes and supports SRM
risk information.
13.2
Independent review of the SRM
Given that the SRM is being used to provide the ORR with information to monitor industry
performance with respect to HLOS safety metrics, the model and its related processes have
been subjected to an independent peer review conducted by the Health and Safety
Laboratory (HSL). The review was undertaken in order to:
Determine the integrity and accuracy of the risk estimates developed via the SRM
and through the application of the SRM modelling processes.
Identify any issues that might hamper the ability to make comparisons of risk
estimates from successive versions of the SRM during the HLOS period.
Make any recommendations for change of the SRM modelling approach that might
improve either the accuracy of the risk estimates, or the ability of users to fully
understand their meaning and tolerances.
A number of recommendations were generated as part of the review [Ref. 3] and these have
all been addressed and closed out to HSL’s satisfaction during the production of SRMv6.
One particular revision of process that resulted from this review was a changed approach to
trending using normalisers (see Section D.2 in Appendix D for more details).
50
Version 6.1 – June 2009
SRM Governance and RPB Updates
13.3
Update history
Since the issue of version 1 of the RPB in 2001, the RPB has been updated regularly so that
the risk profile remains as current as possible. Since version 2, the RPB has been issued
approximately every 18 months. Version 6 of the RPB is actually the seventh issue. The
update history up to and including this version is shown in Table 14 below.
Table 14. SRM update history
13.4
Version
Issue Date
Major Change (from previous version)
1
January 2001
First version
2
July 2001
3
February 2003
4
January 2005
5
August 2006
Removal of Mk1, inclusion of OTP SRM
5.5
May 2008
Interim partial update
Change in FWI weightings
6
May 2009
Full data update (to 30 September 2008),
model enhancements,
Control Period 4, HLOS benchmark version
Inclusion of TPWS
Future updates
After this current version, SRMv6, a further full update of the SRM will be produced in March
2014 so that the underlying safety performance over Control Period 4 can be measured. The
following figure (Chart 23) illustrates a potential timeline for future updates of the SRM. This
timeline shows at least one full update of the SRM, halfway through Control Period 4. It may
be appropriate to carry out further interim updates over this period for the following reasons:
New analyses or analysis methods are incorporated into the SRM or the SRM is
extended to cover new hazardous events beyond the current scope.
A significant change in the risk profile becomes apparent due to the introduction of a
new control measure or a significant deterioration in the application of one or more
existing control measures is identified.
If an update to the modelling approach is applied to the SRM after the benchmark version 6,
then version 6 may need to be recalculated to take account of any modelling changes, and
allow the risk profile over Control Period 4 to be calculated consistently.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
51
SRM Governance and RPB Updates
Chart 23.
Timeline for future updates of the SRM and the RPB
Issue 6
Mar 2009
(risk figures)
Jun 2009
(RPB)
2008
2009
Control Period 3
Issue 7
Sep 2011
2010
2011
2012
Control Period 4
Issue 8
Mar 2014
(risk figures)
Jun 2014
(RPB)
2013
2014
Minimum committed future updates
RSSB has committed to deliver at least one further update of the SRM prior to the 2014
release to coincide with the end of the HLOS period. The release of two intermediate
updates in this period is currently being considered.
52
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Injury Weightings
14
Injury Weightings
The current fatality and weighted injuries (FWI) figures are based on a set of weightings that
came into effect on 1 April 2008. The weightings were approved by the RSSB Board
following a major research project, and consultation with the industry, ORR, and DfT. This
was the first time that the weightings had changed since the use of FWI as a measure of
railway safety first gained widespread acceptance in the 1980s.
Table 15 shows the different injury classifications and their associated weightings, as used in
this report. The figures in the weight column represent the number of injuries of each type
that are ‘statistically equivalent’ to one fatality. For example, if an accident resulted in one
fatality and three major injuries, the total FWI would be 1.3.
Table 15. Injury degrees and weightings
Injury degree
Definition
Fatality
Death occurs within one year of the accident.
Major injury
As defined in RIDDOR 1995 [Ref. 12] – includes losing
consciousness, most fractures, major dislocations and
hospital stays of 24 hours or more.
1/10
RIDDOR-reportable
minor injury
Physical injuries that are not major, but which result in
more than three days’ absence from work (for members
of the workforce) or require hospital treatment (for
passengers and members of the public).
1/200
Non RIDDOR-reportable
minor injury
All other physical injuries.
1/1000
Class 1 shock / trauma
Caused by witnessing a fatality or being involved in a
collision, derailment or train fire.
1/200
Class 2 shock / trauma
Other causes, such as verbal abuse, near misses and
witnessing non-fatal assaults.
1/1000
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Weight
1
53
Access to the Model
15
Access to the model and its outputs
The SRM has been developed as a resource for the railway industry. The RPB is just one
output of the SRM, and the Risk Team at RSSB is on hand to support our members in
getting the maximum benefit from the model in a range of different ways. Our key
deliverables and services are summarised in the following sub-sections.
15.1
The SRM
The SRM is a comprehensive mathematical representation of 120 hazardous events
affecting passengers, workers and members of the public (MOP) that could lead directly to
injury or fatality on the railway within the boundaries described in Section 3. It is a detailed
fault tree and event tree analysis model which requires FaultTree+ (FT+) software and a
comprehensive understanding of the model. The SRM itself is generally not made available
in electronic format to users outside RSSB.
15.2
The RPB document
The outputs of the SRM are made available in a form that will assist members and other
interested parties in undertaking risk assessment without the need to undertake detailed
software-based fault tree and event tree analyses. The outputs from the SRM are presented
in this document and can be downloaded through www.rssb.co.uk.
15.3
SRM guidance
Guidance on the use of the SRM outputs for risk assessment formats are provided in the
published RSSB Guidance Document – Guidance on the preparation of risk assessments for
transport operators [Ref. 13] available from www.rssb.co.uk.
15.4
Templates
SRM templates can be obtained from RSSB (through www.rssb.co.uk) to support this
process. These templates can be used to estimate risk from portions of the network. For
example, they can be used to estimate the risk profile of a given train operator.
They provide a starting point for transport operators to assess the risk of their own operations
and are designed to be used in conjunction with the RPB and the SRM.
The templates have been designed so that they are relevant for all of the following groups:
a) Passenger train operators.
b) Freight train operators.
Collectively known as transport
operators
c) Infrastructure managers and contractors
54
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Access to the Model
15.5
Assistance
If you would like any assistance or training in the use of the SRMv6 and its associated
outputs, please contact the risk team on 020 3142 5464 or risk@rssb.co.uk.
The risk team can provide on-site training and visits for groups or individuals – they can also
offer a hot desk at their offices where you can work closely with the team on a risk problem
such as a risk assessment or template analysis.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
55
Contributors
16
Contributors
Details of the preparation of the Risk Profile Bulletin are shown below:
Prepared by:
Stuart Archbold
George Bearfield
Ben Gilmartin
Katherine Green
David Griffin
Chris Harrison
Oliver Kneale
Richard Minson
Wayne Murphy
Tracey Tan
Kevin Thompson
Reviewed by:
Colin Dennis
George Bearfield
Scope and changes to version 6 endorsed by:
SRM Practitioners Working Group (SRMPWG)
Safety Policy Group (SPG)
Approved by:
Colin Dennis
Release date:
June 2009
Correspondence should be addressed to the above at:
RSSB
Block 2 Angel Square,
1 Torrens Street
London
EC1V 1NY
56
Version 6.1 – June 2009
References
17
References
1.
RSSB, The Railway Strategic Safety Plan 2008-2010, January 2008.
2.
Department for Transport paper on NMF: http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/strategy/
whitepapers/whitepapercm7176/railwhitepapersupportingdocs/nmfdemands.pdf.
3.
Health and Safety Laboratory, Review of the Rail Safety and Standards Board's Safety
Risk Model, RSU/2008/26, December 2008.
4.
Department for Transport, Delivering a sustainable railway, CM-7176, July 2007.
5.
The Health and Safety Executive, Reducing risks, protecting people. Crown copyright,
UK, 2001, http://www.rssb.co.uk/safety/safety_strategies/sdmoukr.asp.
6.
RSSB, Taking Safe Decisions – How Britain’s railways take decisions that affect safety,
2008, www.rssb.co.uk/safety/safety_strategies/ sdmoukr.asp.
7.
Office of Rail Regulation, Internal guidance and general principles for assessing
whether health and safety risks on Britain’s railways have been reduced ‘so far as is
reasonably practicable’, 2008.
8.
Office of Rail Regulation, National Rail Trends, 2009.
9.
RAIB Rail Accident Report, Derailment at Grayrigg, report 20/2008, v2, January 2009.
10.
All England Law Reports, Edwards vs. National Coal Board, 1949, vol. 1, pp. 743–749.
11.
RSSB Safety Strategy Paper, www.rssb.co.uk/safety/safety_strategies/vpf.asp.
12.
The Health and Safety Executive, Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous
Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR), HMSO, 1995.
13.
RSSB, Guidance on the preparation of risk assessments within railway safety cases,
Railway Group Guidance Note GE/GN8561, Issue 1, June 2002.
14.
Ovenstone I. M. (1973) A psychiatric approach to the diagnosis on suicide, British
journal of psychiatry, 123 (572), pp15-21.
15.
RSSB, Profile of safety risk associated with on-track plant on the mainline railway,
Issue 1, March 2004.
16.
Arthur D Little Consulting, All Level Crossing Risk Model - an Enhanced Specification,
a report prepared for RSSB, April 2008.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
57
Glossary
18
Glossary
Term
Definition
ALARP/SFAIRP
The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA) places duties on
employers in the UK to ensure safety ‘so far as is reasonably practicable’
(SFAIRP). When these duties are considered in relation to risk management
the duty is sometimes described as a requirement to reduce risk to a level
that is ‘as low as is reasonably practicable’ (ALARP). These terms therefore
express the same concept in different contexts and should be considered to
be synonymous.
Assault
SMIS records incidents in which ‘in circumstances related to their work, a
member of staff is assaulted, threatened or abused, thereby affecting their
safety or welfare.’ BTP records and categorises criminal assaults in
accordance with Home Office rules.
Automatic Train
Protection (ATP)
This system provides either a continuous or regular update of speed
monitoring for each train and causes the brakes to apply if the driver fails to
bring the speed within the required limit. It can minimise – but not eradicate –
the chances of a train passing a signal at danger.
Automatic Warning
System (AWS)
This is a system that provides audible and visual warnings to the driver on the
approach to signals, certain level crossings and emergency, temporary, and
certain permanent speed restrictions. It is a track inductor-based system
linked to the aspects of fixed line-side signals.
Child
This term is used to describe a person aged 15 years or below.
Collective risk
In general the collective risk is the aggregate risk, possibly to a range of
different exposed groups, associated with a particular scenario or hazardous
event. The Safety Risk Model (SRM) calculates collective risk as the average
number of fatalities, or fatalities and weighted injuries per year that would be
expected to occur from a hazardous event, or group of hazardous events.
When undertaking an assessment of whether or not a measure is necessary
to reduce risk to a level that is ALARP the change in risk associated with the
measure is a collective risk estimate.
Consequences
The number of fatalities, major and minor injuries, shock and trauma resulting
from the occurrence of a particular hazardous event outcome.
Control measures
The measures (hardware systems and equipment or procedural) that are put
in place to prevent or minimise the frequency of a hazardous event and/or the
consequences following the occurrence of a hazardous event.
Escalation factor
A system failure, sub-system failure, component failure, human error,
physical effect or operational condition which could, individually or in
combination with other escalation factors, result in significantly different
outcomes following a hazardous event. For instance, following a train
derailment there could be a bridge collapse onto a train, a fire or a hazardous
goods release. Escalation factors are those that give rise to increased
consequence outcomes following the occurrence of a hazardous event.
Fatalities and weighted
injuries (FWI)
An overall measure of safety harm, taking account of injury and fatalities in
the following way: One FWI = one fatality = 10 major injuries = 200 RIDDORreportable minor injuries or class 1 shock/traumas = 1,000 non-RIDDORreportable minor injuries or class 2 shock/traumas.
Fatality
Death within one year of the causal accident.
58
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Glossary
Term
Definition
Frequency
The frequency of an event is the number of times it occurs over a specified
period of time (e.g., the number of events per year).
Hazardous event
An event that has the potential to lead directly to death or injury.
Individual risk
Individual Risk relates to the probability of fatality per year to which an
individual is exposed from the operation of the railway. Individual risk is a
useful notion when organisations are seeking to understand their risk profile
and to prioritise and target safety management effort. The ORR categorises
individual risk as ‘unacceptable’, ‘tolerable’ and ‘broadly acceptable’ for the
purposes of prioritising and targeting its enforcement activity.
Level crossing
The ground-level interface between a road and the railway.
Improper use refers to occasions when users cross when a train is
imminent, but are either honestly mistaken about its proximity and the
warnings given by signs, sirens and so on (error), or deliberately disregard
them (violation).
Proper use refers to occasions when users begin to cross entirely
legitimately, but unforeseen events lead to a transgression (as when a motor
vehicle breaks down half-way across a crossing, or the level crossing fails
due to an error outside the user's control).
Major injury
An injury to a passenger, staff or member of the public as defined in
Schedule 1 to RIDDOR 1995 (including most fractures, amputations, losses
of consciousness), or where the injury resulted in hospital attendance for
more than 24 hours.
Minor injury
Physical injuries to passengers, staff or members of the public that are not
major injuries.
For workforce, minor injuries are RIDDOR-reportable if they result in greater
than three days’ lost time. For passengers and members of the public, minor
injuries are RIDDOR-reportable if the injured person was taken from the
accident site direct to the hospital.
Other minor injuries are not reportable under RIDDOR.
Movement accidents
These are accidents to people involving trains (in motion or stationary), but
excluding injuries sustained in train accidents.
Network Rail managed
infrastructure (NRMI)
This falls within the boundaries of Network Rail’s operational railway and
includes the permanent way, land within the line-side fence, and plant used
for signalling or exclusively for supplying electricity for operational purposes
to the railway. It does not include stations, depots, yards or sidings that are
owned by, or leased to, other parties. However, it does include the permanent
way at stations and plant within these locations.
Ovenstone criteria
Explicit set of criteria, adapted for the railway, which provides an objective
assessment of suicide where a coroner’s verdict is not available. The criteria
are based on the findings of a 1970 research project into rail suicides and
cover aspects such as the presence (or not) of a suicide note, the clear intent
to commit suicide, behavioural patterns, previous suicide attempts, prolonged
bouts of depression and instability levels [Ref. 14].
Non-movement
accident
These are accidents unconnected with the movement of trains, which occur
to people on railway premises.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
59
Glossary
Term
Definition
Outcomes
The range of scenarios that could arise following the occurrence of a
hazardous event.
Passenger
A person on railway infrastructure, who either intends to travel, is travelling or
has travelled. Note this does not include passengers who are trespassing or
who commit suicide – they are included as members of the public.
Possession
The complete stoppage of all normal train movements on a running line or
siding for engineering purposes. This also includes protection as defined by
the Rule Book (GE/RT 8000).
Precursor
A system failure, sub-system failure, component failure, human error or
operational condition which could, individually or in combination with other
precursors, result in the occurrence of a hazardous event.
Probability
The likelihood of an event occurring over an unspecified period of time or on
demand (when an individual component or system is called upon to operate).
Public (members of)
Persons other than passengers or workforce members (that is, trespassers,
persons on business and other persons). Note this includes passengers who
are trespassing (when crossing tracks between platforms, for example).
Residual risk
Residual risk relates to the level of risk remaining when the current risk
control measures and their degrees of effectiveness are taken into account.
Risk contribution
This is a term used in the SRM analysis software. It relates to a reduction in
the total collective risk estimate for a hazardous event if the frequency or
probability of a precursor, or escalation factor or group of escalation factors,
were reduced to zero.
RIDDOR (Reporting of
Injuries, Diseases and
Dangerous
Occurrences
Regulations)
RIDDOR 1995 is a set of health and safety regulations that require any major
injuries, illnesses or accidents occurring in the workplace to be formally
reported to the enforcing authority. It defines major injuries and lists notifiable
diseases – many of which can be occupational in origin. It also defines
notifiable dangerous occurrences, such as collisions and derailments.
Running line
A line that is ordinarily used for the passage of trains, as shown in Table ‘A’ of
the sectional appendices.
Safety Management
Information System
(SMIS)
A national database used by railway undertakings and infrastructure
managers to record any safety-related events that occur on the railway. SMIS
data is accessible to all of the companies who use the system, so that it may
be used to analyse risk, predict trends and focus action on major areas of
safety concern.
Safety Risk Model
(SRM)
A quantitative representation of the safety risk that can result from the
operation and maintenance of the GB rail network. It comprises 120 individual
models, each representing a type of hazardous event (defined as an event or
incident that has the potential to result in injuries or fatalities).
Shock/trauma
Shock or traumatic stress affecting an employee, passenger or member of
the public who has been involved in, or a witness to, an event.
Class 1 refers to shock or traumatic stress related to being involved in or
witnessing fatality incidents and train accidents (collisions, derailments and
fires).
Class 2 refers to shock or traumatic stress related to all other causes of
shock/trauma, such as verbal assaults, witnessing physical assaults,
witnessing non-fatal incidents and near misses.
60
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Glossary
Term
Definition
Signal passed at
danger (SPAD)
An incident when any part of a train has passed a stop signal at danger
without authority or where an in-cab signalled movement authority has been
exceeded without authority.
A category A SPAD is a SPAD that occurs when the stop aspect, end of incab signalled movement authority or indication (and any associated
preceding cautionary indications) was displayed correctly, in sufficient time
for the train to be stopped safely at the signal or end of in-cab movement
authority.
Suicide and suspected
suicide
A fatality is classified as a suicide where a coroner’s verdict is suicide. It is
classified as a suspected suicide where the coroner has yet to return a
verdict or returns an open verdict, but where objective evidence of suicide
exists based on the application of Ovenstone criteria.
Track worker
A member of workforce whose responsibilities include engineering or
technical activities on or about the track. This includes track maintenance,
civil structure inspection, S&T renewal/upgrade, engineering supervision,
acting as a controller of site safety (COSS), hand signaller or lookout and
machine operation.
Trackside
This is a collective term that refers to the running line, Network Rail managed
sidings, and depots.
Train accident
RIDDOR-reportable train accidents are defined in RIDDOR 1995. To be
reportable under RIDDOR, the accident must be on or affect the running line.
There are additional criteria for different types of accident, and these can vary
depending on whether or not the accident involved a passenger train.
Train Protection and
Warning System
(TPWS)
A safety system that automatically applies the brakes on a train which either
passes a signal at danger, or exceeds a given speed when approaching a
signal at danger, a permissible speed reduction or the buffer stops in a
terminal platform.
A TPWS intervention is when the system applies the train’s brakes without
this action having been taken by the driver first.
A TPWS activation is when the system applies the train’s brakes after the
driver has already initiated braking.
TPWS reset and continue incidents occur when the driver has reset the
TPWS after an activation (or intervention) and continued forward without the
signaller’s authority.
Trespass
Trespass occurs when people go where they are never authorised to be,
rather than where they behave inappropriately (either from error or violation)
at places where they are allowed to go at certain times and under certain
conditions, such as level crossings.
Workforce
Persons working for the industry on railway operations (either as direct
employees or under contract).
Version 6.1 – June 2009
61
Acronyms
List of Acronyms
Term
Definition
ABCL
AHB
ALARP
AOCL
ASPR
BTP
CBA
CCTV
DfT
DEMU
DLOCO
DMU
ECS
ELOCO
EMU
FP
FT
FTF
FTP
FWI
H&V
HEM
HEN
HET
HLOS
HST
KRA
LX/LC
MCB
MG
MOP
NRMI
OC
OHL
OHLE
ORR
OTM
OTP
PT
RGS
RIDDOR
ROGS
RPB
RSSB
automatic barrier crossing locally monitored
automatic half-barrier crossing
as low as reasonably practicable
automatic open crossing, locally monitored
annual safety performance report
British Transport Police
cost-benefit analysis
closed-circuit television
Department for Transport
diesel electric multiple unit
diesel locomotive
diesel multiple unit
empty coaching stock
electric locomotive
electric multiple unit
footpath level crossing
freight train
derailment of freight trains on freight only lines
derailment of freight trains on passenger lines
fatalities and weighted injuries
heating and ventilation
hazardous event – movement
hazardous event – non-movement
hazardous event – train
high level output specification
high speed train
key risk areas
level crossing
manually controlled barrier crossing
manned gates
member of the public
Network Rail managed infrastructure
open crossing
overhead line
overhead line equipment
Office of Rail Regulation
on-track machine
on-track plant
passenger train
railway group standard
Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995
Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006
Risk Profile Bulletin
Rail Safety and Standards Board
62
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Acronyms
Term
Definition
RTA
RV
SBC
SBC+WL
SFAIRP
SMIS
SPAD
SPC
SPC+MWL
SPG
SRM
SRMPWG
SSP
TPWS
UWC
UWC+MWL
UWC+T
UWG
VPF
WSF
road traffic accident
road vehicle
station barrow crossing
station barrow crossing with white indicator lights
so far as is reasonably practicable
safety management information system
signal passed at danger
station pedestrian crossing
station pedestrian crossing with miniature warning lights
safety policy group
Safety Risk Model
Safety Risk Model Practitioners Working Group
Strategic Safety Plan
train protection and warning system
user-worked crossing
user-worked crossing with miniature warning lights
user-worked crossing with telephone
user-worked gated crossing
value of preventing a fatality
wrong-side signal failures
Version 6.1 – June 2009
63
Page left blank intentionally
64
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix A
Appendix A: SRMv6 Risk Estimates by Hazardous Event
Appendix A1
A.1
SRMv6 results by hazardous event
Frequency, consequence, and risk estimates by hazardous event
The tables in this Appendix present the 120 hazardous events on the mainline railway –
separated into train accidents, movement accidents, and non-movement accidents. For each
hazardous event, the risk, frequency, and average consequences per event are given,
together with its potential to result in multiple fatality consequences. The frequencies
calculated for all the train accident hazardous events relate to the frequencies of all incidents
per year whether or not they lead to an injury.
However, for the movement and non-movement accidents, the predicted hazardous event
frequencies relate only to the frequency of the incidents that lead directly to injury. Due to the
lack of data for these hazardous events, it has not been possible to quantify the frequency of
all incidents and determine the probability of an injury occurring. The types of frequency
estimate applicable to each hazardous event is identified on each of the tables.
The number of fatalities, major injuries and reportable and non-reportable minor injuries per
event are presented in Table A1. Reasons for variation in reported risk between versions 5.5
and 6 are contained in Table A2.
In order to understand the way in which Table A1 is constructed, the derivation of the total
risk is as follows (the numbers in brackets relate to the column numbers in Table A1):
Total
= Freq x
Risk
(5)
FWI/
year
(3)
Events/
year
[ FAT
(6)
+
(11)
+
(16)
Fatalities/
event
+ { 0.1 x MA} + { 0.005 x (MR + ST1) } + {0.001 x (MN + ST2) } ]
(7)
+
(12)
+
(17)
Major
injury/event
(8)
+
(13)
+
(18)
Rep minor
injury/event
(10)
+
(15)
+
(20)
Shock/trauma
1/event
(9)
+
(14)
+
(19)
(10)
+
(15)
+
(20)
Non-rep minor Shock/trauma
injury/event
2/event
FAT, MA, MR, and MN refer to fatalities, major injuries, reportable minor injuries, and nonreportable minor injuries. ST1 and ST2 refer to class 1 and class 2 shock/trauma injuries.
The notes contained in column (21) of Table A1 are defined as follows:
MF/SF – Hazardous events with the potential for multiple or single fatalities.
ST1/2 –
The injuries from shock/trauma are specifically class 1 or 2.
XX% –
The percentage of the risk that is inside possession (HENs only).
All HETs include the frequency of all incidents, whereas all HEMs and HENs include the
frequency of only those incidents leading to injury
Version 6.1 – June 2009
65
Appendix A
Information in normal text (not bold) indicates where a hazardous event has been broken
down into sub-hazardous event categories, e.g. HEM-10 is split into HEM-10A, HEM-10B
and HEM-10 POS. In general, this is because the consequences for each of the sub–
hazardous events are significantly different from each other.
66
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HETs)
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HET-01
HET-01A
HET-01B
HET-02P
HET-02PA
HET-02PB
HET-02NP
HET-02NPA
HET-02NPB
HET-02NP
POS
HET-03
HET-03A
HET-03B
HET-03 POS
HET-04
HET-04A
HET-04B
HET-04 POS
HET-06
HET-06A
HET-06B
HET-06C
HET-09
HET-09A
HET-09B
HET-09C
HET-09 POS
(2)
Hazardous event description
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D SPAD/runaway train,
misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train,
or WSF
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted
train, or WSF
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between OTP and passenger train resulting from OTP
incorrectly outside possession
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D SPAD/runaway train,
misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collisions between trains inside possession (including OTP)
Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment)
Collision of train with object outside possession (not resulting
in derailment)
Collision of train with RV outside possession (not resulting in
derailment)
Collision of OTP with object inside possession (not resulting in
derailment)
Collision between two passenger trains in station
(permissive working)
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): rollbacks
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): low speed
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): potential for high speed
Collision with buffer stops
Collision with buffer stops: rollbacks
Collision with buffer stops: low speed
Collision with buffer stops: potential for high speed
Collision with buffer stops: OTP inside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
MOP
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(20)
(21)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
0.2535
1.712
0.4339
0.2482
0.7451
2.622
0
0
0.0612
0.3456
0.4511
0
0
5.73E-05
1.15E-04
2.29E-04
0
0
0.2295
1.853
0.4253
0.2462
0.7254
2.521
0
0
0.0608
0.3111
0.4034
0
0
5.46E-05
1.09E-04
2.18E-04
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0239
0.3594
0.0086
0.0020
0.0197
0.1012
0
0
3.95E-04
0.0345
0.0477
0
0
2.72E-06
5.43E-06
1.09E-05
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0398
2.628
0.1045
0.0637
0.1583
0.2134
0
0
0.0106
0.0511
0.0331
0
0
0.0065
0.0131
0.0262
0
0
0.0360
2.831
0.1019
0.0629
0.1561
0.2049
0
0
0.0104
0.0457
0.0294
0
0
0.0059
0.0119
0.0237
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0038
0.6768
0.0025
7.94E-04
0.0023
0.0085
0
0
1.74E-04
0.0054
0.0037
0
0
6.16E-04
0.0012
0.0025
0
0
MF, ST1
0.4921
1.067
0.5252
0.2361
0.6155
1.343
0
0
0.0568
0.7129
0.4227
0
0
0.0743
0.1487
0.2973
0
0
0.1557
1.834
0.2856
0.1593
0.3982
0.6379
0
0
0.0293
0.2140
0.1391
0
0
0.0262
0.0524
0.1048
0
0
MF, ST1
0.2863
0.6761
0.1936
0.0597
0.1648
0.6246
0
0
0.0133
0.4082
0.2836
0
0
0.0481
0.0963
0.1926
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0500
0.9202
0.0460
0.0171
0.0525
0.0808
0
0
0.0142
0.0908
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
6.879
0.0179
0.1235
8.41E-04
0.0016
0.0050
0
0
0.0318
0.2493
1.529
0
0
0.0476
0.0952
0.1903
0
0
0.0497
0.7208
0.0359
2.48E-04
4.13E-04
0.0016
0
0
0.0088
0.0629
2.73E-04
0
0
0.0168
0.0335
0.0670
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0914
0.5904
0.0540
2.83E-04
4.70E-04
0.0018
0
0
0.0031
0.1296
3.51E-04
0
0
0.0308
0.0616
0.1232
0
0
MF, ST1
6.738
2860.3
0.0050
2.37E-04
0.0336
0.6787
3.10E-04
0
7.13E-04
0
0.0016
3.000
0
17.01
0
2.001
0.0199
0
0.0567
1.005
1.529
5.027
0
19.31
0
23.48
2.37E-05
0.4271
4.74E-05
0.4271
9.47E-05
0.2136
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
2842.0
7.04E-05
0.2000
0
0
3.000
17.00
2.000
0
1.000
5.000
19.00
22.00
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
3.464
0.1349
0.4673
0
0
0
0.0107
0.0013
0
0
0.0013
0.2038
1.332
0.4176
0.4176
0.2088
0
0
SF, ST1
14.82
7.70E-04
0.0114
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0052
0.0260
0.1032
0.1446
0.0095
0.0095
0.0048
0
0
SF, ST2
7.572
0.0064
0.0488
0.0054
0.1066
4.870
0
0
0.0024
0.0251
0.6733
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.221
0.0016
0.0085
0
0
1.595
0
0
0
0
0.1044
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
1.402
0.0018
0.0025
0
0
0.4282
0
0
0
0
0.0701
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
0.9488
0.0398
0.0378
0.0054
0.1066
2.847
0
0
0.0024
0.0251
0.4988
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
6.654
2.500
0.7476
3.273
0.1333
0.0204
0.0016
0.0018
0.0397
0.0041
0.1360
0.0041
0.0013
0.1301
5.52E-04
0.0185
0
0
0.0185
0
0.3681
0
0
0.3681
0
10.81
0.7635
0.2284
9.821
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0084
0
0
0.0084
0
0.0892
0
0
0.0866
0.0027
1.865
0.0500
0.0374
1.721
0.0571
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
MF, ST1
SF, ST1
67
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HETs)
National
average
frequency
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HET-01
HET-01A
HET-01B
HET-02P
HET-02PA
HET-02PB
HET-02NP
HET-02NPA
HET-02NPB
HET-02NP
POS
HET-03
HET-03A
HET-03B
HET-03 POS
HET-04
HET-04A
HET-04B
HET-04 POS
HET-06
HET-06A
HET-06B
HET-06C
HET-09
HET-09A
HET-09B
HET-09C
HET-09 POS
(2)
Hazardous event description
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D SPAD/runaway train,
misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two passenger trains resulting from a
passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train,
or WSF
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted
train, or WSF
Collision between a non-passenger train and passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collision between OTP and passenger train resulting from OTP
incorrectly outside possession
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, Cat D SPAD/runaway train,
misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat A SPAD, misrouted train, or WSF
Collision between two non-passenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat D SPAD / runaway
Collisions between trains inside possession (including OTP)
Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment)
Collision of train with object outside possession (not resulting
in derailment)
Collision of train with RV outside possession (not resulting in
derailment)
Collision of OTP with object inside possession (not resulting in
derailment)
Collision between two passenger trains in station
(permissive working)
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): rollbacks
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): low speed
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): potential for high speed
Collision with buffer stops
Collision with buffer stops: rollbacks
Collision with buffer stops: low speed
Collision with buffer stops: potential for high speed
Collision with buffer stops: OTP inside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
0.2535
1.712
0.4339
0.2295
1.853
0.4253
0.0239
0.3594
0.0086
0.0398
2.628
0.1045
0.0360
2.831
0.1019
0.0038
0.6768
0.0025
0.4921
1.067
0.5252
0.1557
1.834
0.2856
0.2863
0.6761
0.1936
0.0500
0.9202
0.0460
6.879
0.0179
0.1235
0.0497
0.7208
0.0359
0.0914
0.5904
0.0540
6.738
2860.3
0.0050
2.37E-04
0.0336
0.6787
2842.0
7.04E-05
0.2000
3.464
0.1349
0.4673
14.82
7.70E-04
0.0114
7.572
0.0064
0.0488
5.221
0.0016
0.0085
1.402
0.0018
0.0025
0.9488
0.0398
0.0378
6.654
2.500
0.7476
3.273
0.1333
0.0204
0.0016
0.0018
0.0397
0.0041
0.1360
0.0041
0.0013
0.1301
5.52E-04
Open out for full breakdown68
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-10
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
12.40
0.1934
2.397
0.1939
0.6650
3.629
0
0
0.0651
0.1134
8.003
0
0
1.786
1.997
3.258
0
0
HET-10A
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCB + CCTV
0.1761
0.2636
0.0464
0.0033
0.0111
0.0621
0
0
8.93E-04
0.0024
0.1288
0
0
0.0370
0.0270
0.0403
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10B
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCB
0.3509
0.2639
0.0926
0.0066
0.0224
0.1229
0
0
0.0018
0.0049
0.2565
0
0
0.0738
0.0538
0.0802
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10C
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCG
0.1226
0.2588
0.0317
0.0019
0.0065
0.0418
0
0
5.73E-04
0.0016
0.0897
0
0
0.0258
0.0188
0.0280
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10D
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
ABCL
0.3417
0.0855
0.0292
0.0012
0.0049
0.0666
0
0
7.18E-04
2.47E-04
0.2276
0
0
0.0165
0.0812
0.1402
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10E
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
AHB
3.489
0.2054
0.7168
0.0640
0.2138
1.052
0
0
0.0162
0.0406
1.978
0
0
0.5527
0.4035
0.6010
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10F
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
AOCL
2.974
0.0859
0.2555
0.0079
0.0351
0.5681
0
0
0.0057
0.0015
2.021
0
0
0.1469
0.7209
1.244
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10G
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC + MWL
0.7308
0.2737
0.2000
0.0173
0.0595
0.2912
0
0
0.0064
0.0100
0.5303
0
0
0.1532
0.1118
0.1666
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10H
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC + T
2.189
0.2823
0.6179
0.0645
0.2172
0.9138
0
0
0.0207
0.0328
1.587
0
0
0.4592
0.3351
0.4992
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10I
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC
1.457
0.2646
0.3855
0.0259
0.0898
0.4774
0
0
0.0118
0.0184
1.058
0
0
0.3054
0.2228
0.3320
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10J
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
OC
0.5013
0.0093
0.0047
2.63E-05
6.21E-05
0.0098
0
0
3.93E-06
7.92E-06
0.0793
0
0
0.0024
0.0121
0.1112
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0639
0.2677
0.0171
0.0014
0.0047
0.0233
0
0
3.51E-04
9.35E-04
0.0465
0
0
0.0134
0.0098
0.0146
0
0
MF, ST1
2.353
0.1726
0.4061
9.20E-04
0.0018
0.0040
0
0
0.0117
0.0177
1.498
0
0
0.3422
0.3870
0.6335
0
0
0.0315
0.2383
0.0075
1.69E-05
3.39E-05
7.35E-05
0
0
1.27E-04
3.44E-04
0.0210
0
0
0.0067
0.0049
0.0073
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0628
0.2383
0.0150
3.30E-05
6.62E-05
1.43E-04
0
0
2.54E-04
6.81E-04
0.0418
0
0
0.0133
0.0098
0.0146
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0219
0.2383
0.0052
1.17E-05
2.36E-05
5.11E-05
0
0
8.88E-05
2.39E-04
0.0146
0
0
0.0047
0.0034
0.0051
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0611
0.0840
0.0051
9.60E-06
1.93E-05
4.18E-05
0
0
2.25E-04
2.52E-05
0.0394
0
0
0.0031
0.0147
0.0252
0
0
MF, ST1
0.6240
0.1800
0.1123
3.48E-04
6.98E-04
0.0015
0
0
0.0020
0.0054
0.3138
0
0
0.0999
0.0739
0.1093
0
0
MF, ST1
0.5320
0.0856
0.0456
7.58E-05
1.52E-04
3.30E-04
0
0
0.0020
1.74E-04
0.3497
0
0
0.0276
0.1303
0.2238
0
0
MF, ST1
0.1307
0.2412
0.0315
6.95E-05
1.40E-04
3.02E-04
0
0
0.0010
0.0014
0.0865
0
0
0.0277
0.0204
0.0303
0
0
MF, ST1
0.3915
0.2414
0.0945
2.07E-04
4.16E-04
9.00E-04
0
0
0.0030
0.0042
0.2593
0
0
0.0829
0.0613
0.0907
0
0
MF, ST1
0.2606
0.2412
0.0629
1.41E-04
2.84E-04
6.14E-04
0
0
0.0020
0.0028
0.1725
0
0
0.0552
0.0408
0.0603
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0897
0.0164
0.0015
1.13E-06
2.26E-06
4.90E-06
0
0
2.98E-04
1.86E-06
0.0140
0
0
7.42E-04
0.0025
0.0202
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0114
0.2376
0.0027
6.18E-06
1.24E-05
2.69E-05
0
0
4.62E-05
1.25E-04
0.0076
0
0
0.0024
0.0018
0.0026
0
0
MF, ST1
0.1361
0.1642
0.0223
0
0
0
0
0
6.80E-04
0.0022
0.1774
0
0
0.0180
0.0230
0.0441
0
0
MF, ST1
7.004
0.2823
1.977
1.190
3.774
10.39
0
0
0.2103
0.3724
6.892
0
0
0.0721
0.0391
0.0463
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-10K
HET-11
HET-11A
HET-11B
HET-11C
HET-11D
HET-11E
HET-11F
HET-11G
HET-11H
HET-11I
HET-11J
HET-11K
HET-11 POS
HET-12
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
FP (includes FP MWL)
Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCB + CCTV
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCB
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCG
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: ABCL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: AHB
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: AOCL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC + MWL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC + T
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: OC
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: FP (includes FP MWL)
OTP collision with road vehicle on level crossing inside
possession
Derailment of passenger trains
Version 6.1 – June 2009
69
Table A1
National
average
frequency
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
12.40
0.1934
2.397
HET-10A
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCB + CCTV
0.1761
0.2636
0.0464
HET-10B
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCB
0.3509
0.2639
0.0926
HET-10C
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
MCG
0.1226
0.2588
0.0317
HET-10D
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
ABCL
0.3417
0.0855
0.0292
HET-10E
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
AHB
3.489
0.2054
0.7168
HET-10F
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
AOCL
2.974
0.0859
0.2555
HET-10G
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC + MWL
0.7308
0.2737
0.2000
HET-10H
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC + T
2.189
0.2823
0.6179
HET-10I
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
UWC
1.457
0.2646
0.3855
HET-10J
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
OC
0.5013
0.0093
0.0047
0.0639
0.2677
0.0171
2.353
0.1726
0.4061
0.0315
0.2383
0.0075
0.0628
0.2383
0.0150
0.0219
0.2383
0.0052
0.0611
0.0840
0.0051
0.6240
0.1800
0.1123
0.5320
0.0856
0.0456
0.1307
0.2412
0.0315
0.3915
0.2414
0.0945
0.2606
0.2412
0.0629
0.0897
0.0164
0.0015
0.0114
0.2376
0.0027
0.1361
0.1642
0.0223
7.004
0.2823
1.977
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-10
HET-10K
HET-11
HET-11A
HET-11B
HET-11C
HET-11D
HET-11E
HET-11F
HET-11G
HET-11H
HET-11I
HET-11J
HET-11K
HET-11 POS
HET-12
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing:
FP (includes FP MWL)
Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCB + CCTV
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCB
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: MCG
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: ABCL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: AHB
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: AOCL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC + MWL
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC + T
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: UWC
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: OC
Non passenger train collision with road vehicle on level
crossing: FP (includes FP MWL)
OTP collision with road vehicle on level crossing inside
possession
Derailment of passenger trains
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown70
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-13
Derailment of non-passenger train
60.71
0.0090
0.5480
0.2046
0.4055
0.8860
0
0
0.1315
0.5398
7.227
0
0
0.0578
0.1807
0.1877
0
0
HET-13 FTP
Derailment of freight trains on passenger lines outside
possession
11.72
0.0267
0.3123
0.1594
0.3085
0.6614
0
0
0.0447
0.1708
1.162
0
0
0.0387
0.1178
0.1269
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-13 FTF
Derailment of freight trains on freight only lines outside
possession
5.454
0.0123
0.0668
0.0186
0.0368
0.0797
0
0
0.0139
0.0769
0.4678
0
0
0.0146
0.0531
0.0566
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-13 EP
HET-13 POS
HET-17
HET-17i
HET-17e
HET-20
HET-20A
HET-20 POS
Derailment of ECS&Parcels trains on passenger lines
Derailment of trains inside possession (including OTP)
Fire on passenger train (in station)
Fire on passenger train interior
Fire on passenger train exterior
Fire on non-passenger train
Fire on non-passenger train outside possession
Fire on OTP inside possession
2.599
40.94
126.5
69.37
57.14
24.26
22.66
1.600
0.0148
0.0032
0.0012
9.67E-04
0.0014
0.0015
0.0014
0.0031
0.0385
0.1304
0.1462
0.0671
0.0791
0.0359
0.0310
0.0050
0.0194
0.0071
0.0582
0.0334
0.0248
0
0
0
0.0438
0.0164
0.3332
0.2099
0.1233
0
0
0
0.1086
0.0362
2.295
1.030
1.266
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0058
0.0671
0.0064
8.26E-04
0.0056
0.0041
9.22E-04
0.0032
0.0202
0.2719
0.2632
0.0022
0.2611
0.0212
0.0052
0.0160
0.2451
5.352
2.088
1.303
0.7857
0.3095
0.2778
0.0317
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0041
3.32E-04
0
0
0
0.0231
0.0231
0
0.0092
6.64E-04
0
0
0
0.0461
0.0461
0
0.0030
0.0013
0
0
0
0.0922
0.0922
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
MF, ST1
HET-21
Train crushed by structural collapse or large object (not at
station)
4.70E-04
13.39
0.0063
0.0054
0.0054
0.0063
0
0
2.37E-04
3.13E-04
3.20E-04
0
0
2.10E-05
4.21E-05
8.42E-05
0
0
HET-21A
Train crushed by structural collapse or large object outside
possession (not at station)
4.66E-04
13.52
0.0063
0.0054
0.0054
0.0063
0
0
2.35E-04
3.10E-04
3.16E-04
0
0
2.10E-05
4.21E-05
8.42E-05
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-21 POS
OTP crushed by structural collapse or large object inside
possession (not at station)
4.74E-06
0.5740
2.72E-06
0
0
0
0
0
2.37E-06
3.31E-06
3.79E-06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
HET-22
HET-23
HET-24
HET-25
HET-25A
HET-25B
HET-26
Structural collapse at station
Explosion on passenger train
Explosion on freight train
Train divisions (not leading to collision)
Train divisions (not leading to collision): in station
Train divisions (not leading to collision): on running line
Collision between a failed train and an assisting train
0.0100
0.0200
0.0172
11.67
8.333
3.333
0.1870
3.870
0.2506
4.009
6.79E-04
5.50E-04
0.0010
0.0313
0.0387
0.0050
0.0688
0.0079
0.0046
0.0033
0.0058
0.0257
0.0015
9.57E-05
0.0050
0.0033
0.0017
4.02E-04
0.1029
0.0138
8.83E-05
0.0033
0.0033
0
0.0036
0.1351
0.0214
1.53E-04
0
0
0
0.1497
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0100
0.0025
8.33E-04
0.0017
4.39E-04
0.0200
0.0200
0.0072
8.33E-04
8.33E-04
0
0.0326
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1276
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0475
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0950
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1900
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
MF, ST1
MF, ST1
Version 6.1 – June 2009
MF, ST1
MF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
71
Table A1
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Derailment of non-passenger train
60.71
0.0090
0.5480
HET-13 FTP
Derailment of freight trains on passenger lines outside
possession
11.72
0.0267
0.3123
HET-13 FTF
Derailment of freight trains on freight only lines outside
possession
5.454
0.0123
0.0668
HET-13 EP
HET-13 POS
HET-17
HET-17i
HET-17e
HET-20
HET-20A
HET-20 POS
Derailment of ECS&Parcels trains on passenger lines
Derailment of trains inside possession (including OTP)
Fire on passenger train (in station)
Fire on passenger train interior
Fire on passenger train exterior
Fire on non-passenger train
Fire on non-passenger train outside possession
Fire on OTP inside possession
2.599
40.94
126.5
69.37
57.14
24.26
22.66
1.600
0.0148
0.0032
0.0012
9.67E-04
0.0014
0.0015
0.0014
0.0031
0.0385
0.1304
0.1462
0.0671
0.0791
0.0359
0.0310
0.0050
HET-21
Train crushed by structural collapse or large object (not at
station)
4.70E-04
13.39
0.0063
HET-21A
Train crushed by structural collapse or large object outside
possession (not at station)
4.66E-04
13.52
0.0063
HET-21 POS
OTP crushed by structural collapse or large object inside
possession (not at station)
4.74E-06
0.5740
2.72E-06
HET-22
HET-23
HET-24
HET-25
HET-25A
HET-25B
HET-26
Structural collapse at station
Explosion on passenger train
Explosion on freight train
Train divisions (not leading to collision)
Train divisions (not leading to collision): in station
Train divisions (not leading to collision): on running line
Collision between a failed train and an assisting train
0.0100
0.0200
0.0172
11.67
8.333
3.333
0.1870
3.870
0.2506
4.009
6.79E-04
5.50E-04
0.0010
0.0313
0.0387
0.0050
0.0688
0.0079
0.0046
0.0033
0.0058
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-13
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown72
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HEMs)
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEM-01
(2)
Hazardous event description
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
MOP
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
Rep.
minor
injuries
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(20)
(21)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
1.877
0.0103
0.0194
0.0032
0.1292
0.2385
2.166
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.814
0.0080
0.0146
0
0.1134
0.2165
2.144
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
0.0630
0.0771
0.0049
0.0032
0.0158
0.0221
0.0221
HEM-03
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
(controlled evacuation)
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
(uncontrolled evacuation)
Passenger struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
0.5421
0.1730
0.0938
0.0834
0.0834
0.2085
0.1668
0
0
0
0
0
0.1668
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
HEM-05
HEM-05A
HEM-05B
Train door closes on passenger
Train door closes on passenger (slam-door)
Train door closes on passenger (non-slam door)
284.7
8.488
276.2
0.0025
0.0045
0.0024
0.7115
0.0384
0.6731
0
0
0
3.597
0.2358
3.361
16.93
1.650
15.28
247.4
6.602
240.8
19.86
0
19.86
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
HEM-06
HEM-07
Passenger fall between train and platform
Passenger fall out of train onto track at station
252.3
0.7035
0.0070
0.0429
1.770
0.0302
0.5423
0.0156
7.747
0.1251
51.78
0.3752
179.0
0.1876
13.24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2211
0
1.288
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
HEM-08
HEM-09
HEM-09A
Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
Passenger injury while alighting train (platform side)
5.980
507.6
286.3
0.3660
0.0076
0.0091
2.189
3.870
2.617
1.876
0.5076
0.2863
2.873
24.16
17.69
1.231
114.4
72.12
0
357.9
191.3
0
14.81
8.177
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.6940
0.5362
3.811
0.4259
0.2681
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
HEM-09B
HEM-10
Passenger injury while boarding train (platform side)
Passenger struck by train while on platform
Passenger struck by train while on platform due to standing too
close to platform edge
Passenger struck by train door while on platform
221.3
9.504
0.0057
0.1384
1.253
1.316
0.2213
0.9147
6.470
3.667
42.29
2.403
166.7
1.604
6.628
0.2286
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1578
0
0.1578
3.889
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
9.146
0.1437
1.314
0.9146
3.658
2.286
1.372
0.2286
0
0
0
0
3.887
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
0.3518
0.0038
0.0013
0
0.0054
0.1155
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Passenger on platform struck by train inside possession
0.0062
0.0769
4.80E-04
1.64E-04
0.0030
0.0015
0.2309
9.87E04
0
0
0
0
0
0.0023
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
1.114
0.8174
0.9101
0.8876
0.1775
0.0646
0.0323
0
0
0
0
0.0161
0.8876
0
0
0
0
0
0.2006
0.8174
0.1640
0.1599
0.0320
0.0116
0.0058
0
0
0
0
0.0029
0.1599
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.1316
0.8174
0.1076
0.1049
0.0210
0.0076
0.0038
0
0
0
0
0.0019
0.1049
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0275
0.8174
0.0225
0.0219
0.0044
0.0016
7.98E04
0
0
0
0
3.99E04
0.0219
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0778
0.8174
0.0636
0.0620
0.0124
0.0045
0.0023
0
0
0
0
0.0011
0.0620
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0854
0.8174
0.0698
0.0681
0.0136
0.0050
0.0025
0
0
0
0
0.0012
0.0681
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0080
0.8174
0.0065
0.0063
0.0013
4.62E-04
0
0
0
0
0.0063
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0310
0.8174
0.0253
0.0247
0.0049
0.0018
0
0
0
0
0.0247
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
4.40E-05
0.8174
3.60E-05
3.51E-05
7.02E-06
2.55E-06
0
0
0
0
3.51E05
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0306
0.8174
0.0250
0.0244
0.0049
0.0018
0
0
0
0
0.0244
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0679
0.8174
0.0555
0.0541
0.0108
0.0039
0.0020
0
0
0
0
0.0541
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.1509
0.8174
0.1234
0.1203
0.0241
0.0088
0.0044
0
0
0
0
0.0022
0.1203
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.2150
0.8174
0.1757
0.1714
0.0343
0.0125
0.0062
0
0
0
0
0.0031
0.1714
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0060
0.8174
0.0049
0.0048
9.51E-04
3.46E-04
1.73E04
0
0
0
0
8.65E05
0.0048
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0.0804
0.8174
0.0657
0.0641
0.0128
0.0047
0.0023
0
0
0
0
0.0012
0.0641
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
7.62E-04
0.8174
6.23E-04
6.08E-04
1.22E-04
4.42E-05
2.21E05
0
0
0
0
1.10E05
6.08E04
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
HEM-01A
HEM-01B
HEM-10A
HEM-10B
HEM-10
POS
HEM-11
HEM-11A
HEM-11B
HEM-11C
HEM-11D
HEM-11E
HEM-11F
HEM-11H
HEM-11I
HEM-11K
HEM-11L
HEM-11M
HEM-11N
HEM-11O
HEM-11P
HEM-11
POS
Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on
crossing
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MCB + CCTV level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MCB level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MG level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on ABCL level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on AHB level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on AOCL level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on UWC + T level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on UWC level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on FP + MWL level crossing adjacent
to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on FP level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station pedestrian crossing with
MWL, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on station pedestrian
crossing (no lights), outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station barrow crossing with
lights, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station barrow crossing (no lights),
outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed while crossing track at station on
crossing by a train inside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
2.31E04
8.99E04
1.28E06
8.86E04
1.15E04
4.49E04
6.38E07
4.43E04
9.84E04
SF, ST2
73
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HEMs)
National
average
frequency
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEM-01
(2)
Hazardous event description
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
1.877
0.0103
0.0194
1.814
0.0080
0.0146
0.0630
0.0771
0.0049
HEM-03
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
(controlled evacuation)
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
(uncontrolled evacuation)
Passenger struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
0.5421
0.1730
0.0938
HEM-05
HEM-05A
Train door closes on passenger
Train door closes on passenger (slam-door)
284.7
8.488
0.0025
0.0045
0.7115
0.0384
HEM-05B
HEM-06
Train door closes on passenger (non-slam door)
Passenger fall between train and platform
276.2
252.3
0.0024
0.0070
0.6731
1.770
HEM-07
HEM-08
HEM-09
Passenger fall out of train onto track at station
Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
0.7035
5.980
507.6
0.0429
0.3660
0.0076
0.0302
2.189
3.870
HEM-09A
HEM-09B
Passenger injury while alighting train (platform side)
Passenger injury while boarding train (platform side)
286.3
221.3
0.0091
0.0057
2.617
1.253
HEM-10
Passenger struck by train while on platform
9.504
0.1384
1.316
HEM-01A
HEM-01B
HEM-10A
HEM-10B
HEM-10
POS
HEM-11
HEM-11A
HEM-11B
HEM-11C
HEM-11D
HEM-11E
HEM-11F
HEM-11H
HEM-11I
HEM-11K
HEM-11L
HEM-11M
HEM-11N
HEM-11O
HEM-11P
HEM-11
POS
Passenger struck by train while on platform due to standing too
close to platform edge
Passenger struck by train door while on platform
9.146
0.1437
1.314
0.3518
0.0038
0.0013
Passenger on platform struck by train inside possession
0.0062
0.0769
4.80E-04
1.114
0.8174
0.9101
0.2006
0.8174
0.1640
0.1316
0.8174
0.1076
0.0275
0.8174
0.0225
0.0778
0.8174
0.0636
0.0854
0.8174
0.0698
0.0080
0.8174
0.0065
0.0310
0.8174
0.0253
4.40E-05
0.8174
3.60E-05
0.0306
0.8174
0.0250
0.0679
0.8174
0.0555
0.1509
0.8174
0.1234
0.2150
0.8174
0.1757
0.0060
0.8174
0.0049
0.0804
0.8174
0.0657
7.62E-04
0.8174
6.23E-04
Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on
crossing
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MCB + CCTV level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MCB level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on MG level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on ABCL level crossing
adjacent to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on AHB level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on AOCL level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on UWC + T level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on UWC level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on FP + MWL level crossing adjacent
to station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on FP level crossing adjacent to
station, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station pedestrian crossing with
MWL, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed by train on station pedestrian
crossing (no lights), outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station barrow crossing with
lights, outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed on station barrow crossing (no lights),
outside possession
Passenger struck/crushed while crossing track at station on
crossing by a train inside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown74
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEM-12
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
5.129
0.6819
3.497
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.366
3.366
1.122
0.4808
0.1603
0
HEM-12A
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
5.125
0.6819
3.495
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.363
3.363
1.121
0.4805
0.1602
0
SF, ST1
HEM-12
POS
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
inside possession
0.0035
0.6819
0.0024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0023
0.0023
7.68E04
3.29E-04
1.10E04
0
SF, ST1
HEM-13
Train crowding leading to passenger injury
8.794
0.0071
0.0623
0
0.5113
0.7158
7.260
0.3068
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEM-14
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train
0.5507
0.7856
0.4326
0
0
0
0
0
0.4178
0.1329
0
0
0.3133
0
0
0
0
0
0.3319
0.8230
0.2732
0
0
0
0
0
0.2655
0.0664
0
0
0.1991
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
0.0462
0.5519
0.0255
0
0
0
0
0
0.0231
0.0231
0
0
0.0173
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
0.1726
0.7763
0.1340
0
0
0
0
0
0.1291
0.0434
0
0
0.0969
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
HEM-14
POS
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train outside
possession
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train outside
possession (error during coupling)
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train inside
possession
HEM-15
Workforce fall from train in running
2.086
0.1131
0.2358
0
0
0
0
0
0.1543
0.7717
0.6173
1.235
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEM-15A
Train crew fall from train in running outside possession
0.2857
0.0849
0.0243
0
0
0
0
0
0.0159
0.0794
0.0635
0.1270
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
Workforce fall from train in running inside possession
1.800
0.1175
0.2116
0
0
0
0
0
0.1385
0.6923
0.5538
1.108
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting train
Workforce injury while alighting train to platform outside
possession
Workforce injury while alighting train to track outside
possession
Workforce injury while boarding train from platform outside
possession
Workforce injury while boarding train from track outside
possession
198.7
0.0041
0.8090
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.735
35.39
158.2
0.3510
0
0
0
0
0
101.1
0.0046
0.4615
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.808
20.59
77.34
0.3510
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
23.67
0.0044
0.1051
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.6121
5.203
17.85
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
58.38
0.0027
0.1591
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.7421
6.803
50.84
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
10.49
0.0056
0.0587
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.4153
1.765
8.306
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting inside possession
5.095
0.0049
0.0248
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1574
1.024
3.914
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
2.143
0.0053
0.0113
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0824
0.2473
1.813
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEM-17A
HEM-17
POS
HEM-19
Train crew struck while leaning out of train outside possession
2.000
0.0053
0.0105
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0769
0.2308
1.692
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce struck while leaning out of train inside possession
0.1429
0.0053
7.53E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0055
0.0165
0.1209
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Track worker struck/crushed by train
4.500
0.4551
2.048
0
0
0
0
0
1.858
1.703
0.3194
0.8517
3.513
0
0
0
0
0
HEM-19A
Track worker struck/crushed by train outside possession
2.616
0.4549
1.190
0
0
0
0
0
1.080
0.9905
0.1857
0.4952
2.043
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
HEM19POS
Track worker struck/crushed by train inside possession
1.884
0.4553
0.8577
0
0
0
0
0
0.7780
0.7130
0.1337
0.3565
1.471
0
0
0
0
0
MF, ST1
34.51
0.0036
0.1237
0
0
0
0
0
0.0128
0.5731
4.920
29.01
0
0
0
0
0
0
25.93
0.0023
0.0604
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2009
3.641
22.09
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
7.143
0.0074
0.0525
0
0
0
0
0
0.0106
0.3088
1.065
5.759
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce struck by flying object inside possession
1.437
0.0075
0.0107
0
0
0
0
0
0.0022
0.0634
0.2143
1.157
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce fall between train and platform
Workforce fall between train and platform
107.6
107.5
0.0050
0.0050
0.5353
0.5345
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.456
3.451
21.33
21.29
82.37
82.24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce fall between train and platform inside possession
0.1653
0.0048
8.01E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0051
0.0328
0.1267
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Workforce fall out of train onto track at station
Train door closes on workforce
Train door closes on workforce
0.1000
72.36
70.67
0.0429
0.0029
0.0029
0.0043
0.2114
0.2065
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0022
0
0
0.0178
1.082
1.057
0.0533
7.980
7.793
0.0267
63.30
61.82
0.6461
0.6451
9.71E04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
Train door closes on workforce inside possession
1.696
0.0029
0.0050
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0254
0.1871
1.484
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEM-14A
HEM-14B
HEM-15
POS
HEM-16
HEM-16A
HEM-16B
HEM-16C
HEM-16D
HEM-16
POS
HEM-17
HEM-20
HEM-20A
HEM-20B
HEM-20
POS
HEM-21
HEM-21A
HEM-21
POS
HEM-22
HEM-23
HEM-23A
HEM-23
POS
Workforce struck by flying object (includes objects thrown by
OTM movements outside a possession)
Workforce (non-track worker) struck by small flying object
disturbed by or thrown from passing train outside possession
Track worker struck by flying object disturbed by or thrown
from passing train outside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
SF, ST2
75
Table A1
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEM-12
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
5.129
0.6819
3.497
HEM-12A
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
5.125
0.6819
3.495
HEM-12
POS
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station
inside possession
0.0035
0.6819
0.0024
HEM-13
Train crowding leading to passenger injury
8.794
0.0071
0.0623
HEM-14
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train
0.5507
0.7856
0.4326
0.3319
0.8230
0.2732
0.0462
0.5519
0.0255
0.1726
0.7763
0.1340
HEM-14
POS
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train outside
possession
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train outside
possession (error during coupling)
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train inside
possession
HEM-15
Workforce fall from train in running
2.086
0.1131
0.2358
HEM-15A
Train crew fall from train in running outside possession
0.2857
0.0849
0.0243
Workforce fall from train in running inside possession
1.800
0.1175
0.2116
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting train
Workforce injury while alighting train to platform outside
possession
Workforce injury while alighting train to track outside
possession
Workforce injury while boarding train from platform outside
possession
Workforce injury while boarding train from track outside
possession
198.7
0.0041
0.8090
101.1
0.0046
0.4615
23.67
0.0044
0.1051
58.38
0.0027
0.1591
10.49
0.0056
0.0587
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting inside possession
5.095
0.0049
0.0248
HEM-14A
HEM-14B
HEM-15
POS
HEM-16
HEM-16A
HEM-16B
HEM-16C
HEM-16D
HEM-16
POS
HEM-17
Workforce struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
2.143
0.0053
0.0113
HEM-17A
HEM-17
POS
HEM-19
Train crew struck while leaning out of train outside possession
2.000
0.0053
0.0105
Workforce struck while leaning out of train inside possession
0.1429
0.0053
7.53E-04
Track worker struck/crushed by train
4.500
0.4551
2.048
HEM-19A
Track worker struck/crushed by train outside possession
2.616
0.4549
1.190
HEM19POS
Track worker struck/crushed by train inside possession
1.884
0.4553
0.8577
34.51
0.0036
0.1237
25.93
0.0023
0.0604
7.143
0.0074
0.0525
Workforce struck by flying object inside possession
1.437
0.0075
0.0107
Workforce fall between train and platform
Workforce fall between train and platform
107.6
107.5
0.0050
0.0050
0.5353
0.5345
Workforce fall between train and platform inside possession
0.1653
0.0048
8.01E-04
Workforce fall out of train onto track at station
Train door closes on workforce
Train door closes on workforce
0.1000
72.36
70.67
0.0429
0.0029
0.0029
0.0043
0.2114
0.2065
Train door closes on workforce inside possession
1.696
0.0029
0.0050
HEM-20
HEM-20A
HEM-20B
HEM-20
POS
HEM-21
HEM-21A
HEM-21
POS
HEM-22
HEM-23
HEM-23A
HEM-23
POS
Workforce struck by flying object (includes objects thrown by
OTM movements outside a possession)
Workforce (non-track worker) struck by small flying object
disturbed by or thrown from passing train outside possession
Track worker struck by flying object disturbed by or thrown
from passing train outside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown76
Table A1
Passenger
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
(20)
(21)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
outside possession
35.26
0.6797
23.97
23.02
8.436
2.204
1.202
0
35.20
0.6802
18.40
23.00
8.400
2.200
1.200
0
SF, ST1
Adult trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
0.0644
0.0673
0.0210
0.0364
0.0040
0.0022
0
SF, ST1
Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
outside possession
2.206
1.802
0.4024
0
0
0
0
2.200
1.800
0.4000
0
0
0
MF, ST1
Child trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
0
0
0.0055
0.0017
0.0024
0
0
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0.1298
7.137
7.137
1.427
0.5191
0.2595
0
0
0
0
0.0115
0.6344
0.6344
0.1269
0.0461
0.0231
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0.0022
0.1235
0.1235
0.0247
0.0090
0.0045
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
4.45E04
0.0245
0.0245
0.0049
0.0018
8.90E04
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0012
0.0649
0.0649
0.0130
0.0047
0.0024
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0185
1.019
1.019
0.2037
0.0741
0.0370
0
MF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0019
0.1024
0.1024
0.0205
0.0074
0.0037
0
MF, ST1
0.1367
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0024
0.1333
0.1333
0.0267
0.0097
0.0048
0
MF, ST1
0.8174
0.7488
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0133
0.7302
0.7302
0.1460
0.0531
0.0266
0
MF, ST1
0.7045
0.8174
0.5759
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0102
0.5616
0.5616
0.1123
0.0408
0.0204
0
MF, ST1
0.0627
0.8174
0.0513
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.09E04
0.0500
0.0500
0.0100
0.0036
0.0018
0
MF, ST1
0.2566
0.8174
0.2097
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0037
0.2045
0.2045
0.0409
0.0149
0.0074
0
MF, ST1
4.371
0.8174
3.573
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0634
3.484
3.484
0.6969
0.2534
0.1267
0
MF, ST1
0.0061
0.8174
0.0050
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.88E05
0.0049
0.0049
9.77E04
3.55E-04
1.78E04
0
MF, ST1
0.0200
0.1180
0.0024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.00E-04
0.0196
0
0
0
0.0200
0.1180
0.0024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.00E-04
0.0196
0
0
0
SF, ST2
1.37E-05
0.1180
1.61E-06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.73E-07
4.241
4.238
0.2018
0.2018
0.8557
0.8551
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MOP fall while riding illegally on train inside possession
0.0029
0.1877
5.44E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MOP suicide or attempted suicide (open verdict)
MOP suicide (attempted)
MOP suicide
MOP struck by object from the mainline railway
MOP struck by objects thrown from mainline railway operations
MOP struck by object from the mainline railway thrown from
inside possession
268.0
47.17
220.8
2.000
1.600
0.8408
0.0715
1.005
0.0026
0.0026
225.3
3.373
222.0
0.0052
0.0042
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3177
0
0.3177
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.8150
0.8150
0
0
0
2.257
1.834
0.4237
0
0
0.6936
0.6931
4.35E04
189.8
27.10
162.7
0
0
0.4000
0.0026
0.0010
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(1)
HEM-25
HEM-25A
HEM-25
POS
HEM-26
HEM-26A
HEM-26
POS
HEM-27
HEM-27A
HEM-27B
HEM-27C
HEM-27D
HEM-27E
HEM-27F
HEM-27G
HEM-27H
HEM-27I
HEM-27J
HEM-27K
HEM-27L
HEM-27
POS
HEM-29
HEM-29A
HEM-29
POS
HEM-30
HEM-30A
HEM-30
POS
HEM-31
HEM-31A
HEM-31B
HEM-32
HEM-32A
HEM-32
POS
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing or
footpath crossing
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MCB + CCTV level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MCB level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MG level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on ABCL level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on AHB level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on AOCL level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC + MWL level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC + T level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on OC level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on FP + MWL level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on FP (no lights) level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing inside
possession
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations inside possession
MOP fall while riding illegally on train
MOP fall while riding illegally on train outside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
0
0
0
0
0
23.94
0
0
0
0
0.3888
0.0250
0
0
0
2.004
0.9248
1.853
0
0
2.000
0.9255
1.851
0
0.0037
0.5225
0.0019
8.954
0.8174
0.7959
MOP
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
Hazardous event
Hazardous
event no.
Staff
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
0
0
0
0.2004
18.47
0
0
0
0
0.2000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.66E04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.319
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.8174
0.6505
0
0
0
0
0
0.1550
0.8174
0.1267
0
0
0
0
0.0307
0.8174
0.0251
0
0
0
0.0814
0.8174
0.0666
0
0
1.278
0.8174
1.045
0
0.1285
0.8174
0.1050
0.1672
0.8174
0.9161
0
0
0
SF, ST2
0.6936
0.6931
1.34E05
1.509
1.508
1.427
1.426
0
0
SF, ST1
4.35E-04
0.0010
0.0010
0
SF, ST1
221.2
0
221.2
0
0
31.78
31.78
0
0
0
9.780
9.780
0
0.7692
0.6154
0.6115
0.6111
4.35E04
1.222
1.222
0
1.077
0.8615
0.92898
0.61123
0.31775
0.30769
0.24615
0
0
0.1538
0.2154
0.06154
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
77
Table A1
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
outside possession
35.26
0.6797
23.97
35.20
0.6802
23.94
Adult trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
0.0644
0.3888
0.0250
Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
outside possession
2.004
0.9248
1.853
2.000
0.9255
1.851
Child trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
0.0037
0.5225
0.0019
8.954
0.8174
7.319
0.7959
0.8174
0.6505
0.1550
0.8174
0.1267
0.0307
0.8174
0.0251
0.0814
0.8174
0.0666
1.278
0.8174
1.045
0.1285
0.8174
0.1050
0.1672
0.8174
0.1367
0.9161
0.8174
0.7488
0.7045
0.8174
0.5759
0.0627
0.8174
0.0513
0.2566
0.8174
0.2097
4.371
0.8174
3.573
0.0061
0.8174
0.0050
0.0200
0.1180
0.0024
0.0200
0.1180
0.0024
1.37E-05
0.1180
1.61E-06
4.241
4.238
0.2018
0.2018
0.8557
0.8551
MOP fall while riding illegally on train inside possession
0.0029
0.1877
5.44E-04
MOP suicide or attempted suicide (open verdict)
MOP suicide (attempted)
MOP suicide
MOP struck by object from the mainline railway
MOP struck by objects thrown from mainline railway operations
MOP struck by object from the mainline railway thrown from
inside possession
268.0
47.17
220.8
2.000
1.600
0.8408
0.0715
1.005
0.0026
0.0026
225.3
3.373
222.0
0.0052
0.0042
0.4000
0.0026
0.0010
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEM-25
HEM-25A
HEM-25
POS
HEM-26
HEM-26A
HEM-26
POS
HEM-27
HEM-27A
HEM-27B
HEM-27C
HEM-27D
HEM-27E
HEM-27F
HEM-27G
HEM-27H
HEM-27I
HEM-27J
HEM-27K
HEM-27L
HEM-27
POS
HEM-29
HEM-29A
HEM-29
POS
HEM-30
HEM-30A
HEM-30
POS
HEM-31
HEM-31A
HEM-31B
HEM-32
HEM-32A
HEM-32
POS
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing or
footpath crossing
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MCB + CCTV level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MCB level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on MG level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on ABCL level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on AHB level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on AOCL level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC + MWL level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC + T level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on UWC level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on OC level crossing,
outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on FP + MWL level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on FP (no lights) level
crossing, outside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing inside
possession
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations inside possession
MOP fall while riding illegally on train
MOP fall while riding illegally on train outside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown78
Table A1
Passenger
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
Passenger injury due to braking or lurching
Passenger injury due to braking
Passenger injury due to lurching
Train crew injury due to braking or lurching
Workforce injury due to braking
Workforce injury due to lurching
91.37
19.18
72.20
391.8
40.33
351.3
0.0059
0.0064
0.0058
0.0026
0.0025
0.0027
0.5409
0.1229
0.4180
1.033
0.1011
0.9314
Workforce injury due to braking or lurching inside possession
0.1429
0.0027
1.001
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEM-38
HEM-38A
HEM-38B
HEM-39
HEM-39A
HEM-39B
HEM-39
POS
HEM-40
HEM-40A
HEM-40
POS
HEM-41
HEM-42
HEM-43
HEM-43A
HEM-43B
HEM-44
HEM-44A
HEM-44B
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform
edge
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
MOP fall between train and platform
Passenger struck by flying object thrown up by passing train
Train door closes on MOP
Train door closes on MOP (slam door)
Train door closes on MOP (non-slam door)
Passenger jump from train in running
Passenger jump from slam door train in running
Passenger jump from power door train in running
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.200
0.9761
3.224
0
0
0
8.202
1.722
6.480
0
0
0
78.83
16.42
62.42
0
0
0
1.035
0.2251
0.8099
0
0
0
3.79E-04
0
0
0
0
0.1901
0.1903
0
0
0
1.000
0.1901
0.1901
0
0
6.85E-04
0.1901
1.30E-04
0
0.4286
3.166
1.050
0.2587
0.7911
1.439
1.109
0.3299
0.2964
0.0015
0.0030
0.0045
0.0024
0.2683
0.3440
0.0140
0.1270
0.0048
0.0031
0.0012
0.0019
0.3861
0.3814
0.0046
0
0
0
0
0
0.3168
0.3168
0
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.668
0.3854
4.281
0
0
0
44.46
5.652
38.79
0
0
0
342.7
34.30
308.3
0
0
0.0017
0.0158
0.1253
0
0
0
1.038
0
1.038
4.22E04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0656
0.1476
0.4101
0.2133
0.1476
0.0164
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0656
4.49E05
0.1905
0
0
0
0
0.2409
0.1584
0.0825
0.1475
0.4098
2.81E04
0.2571
0
0.0168
0.0072
0.0096
0
0
0
0.2131
0.1475
1.01E04
0
0
0.8908
0.2012
0.6896
0
0
0
0.01639
SF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.1E-05
SF, ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0.6666
0.6336
0.0330
0
0.4085
0
0
0
0.2277
0.0792
0.1485
0
2.757
0
0
0
0.2277
0.0792
0.1485
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.05688
0
0.05688
0
0
0
SF, ST1
SF, ST2
1.01E-04
0.1000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.46E-04
0.0714
0
0.0941
0.0503
0.0438
0
0
0
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
79
Table A1
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Passenger injury due to braking or lurching
Passenger injury due to braking
Passenger injury due to lurching
Train crew injury due to braking or lurching
Workforce injury due to braking
Workforce injury due to lurching
91.37
19.18
72.20
391.8
40.33
351.3
0.0059
0.0064
0.0058
0.0026
0.0025
0.0027
0.5409
0.1229
0.4180
1.033
0.1011
0.9314
Workforce injury due to braking or lurching inside possession
0.1429
0.0027
3.79E-04
1.001
0.1901
0.1903
1.000
0.1901
0.1901
6.85E-04
0.1901
1.30E-04
0.4286
3.166
1.050
0.2587
0.7911
1.439
1.109
0.3299
0.2964
0.0015
0.0030
0.0045
0.0024
0.2683
0.3440
0.0140
0.1270
0.0048
0.0031
0.0012
0.0019
0.3861
0.3814
0.0046
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEM-38
HEM-38A
HEM-38B
HEM-39
HEM-39A
HEM-39B
HEM-39
POS
HEM-40
HEM-40A
HEM-40
POS
HEM-41
HEM-42
HEM-43
HEM-43A
HEM-43B
HEM-44
HEM-44A
HEM-44B
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform
edge
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
MOP fall between train and platform
Passenger struck by flying object thrown up by passing train
Train door closes on MOP
Train door closes on MOP (slam door)
Train door closes on MOP (non-slam door)
Passenger jump from train in running
Passenger jump from slam door train in running
Passenger jump from power door train in running
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown80
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HENs)
Passenger
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(20)
(21)
Hazardous event description
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
HEN-01
HEN-02
HEN-03
HEN-04
HEN-05
HEN-07
HEN-08
HEN-09
HEN-10
HEN-11
HEN-13
HEN-14
HEN-14A
HEN-14B
HEN-14C
HEN-14D
Workforce exposure to fire
Line-side fire in station
Fire in station
Workforce exposure to line-side explosion
Explosion at station
Passenger exposure to hazardous substances
Passenger exposed to electrical arcing at station
Passenger electric shock at station (OHL)
Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
Passenger electric shock at station (non-traction supplies)
Passenger fall from platform onto track (no train present)
Passenger slip, trip or fall
Passenger slip, trip or fall (platform)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (stairs)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (escalator)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (station concourse)
2.571
0.5714
0.6667
0.5714
0.0500
5.441
0.3299
0.0667
0.8870
0.5421
42.59
2914.7
832.0
945.6
521.7
519.5
0.0079
0.0117
0.0254
0.0423
3.000
0.0032
0.0224
0.2004
0.4331
0.0066
0.0172
0.0087
0.0084
0.0109
0.0054
0.0084
0.0203
0.0067
0.0169
0.0241
0.1500
0.0173
0.0074
0.0134
0.3842
0.0036
0.7324
25.28
7.018
10.28
2.833
4.381
0
0
0.0033
0
0.1000
0
0
0.0095
0.3548
0
0.0677
1.788
0.1953
1.299
0.1541
0.1219
0
0
0.0300
0
0.2000
0.0749
0.0660
0.0381
0.2661
0.0298
5.410
173.9
52.04
68.05
15.72
32.49
0
0
0.0333
0
0
1.117
0.1320
0.0025
0.1774
0.0238
21.39
831.1
209.2
324.7
142.4
130.6
0
0
0
0
0
4.065
0.1320
0.0166
0.0887
0.4944
14.22
1878.8
557.9
541.7
367.2
348.3
0
0
0
0
0
0.1843
0
0
0
0.0119
1.635
66.57
14.55
12.67
27.89
9.083
0
0
0.0013
0.0114
0.0250
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1429
0.0519
0.0832
0.1143
0.0500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.7143
0.2078
0
0.1429
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.286
0.4416
0.7485
0.5714
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3082
0
0
0.3082
0
0.1429
0.0260
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3548
0
0.8806
0.4687
0
0.3248
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 75%
SF, ST2
MF, ST2
MF,ST2, 80%
MF, ST1
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST1
SF, ST1
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
HEN-14E
Passenger slip, trip or fall while legitimately crossing line on
station crossing
3.166
0.0061
0.0193
0
0.1439
0.4317
2.446
0.1439
0
0
0
0
0.1439
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEN-14F
Passenger slip, trip or fall (chair, bench, wheelchair)
20.17
0.0068
0.1380
0
0.9660
5.555
12.68
0.9660
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEN-14G
Passenger slip, trip or fall (ramps)
72.52
0.0084
0.6117
0.0170
4.536
18.24
48.63
1.268
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEN-15
Passenger fall from overbridge at station
0.3520
0.2679
0.0943
0.0782
0.1564
0.0782
0.0391
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1
HEN-16
Passenger fall during evacuation at station
0.0500
0.0531
0.0027
0
0.0250
0.0203
0.0522
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
HEN-17
1.407
0.0270
0.0379
0
0.3518
0.4221
0.6332
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2
113.7
0.0159
1.804
0
0
0
0
0
0.1240
15.00
20.20
78.59
0.1240
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 79%
7.480
0.0264
0.1972
0
0
0
0
0
0.0773
1.064
1.787
4.552
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 90%
566.7
0.0020
1.139
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.800
24.00
537.6
1.548
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 7%
HEN-24
Passenger crushing caused by overcrowding at station
Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large
object
Workforce trapped in machinery
Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at
station
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
1051.3
0.0064
6.743
0
0
0
0
0
0.0929
50.71
144.7
853.4
2.946
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 46%
HEN-25
Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
18.18
0.0328
0.5968
0
0
0
0
0
0.1743
3.948
3.089
11.67
0.5661
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 65%
HEN-26
Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle
13.93
0.0234
0.3259
0
0
0
0
0
0.1215
1.857
1.600
10.47
0.2396
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 56%
HEN-27
Workforce burns due to welding etc
35.32
0.0019
0.0678
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2403
2.162
32.92
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-27A
Workforce burn due to electrical short circuit
0.9048
0.0019
0.0017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0062
0.0554
0.8432
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 34%
HEN-27B
Workforce burn due to welding or flame cutting
11.43
0.0019
0.0219
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0777
0.6997
10.65
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 96%
HEN-27C
Workforce burn due to other causes
22.99
0.0019
0.0441
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1564
1.407
21.42
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 36%
HEN-28
Workforce exposure to arcing
7.095
0.0138
0.0982
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.9030
0.1290
7.095
0.1290
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-28A
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (conductor rail)
5.298
0.0138
0.0733
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.6742
0.0963
5.298
0.0963
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 72%
HEN-28B
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (OHL)
0.9269
0.0138
0.0128
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1180
0.0169
0.9269
0.0169
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 66%
HEN-28C
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (other)
0.8707
0.0138
0.0120
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1108
0.0158
0.8707
0.0158
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 74%
HEN-29
Workforce exposure to hazardous substances (including
stings, bites and needle injuries)
76.52
0.0023
0.1765
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.8141
3.954
75.01
0.3489
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 41%
HEN-30
Workforce electric shock (conductor rail)
4.600
0.1234
0.5676
0
0
0
0
0
0.4981
0.6067
0.8038
3.251
0.3943
0
0
0
0
0
1.053
0.4311
0.4541
0
0
0
0
0
0.4514
0
0.1505
0.4514
0.3009
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST1, 70%
3.547
0.0320
0.1135
0
0
0
0
0
0.0467
0.6067
0.6533
2.800
0.0933
0
0
0
0
0
SF, ST2, 77%
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEN-21
HEN-22
HEN-23
HEN-30A
HEN-30B
(2)
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock
(conductor rail) due to fall
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock
(conductor rail) via item/object
Version 6.1 – June 2009
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
MOP
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
Hazardous event
National
average
frequency
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
Shock /
trauma
Notes
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
SF, ST2
81
Table A1
Table A1. List of risk, frequency, and average consequences (HENs)
Hazardous event
(1)
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
Hazardous event description
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
HEN-01
HEN-02
HEN-03
HEN-04
HEN-05
HEN-07
HEN-08
HEN-09
HEN-10
HEN-11
HEN-13
HEN-14
HEN-14A
HEN-14B
HEN-14C
HEN-14D
Workforce exposure to fire
Line-side fire in station
Fire in station
Workforce exposure to line-side explosion
Explosion at station
Passenger exposure to hazardous substances
Passenger exposed to electrical arcing at station
Passenger electric shock at station (OHL)
Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
Passenger electric shock at station (non-traction supplies)
Passenger fall from platform onto track (no train present)
Passenger slip, trip or fall
Passenger slip, trip or fall (platform)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (stairs)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (escalator)
Passenger slip, trip or fall (station concourse)
2.571
0.5714
0.6667
0.5714
0.0500
5.441
0.3299
0.0667
0.8870
0.5421
42.59
2914.7
832.0
945.6
521.7
519.5
0.0079
0.0117
0.0254
0.0423
3.000
0.0032
0.0224
0.2004
0.4331
0.0066
0.0172
0.0087
0.0084
0.0109
0.0054
0.0084
0.0203
0.0067
0.0169
0.0241
0.1500
0.0173
0.0074
0.0134
0.3842
0.0036
0.7324
25.28
7.018
10.28
2.833
4.381
HEN-14E
Passenger slip, trip or fall while legitimately crossing line on
station crossing
3.166
0.0061
0.0193
HEN-14F
Passenger slip, trip or fall (chair, bench, wheelchair)
20.17
0.0068
0.1380
HEN-14G
Passenger slip, trip or fall (ramps)
72.52
0.0084
0.6117
HEN-15
Passenger fall from overbridge at station
0.3520
0.2679
0.0943
HEN-16
Passenger fall during evacuation at station
0.0500
0.0531
0.0027
HEN-17
1.407
0.0270
0.0379
113.7
0.0159
1.804
7.480
0.0264
0.1972
566.7
0.0020
1.139
HEN-24
Passenger crushing caused by overcrowding at station
Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large
object
Workforce trapped in machinery
Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at
station
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
1051.3
0.0064
6.743
HEN-25
Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
18.18
0.0328
0.5968
HEN-26
Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle
13.93
0.0234
0.3259
HEN-27
Workforce burns due to welding etc
35.32
0.0019
0.0678
HEN-27A
Workforce burn due to electrical short circuit
0.9048
0.0019
0.0017
HEN-27B
Workforce burn due to welding or flame cutting
11.43
0.0019
0.0219
HEN-27C
Workforce burn due to other causes
22.99
0.0019
0.0441
HEN-28
Workforce exposure to arcing
7.095
0.0138
0.0982
HEN-28A
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (conductor rail)
5.298
0.0138
0.0733
HEN-28B
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (OHL)
0.9269
0.0138
0.0128
HEN-28C
Workforce burn due to/exposure to arcing (other)
0.8707
0.0138
0.0120
HEN-29
Workforce exposure to hazardous substances (including
stings, bites and needle injuries)
76.52
0.0023
0.1765
HEN-30
Workforce electric shock (conductor rail)
4.600
0.1234
0.5676
1.053
0.4311
0.4541
3.547
0.0320
0.1135
Hazardous
event no.
HEN-21
HEN-22
HEN-23
HEN-30A
HEN-30B
(2)
National
average
frequency
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock
(conductor rail) due to fall
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock
(conductor rail) via item/object
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown82
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-31
Workforce electric shock (OHL)
1.718
0.0732
0.1258
0
0
0
0
0
0.0643
0.5741
0.4754
0.9210
0.1585
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-31A
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock (OHL)
(direct contact)
0.4500
0.2003
0.0901
0
0
0
0
0
0.0643
0.2571
0
0.1286
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST1, 100%
HEN-31B
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock (OHL)
(indirect contact)
1.268
0.0281
0.0357
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3170
0.4754
0.7924
0.1585
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST1, 74%
HEN-32
Workforce electric shock (non-traction supply)
10.15
0.0066
0.0675
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5578
0.4463
9.260
0.2231
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2, 28%
HEN-33
Workforce asphyxiation / drowning
0.1855
0.3501
0.0650
0
0
0
0
0
0.0583
0.0652
0.0248
0.0372
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-33A
Workforce asphyxiation in tunnel
0.0690
0.5500
0.0379
0
0
0
0
0
0.0345
0.0345
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST1, 90%
HEN-33B
Workforce asphyxiation at station
0.0690
0.0123
8.51E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0069
0.0248
0.0372
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2, 80%
HEN-33C
Workforce asphyxiation (drowning)
0.0476
0.5500
0.0262
0
0
0
0
0
0.0238
0.0238
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST1, 80%
HEN-35
Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty
28.11
0.0130
0.3647
0
0
0
0
0
0.3077
0.1500
3.599
24.06
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-35A
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) involved in road traffic
accident while on duty
27.86
0.0130
0.3613
0
0
0
0
0
0.3077
0.1250
3.430
24.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-35B
Signaller struck by road vehicle
0.2500
0.0136
0.0034
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0250
0.1688
0.0563
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST1
HEN-36
Adult trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
19.00
0.0500
0.9496
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.8000
0.4000
5.000
8.800
4.600
0.2
SF,ST2
HEN-37
HEN-38
Adult trespasser electric shock (OHL)
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
1.743
8.600
0.3464
0.7060
0.6037
6.071
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3169
2.586
0.4753
5.971
1.268
0.7857
0
1.571
0
0.5286
0
0
SF,ST1
HEN-38A
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail) at station
5.000
0.6911
3.455
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.200
3.400
0.4000
0.8000
0.4000
0
SF,ST1
HEN-38B
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail) not at station
3.600
0.7266
2.616
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3857
2.571
0.3857
0.7714
0.1286
0
SF,ST1
HEN-39
HEN-40
HEN-41
HEN-42
HEN-43
HEN-44
Adult trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
Child trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
Child trespasser electric shock (OHL)
Child trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
Child trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
MOP struck / trapped by level crossing equipment
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MCB +
CCTV level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MCB
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MG level
crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on ABCL
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on AHB
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC +
MWL level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC + T
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC + T
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on FP +
MWL level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on FP level
crossing
0.1379
2.200
1.867
1.214
0.2000
14.47
0.0422
0.0500
0.1304
0.4216
0.0422
0.0223
0.0058
0.1100
0.2434
0.5119
0.0084
0.3222
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0926
0
0
0
0
0
0.0463
0.1098
0.4857
0
0.1645
0.0552
0.5789
1.318
0.2429
0.0800
1.316
0.0552
1.019
0.3294
0.3643
0.0800
3.289
0.0276
0.5326
0.2196
0.1214
0.0400
9.539
0
0.02316
0
0
0
0.16446
SF,ST2
SF,ST2
SF,ST1
SF,ST1
SF,ST2
10.00
0.0223
0.2226
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1136
0.9091
2.273
6.591
0.11364
SF,ST2
2.105
0.0223
0.0469
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0239
0.1913
0.4784
1.387
0.02392
SF,ST2
0.6975
0.0223
0.0155
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0079
0.0634
0.1585
0.4597
0.00793
SF,ST2
0.1012
0.0223
0.0023
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0012
0.0092
0.0230
0.0667
0.00115
SF,ST2
0.4702
0.0223
0.0105
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0053
0.0427
0.1069
0.3099
0.00534
SF,ST2
0.0725
0.0223
0.0016
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.24E-04
0.0066
0.0165
0.0478
0.00082
SF,ST2
0.1795
0.0223
0.0040
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0020
0.0163
0.0408
0.1183
0.00204
SF,ST2
0.1944
0.0223
0.0043
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0022
0.0177
0.0442
0.1281
0.00221
SF,ST2
0.0356
0.0223
7.92E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.04E-04
0.0032
0.0081
0.0234
0.0004
SF,ST2
0.6166
0.0223
0.0137
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0070
0.0561
0.1401
0.4064
0.00701
SF,ST2
HEN-44A
HEN-44B
HEN-44C
HEN-44D
HEN-44E
HEN-44G
HEN-44H
HEN-44I
HEN-44K
HEN-44L
Version 6.1 – June 2009
SF,ST1, 13%
83
Table A1
Hazardous event
(1)
(2)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-31
Workforce electric shock (OHL)
1.718
0.0732
0.1258
HEN-31A
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock (OHL)
(direct contact)
0.4500
0.2003
0.0901
HEN-31B
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock (OHL)
(indirect contact)
1.268
0.0281
0.0357
HEN-32
Workforce electric shock (non-traction supply)
10.15
0.0066
0.0675
HEN-33
Workforce asphyxiation / drowning
0.1855
0.3501
0.0650
HEN-33A
Workforce asphyxiation in tunnel
0.0690
0.5500
0.0379
HEN-33B
Workforce asphyxiation at station
0.0690
0.0123
8.51E-04
HEN-33C
Workforce asphyxiation (drowning)
0.0476
0.5500
0.0262
HEN-35
Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty
28.11
0.0130
0.3647
HEN-35A
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) involved in road traffic
accident while on duty
27.86
0.0130
0.3613
HEN-35B
Signaller struck by road vehicle
0.2500
0.0136
0.0034
HEN-36
Adult trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
19.00
0.0500
0.9496
HEN-37
HEN-38
Adult trespasser electric shock (OHL)
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
1.743
8.600
0.3464
0.7060
0.6037
6.071
HEN-38A
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail) at station
5.000
0.6911
3.455
HEN-38B
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail) not at station
3.600
0.7266
2.616
HEN-39
HEN-40
HEN-41
HEN-42
HEN-43
HEN-44
Adult trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
Child trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
Child trespasser electric shock (OHL)
Child trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
Child trespasser electric shock (non-traction supply)
MOP struck / trapped by level crossing equipment
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MCB +
CCTV level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MCB
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on MG level
crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on ABCL
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on AHB
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC +
MWL level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC + T
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on UWC + T
level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on FP +
MWL level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment on FP level
crossing
0.1379
2.200
1.867
1.214
0.2000
14.47
0.0422
0.0500
0.1304
0.4216
0.0422
0.0223
0.0058
0.1100
0.2434
0.5119
0.0084
0.3222
10.00
0.0223
0.2226
2.105
0.0223
0.0469
0.6975
0.0223
0.0155
0.1012
0.0223
0.0023
0.4702
0.0223
0.0105
0.0725
0.0223
0.0016
0.1795
0.0223
0.0040
0.1944
0.0223
0.0043
0.0356
0.0223
7.92E-04
0.6166
0.0223
0.0137
HEN-44A
HEN-44B
HEN-44C
HEN-44D
HEN-44E
HEN-44G
HEN-44H
HEN-44I
HEN-44K
HEN-44L
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown84
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEN-45
HEN-45A
HEN-45B
HEN-45C
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge (incl. RTA)
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence (incl. RTA)
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct (incl. RTA)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
14.26
0.2246
3.202
9.800
0.2750
3.600
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
0
0
0
0
0
2.695
0
0
0
0
0.0940
0.3384
0
0
0
0.8571
0.1975
0.1693
0
0
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
0
0
0
0
0.6260
2.465
7.140
3.407
1.607
0.30532
0
0
0
0
0
0.6000
2.200
4.800
2.200
0.8000
0
SF,ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1440
1.872
1.008
0.7200
0.288
SF,ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0260
0.1212
0.4675
0.1991
0.0866
0.01732
SF,ST1
HEN-46
MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing or footpath crossing
15.34
0.0278
0.4267
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1461
2.483
4.820
7.888
0.29213
HEN-46A
MOP slip, trip or fall on MCB + CCTV level crossing
6.441
0.0278
0.1792
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0613
1.043
2.024
3.313
0.12269
SF,ST2
HEN-46B
MOP slip, trip or fall on MCB level crossing
3.583
0.0278
0.0997
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0341
0.5801
1.126
1.843
0.06825
SF,ST2
HEN-46C
MOP slip, trip or fall on MG level crossing
0.6748
0.0278
0.0188
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0064
0.1093
0.2121
0.3471
0.01285
SF,ST2
HEN-46D
MOP slip, trip or fall on ABCL level crossing
0.2607
0.0278
0.0073
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0025
0.0422
0.0819
0.1341
0.00497
SF,ST2
HEN-46E
MOP slip, trip or fall on AHB level crossing
0.7244
0.0278
0.0202
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0069
0.1173
0.2277
0.3725
0.0138
SF,ST2
HEN-46F
MOP slip, trip or fall on AOCL level crossing
0.3512
0.0278
0.0098
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0033
0.0569
0.1104
0.1806
0.00669
SF,ST2
HEN-46G
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC + MWL level crossing
0.2386
0.0278
0.0066
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0023
0.0386
0.0750
0.1227
0.00455
SF,ST2
HEN-46H
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC + T level crossing
0.5993
0.0278
0.0167
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0057
0.0970
0.1884
0.3082
0.01142
SF,ST2
HEN-46I
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC level crossing
0.6566
0.0278
0.0183
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0063
0.1063
0.2063
0.3377
0.01251
SF,ST2
HEN-46J
MOP slip, trip or fall on OC level crossing
0.0230
0.0278
6.40E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.19E-04
0.0037
0.0072
0.0118
0.00044
SF,ST2
HEN-46K
MOP slip, trip or fall on FP + MWL level crossing
0.0957
0.0278
0.0027
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.11E-04
0.0155
0.0301
0.0492
0.00182
SF,ST2
HEN-46L
MOP slip, trip or fall on FP level crossing
1.689
0.0278
0.0470
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0161
0.2734
0.5307
0.8684
0.03216
SF,ST2
HEN-48
MOP exposure to fire on the mainline railway
0.0500
0.0290
0.0015
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0125
0.0375
0.0125
0
SF,ST2
HEN-49
MOP exposure to explosion on the mainline railway
0.0500
6.000
0.3000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2500
0.5000
0
0
0
MF,ST1
HEN-50
MOP exposure to electrical arcing
0.2000
0.0224
0.0045
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0400
0.0800
0.0800
0
SF,ST2
HEN-51
MOP electric shock (OHL)
0.2000
0.0281
0.0056
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0500
0.0750
0.1250
0.025
SF,ST1
HEN-52
MOP electric shock (conductor rail)
0.0595
0.4311
0.0257
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0238
0.0179
0.0119
0.0060
0
SF,ST1
HEN-53
0.2500
0.0066
0.0017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0137
0.0110
0.2280
0.00549
SF,ST2
0.0100
10.00
0.1000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1000
0
0
0
0
MF,ST1
370.4
0.0035
1.303
0
7.190
54.83
299.2
10.72
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2
565.7
0.0043
2.411
0
0
0
0
0
0
17.06
38.95
510.0
0.1177
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2, 76%
6.332
0.0017
0.0109
0
0
1.136
5.195
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2
2.200
0.0144
0.0316
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2750
0.5500
1.375
0
SF,ST2
10.33
3.086
0.4394
0.0073
0.0012
0.0010
0.0755
0.0038
4.39E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.4394
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1469
0
0.1950
2.939
0
0
0.1469
0
0
0
0
0.5849
0
0
1.755
0
0
7.799
0
0
0.19497
0
0
SF,ST2
SF,ST2, 28%
SF,ST2
846.9
0.0038
3.184
0
19.57
98.10
721.9
13.63
0
0
0
0.4339
0.2657
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2
1276.0
0.0021
2.666
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.932
99.31
1171.9
4.476
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2, 1%
HEN-64
MOP electric shock (non-traction supplies)
MOP exposure to hazardous substances leakage on the
mainline railway
Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at
station
Workforce struck by/contact with/ trapped in object not at
station
Passenger burn (not on train)
MOP injury on bridges/steps/subways (other than in
stations) whilst on the mainline railway
MOP struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
Workforce exposure to noise (not on train)
Passenger exposure to noise (not on train)
Passenger on-train incident (excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
Workforce on-train incident (excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
Passenger assault
1974.1
0.0041
8.076
1.475
40.68
139.8
1058.3
735.3
0
0
0
0
40.68
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2
HEN-65
Workforce assault
1757.3
0.0019
3.258
0
0
0
0
0.1128
0.0527
9.925
92.51
664.3
1085.7
0
0
0
0.1128
0
SF,ST2, 0.4%
HEN-66
MOP assault
170.0
0.0052
0.8891
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2092
4.645
12.52
92.37
60.4914
SF,ST2
HEN-67
MOP fall from platform onto track (no train present)
2.857
0.0173
0.0494
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0571
0.0044
0.3668
1.451
0.9373
0.10596
SF,ST2
HEN-68
MOP non-trespasser fall in stations
85.33
0.0084
0.7160
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0074
0.0050
0.0371
5.054
23.08
56.17
1.91278
SF,ST2
HEN-54
HEN-55
HEN-56
HEN-57
HEN-58
HEN-59
HEN-60
HEN-61
HEN-62
HEN-63
Version 6.1 – June 2009
85
Table A1
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
HEN-45
HEN-45A
HEN-45B
HEN-45C
(2)
Hazardous event description
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge (incl. RTA)
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence (incl. RTA)
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct (incl. RTA)
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
14.26
0.2246
3.202
9.800
0.2750
2.695
3.600
0.0940
0.3384
0.8571
0.1975
0.1693
HEN-46
MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing or footpath crossing
15.34
0.0278
0.4267
HEN-46A
MOP slip, trip or fall on MCB + CCTV level crossing
6.441
0.0278
0.1792
HEN-46B
MOP slip, trip or fall on MCB level crossing
3.583
0.0278
0.0997
HEN-46C
MOP slip, trip or fall on MG level crossing
0.6748
0.0278
0.0188
HEN-46D
MOP slip, trip or fall on ABCL level crossing
0.2607
0.0278
0.0073
HEN-46E
MOP slip, trip or fall on AHB level crossing
0.7244
0.0278
0.0202
HEN-46F
MOP slip, trip or fall on AOCL level crossing
0.3512
0.0278
0.0098
HEN-46G
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC + MWL level crossing
0.2386
0.0278
0.0066
HEN-46H
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC + T level crossing
0.5993
0.0278
0.0167
HEN-46I
MOP slip, trip or fall on UWC level crossing
0.6566
0.0278
0.0183
HEN-46J
MOP slip, trip or fall on OC level crossing
0.0230
0.0278
6.40E-04
HEN-46K
MOP slip, trip or fall on FP + MWL level crossing
0.0957
0.0278
0.0027
HEN-46L
MOP slip, trip or fall on FP level crossing
1.689
0.0278
0.0470
HEN-48
MOP exposure to fire on the mainline railway
0.0500
0.0290
0.0015
HEN-49
MOP exposure to explosion on the mainline railway
0.0500
6.000
0.3000
HEN-50
MOP exposure to electrical arcing
0.2000
0.0224
0.0045
HEN-51
MOP electric shock (OHL)
0.2000
0.0281
0.0056
HEN-52
MOP electric shock (conductor rail)
0.0595
0.4311
0.0257
HEN-53
0.2500
0.0066
0.0017
0.0100
10.00
0.1000
370.4
0.0035
1.303
565.7
0.0043
2.411
6.332
0.0017
0.0109
2.200
0.0144
0.0316
10.33
3.086
0.4394
0.0073
0.0012
0.0010
0.0755
0.0038
4.39E-04
846.9
0.0038
3.184
1276.0
0.0021
2.666
HEN-64
MOP electric shock (non-traction supplies)
MOP exposure to hazardous substances leakage on the
mainline railway
Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at
station
Workforce struck by/contact with/ trapped in object not at
station
Passenger burn (not on train)
MOP injury on bridges/steps/subways (other than in
stations) whilst on the mainline railway
MOP struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
Workforce exposure to noise (not on train)
Passenger exposure to noise (not on train)
Passenger on-train incident (excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
Workforce on-train incident (excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
Passenger assault
1974.1
0.0041
8.076
HEN-65
Workforce assault
1757.3
0.0019
3.258
HEN-66
MOP assault
170.0
0.0052
0.8891
HEN-67
MOP fall from platform onto track (no train present)
2.857
0.0173
0.0494
HEN-68
MOP non-trespasser fall in stations
85.33
0.0084
0.7160
HEN-54
HEN-55
HEN-56
HEN-57
HEN-58
HEN-59
HEN-60
HEN-61
HEN-62
HEN-63
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown86
Table A1
Passenger
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
(2)
Hazardous event description
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
(no./
year)
9.943
0.1421
1.413
6.600
0.1477
3.200
Staff
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(8)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
0
0
0
0
0
0.9747
0
0
0
0
0.1282
0.4101
0
0
0
0.1429
0.1975
0.0282
0
0
1.119
0.1488
0.1665
0
0.1667
0.1477
0.0246
0.6667
0.1282
0.2857
MOP
Shock /
trauma
Fatalities
Major
injuries
Rep.
minor
injuries
(13)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(14)
Shock /
trauma
Notes
(18)
Nonrep.
minor
injuries
(19)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(20)
(21)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(no./
year)
(-)
0
0
0
0
0.7543
0.8664
5.278
2.749
1.326
0.00289
0
0
0
0
0
0.7500
0.6000
3.600
2.100
0.4500
0
SF,ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.2462
1.600
0.6154
0.8615
0
SF,ST2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0043
0.0202
0.0779
0.0332
0.0144
0.00289
SF,ST1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0276
0.1068
0.5801
0.2476
0.2197
0.00577
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0189
0.0152
0.0909
0.0530
0.0114
0
SF,ST1
0.0854
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0513
0.3333
0.1282
0.1795
0
SF,ST2
0.1975
0.0564
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0087
0.0404
0.1558
0.0664
0.0289
0.00577
SF,ST1
5.323
0.0120
0.0637
0
0.5323
1.419
3.371
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SF,ST2
SF,ST2, 31%
HEN-73
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence
Adult trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct
Child trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway
Child trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge
Child trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence
Child trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct
Passenger manual handling
HEN-74
Workforce manual handling
471.0
0.0023
1.085
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.976
79.66
388.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
HEN-75
MOP involved in RTA on level crossing
1.258
0.0306
0.0385
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0168
0.1804
0.5306
0.5306
0.09648
HEN-75A
MOP involved in RTA on MCB + CCTV level crossing
0.4464
0.0307
0.0137
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0060
0.0641
0.1881
0.1881
0.03459
SF,ST1
HEN-75B
MOP involved in RTA on MCB level crossing
0.3243
0.0304
0.0099
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0043
0.0462
0.1369
0.1369
0.02432
SF,ST1
HEN-75C
MOP involved in RTA on MG level crossing
0.0775
0.0303
0.0023
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0010
0.0110
0.0328
0.0328
0.00568
SF,ST1
HEN-75D
MOP involved in RTA on ABCL level crossing
0.0536
0.0300
0.0016
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.00E-04
0.0075
0.0227
0.0227
0.00377
SF,ST1
HEN-75E
MOP involved in RTA on AHB level crossing
0.2489
0.0299
0.0074
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0032
0.0348
0.1054
0.1054
0.01708
SF,ST1
HEN-75F
MOP involved in RTA on AOCL level crossing
0.0172
0.0445
7.65E-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.44E-04
0.0036
0.0066
0.0066
0.00396
SF,ST1
HEN-75G
MOP involved in RTA on UWC + MWL level crossing
0.0124895
0.0310289
0.0003875
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00017
0.00182
0.00525
0.00525
0.00102
SF,ST1
HEN-75H
MOP involved in RTA on UWC + T level crossing
0.0276491
0.0315075
0.0008712
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00038
0.00409
0.01159
0.01159
0.0024
SF,ST1
HEN-75I
MOP involved in RTA on UWC level crossing
0.0494718
0.0299483
0.0014816
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00064
0.00694
0.02094
0.02094
0.00345
SF,ST1
HEN-75J
MOP involved in RTA on OC level crossing
0.0009239
0.04446
4.108E-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.8E-05
0.00019
0.00036
0.00036
0.00021
SF,ST1
HEN-71
HEN-71A
HEN-71B
HEN-71C
HEN-72
HEN-72A
HEN-72B
HEN-72C
Version 6.1 – June 2009
87
Table A1
Hazardous event
(1)
Hazardous
event no.
(2)
Hazardous event description
National
average
frequency
National
average
cons.
National
average
risk
(3)
(4)
(5)
(events/
year)
(FWI/
event)
(FWI/
year)
9.943
0.1421
1.413
6.600
0.1477
0.9747
3.200
0.1282
0.4101
0.1429
0.1975
0.0282
1.119
0.1488
0.1665
0.1667
0.1477
0.0246
0.6667
0.1282
0.0854
0.2857
0.1975
0.0564
0.0637
HEN-73
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge
Adult trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence
Adult trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct
Child trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway
Child trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from bridge
Child trespass fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from wall, bank, roof or fence
Child trespasser fall/jump from outside onto the mainline
railway from other e.g. viaduct
Passenger manual handling
5.323
0.0120
HEN-74
Workforce manual handling
471.0
0.0023
1.085
HEN-75
MOP involved in RTA on level crossing
1.258
0.0306
0.0385
HEN-75A
MOP involved in RTA on MCB + CCTV level crossing
0.4464
0.0307
0.0137
HEN-75B
MOP involved in RTA on MCB level crossing
0.3243
0.0304
0.0099
HEN-75C
MOP involved in RTA on MG level crossing
0.0775
0.0303
0.0023
HEN-75D
MOP involved in RTA on ABCL level crossing
0.0536
0.0300
0.0016
HEN-75E
MOP involved in RTA on AHB level crossing
0.2489
0.0299
0.0074
HEN-75F
MOP involved in RTA on AOCL level crossing
0.0172
0.0445
7.65E-04
HEN-75G
MOP involved in RTA on UWC + MWL level crossing
0.0124895
0.0310289
0.0003875
HEN-75H
MOP involved in RTA on UWC + T level crossing
0.0276491
0.0315075
0.0008712
HEN-75I
MOP involved in RTA on UWC level crossing
0.0494718
0.0299483
0.0014816
HEN-75J
MOP involved in RTA on OC level crossing
0.0009239
0.04446
4.108E-05
HEN-71
HEN-71A
HEN-71B
HEN-71C
HEN-72
HEN-72A
HEN-72B
HEN-72C
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Open out for full breakdown88
Table A2
Table A2. Reasons for changes in reported frequency and risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
Train accidents
Train loading distributions were reviewed and revised for
consistency with the loading assumptions used in the Network
Modelling Framework (NMF) model.
HET-01
Collision between two passenger
trains resulting from a passenger
train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted
train or WSF
5
0.3564
0.5250
0.2535
0.4339
-0.0911
Distribution of rolling stock reviewed and updated, taken from
the database version of the timetable (TSDB).
SPAD data reviewed and updated.
Cat D/runaways, Signaller Error/Misroutes and WSF data was
reviewed and updated.
HET-02P
Collision between a passenger
train and a non-passenger train
resulting from a passenger train
Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted
train or WSF
HET-02NP
Collision between a passenger
train and a non-passenger train
resulting from a non-passenger
train Cat A SPAD, Cat D
SPAD/runaway train, misrouted
train or WSF
5
0.3667
0.2558
0.4421
HET-02
POS
Collision between OTP and
passenger train resulting from
OTP incorrectly outside
possession
5
0.0500
0.0460
0.0500
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
0.0390
0.0571
0.0398
0.0473
As for HET-01. Although the passenger train/non-passenger
train collision frequencies have remained comparable between
v5.5 and v6 the risk has increased. This has been primarily
due to the changes in train loading distributions. The most
significant effect is in collisions between Passenger and Nonpassenger trains where the increased probability of mixed
traffic in peak loaded times has resulted in an increase in the
high consequence PT/NPT collisions and therefore an
increased risk for HET-02P.
0.4792
0.2234
As for HET-01. As for HET-2P although the collision
frequencies have remained comparable between v5.5 and v6
(in fact a slight increase) the risk has increased. This has
been primarily due to the changes in train loading distributions.
The most significant effect is in collisions between Passenger
and Non-passenger trains where the increased probability of
mixed traffic in peak loaded times has resulted in an increase
in the high consequence PT/NPT collisions and therefore an
increased risk for HET-02NP.
0.0460
8.67E-06
0.1045
No change
89
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-03
Collision between two nonpassenger trains resulting from a
non-passenger train Cat A SPAD,
Cat D SPAD/runaway train,
misrouted train or WSF
HET-03
POS
Collision between OTP and nonpassenger train inside possession
Last
updated
(version)
5
5
SRMv6
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
0.2341
0.1446
0.1412
0.0898
11.00
0.0463
6.738
0.0336
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
-0.0547
As for HET-01.
-0.0127
The hazardous event structure has been remodelled; and a
new dataset has been used.
This has resulted in a reduction in the frequency and risk
estimated for HET-03 POS.
-0.2044
The structure has been remodelled with HEM-04 and HEM-18
now modelled under HET-04. There is a large decrease in risk
– the main reason for this is the change in injury weightings
and the fact that HET-04 now includes minor non-reportables.
The non-RV events, which previously in v5.5 were incorrectly
assigned a shock/trauma weighting of class 1, are now
correctly assigned a shock/trauma weighting of class 2 - this
also accounts for some of the decrease. These combined
changes result in 0.2418 FWI/Yr less than what the risk would
be if calculated using the old injury weightings. The rest of the
difference is mainly due to a reduction in consequences.
HET-04
Collision of train with object on
line (not resulting in derailment)
HET-04
POS
Collision of OTP with object inside
possession (not resulting in
derailment)
5
15.97
5.77E-04
14.82
0.0114
0.0108
The frequency has decreased slightly but is now based mostly
on data as opposed to expert judgement. The consequences
have been reworked and are now higher than v5, as they also
include collision with RV inside possession, meaning that the
risk has also increased.
HET-06
Collision between two passenger
trains in station (permissive
working)
5
12.83
0.0741
7.572
0.0488
-0.0254
There has been a significant decrease in the number of
incidents of this type occurring since the last full model update
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
2865.8
0.8717
2845.5
0.6673
90
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
The net effect of the changes to the model parameters was a
small (6%) reduction in the risk, and a larger (41%) reduction
in the frequency of events.
The main factor behind these was a reduction in precursor
frequencies (recent years have seen fewer events, particularly
for roll backs and low speed only collisions).
HET-09
Collision with buffer stops
5
11.14
0.1443
6.521
0.1354
-0.0088
Further minor reductions arose from re-evaluating the
probability of a potential for high speed collision being outside
buffer capacity & the consequent probability of fire.
The reductions more than compensated for increases in risk
caused by (i) the change in average loadings; (ii) the change in
modelled accident consequences. The change to
consequences with the greatest effect on the final figures was
a small increase in the expected number of passenger injuries
arising from potentially high speed collisions within the
capacity of the buffers; the number was amended from SRM
v5 to reflect recent data [e.g. Sudbury 2006, plus Walton on
Naze 2002, Edinburgh Waverley 2001].
HET-09
POS
Collision with buffer stops: OTP
inside possession
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
0.0667
3.19E-04
0.1333
5.52E-04
2.33E-04
The risk has increased from version 5.5, although it remains
extremely small. This is due to an increase in the modelled
frequency for all precursors. The frequencies were revised
upwards because a single accident occurred (in June 2006).
Previously, the data used contained no such accidents and the
estimate was based on expert judgement (a recollection of a
single accident occurring in a 15-year period).
91
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
Level Crossing Modelling Changes
The level crossing models have been substantially re-modelled
to achieve alignment with Network Rail's All Level Crossing
Risk Model (ALCRM). This has required the development of
separate models for each crossing type and the development
of a wider range of causes for each crossing type. For the
models assessing the risk from collisions with road vehicles,
the change has also enabled the escalation of accidents at
each type of crossing to be different to account for:
• the distribution of different types of road vehicles being struck
• the distribution of operational speeds at each type of crossing
• the subsequent likelihood of a derailment.
HET-10
Passenger train collision with road
vehicle on level crossing
5
15.62
3.031
12.40
2.397
-0.6336
A result of the modelling change is to reduce the average
consequence per event at some crossings types; in particular
the likelihood of a derailment at lower speed crossing has
been reduced. Additionally, the likelihood of derailment at
some crossings has been reduced as account is taken of the
types of vehicle that are typically struck at the different types of
crossing, i.e., heavy vehicles, such as tractors are more likely
to be struck at user worked crossing than at AHBs.
Additionally, the consequence of passenger train derailment
has reduced in line with HET-12.
Level Crossing Data Changes
There has also been a reduction in the predicted frequency of
collisions with road vehicles (for HET-10 and HET-11
combined), from 15.6 to 12.4 per year. The cause of the
reduction in frequency is the generally lower level of collisions
since the model was last updated using data up to the end of
2005; in 2006 and 2007, there were 11 collisions per year.
The rate in 2008 was higher at 19. Approximately 80% of such
collisions are predicted to be with passenger trains rather than
freight trains. Another, less significant, cause of the reduction
is caused by accounting for the changing population of
crossing over the data period analysed.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
92
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-11
Non-passenger train collision with
road vehicle on level crossing
5
3.110
0.5077
2.217
HET-11
POS
Collision between OTP and road
vehicle inside possession
5
0.0900
0.0167
0.1361
HET-12
HET-13
FTP
HET-13
FTF
HET-13 EP
HET-13
POS
Derailment of passenger trains
Derailment of freight trains on
passenger lines outside
possession
Derailment of freight trains on
freight only lines outside
possession
Derailment of ECS&Parcels trains
on passenger lines
Derailment of OTP inside
possession
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
0.3837
-0.1240
For details, see HET-10 above. In addition, the consequences
of freight and ECS train derailment have increased in line with
HET-13.There has also been a 3.9% reduction in the number
of ECS and freight train miles.
0.0223
0.0056
Change in frequency due to an additional event identified
during the recent data review. Hence, the overall risk
increases as well.
High speed derailments (>75 mph) have been specifically
modelled for version 6. In addition greater use of laminated
glass has resulted in a reduction in consequences where
vehicles turn over. Revised passenger loadings and
probability of next train on the line have increased the
consequences of some events and the revisions to the
precursor frequencies, taking into account more recent
derailment data has resulted in a reduction in frequency.
5
9.139
3.129
7.004
1.977
-1.152
5
13.82
0.3344
11.72
0.3123
-0.0221
5
7.192
0.1037
5.454
0.0668
-0.0369
5
2.400
0.0560
2.599
0.0385
-0.0175
5
34.03
0.0870
HET-17
Fire on passenger train
5.5
12.88
0.0423
HET-18
Fire on passenger train (not in
station)
5.5
151.9
0.0552
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
40.94
126.5
0.1304
0.1462
Now part of HET-17
The frequency and consequences of Freight train derailments
have been updated taking account of the latest data. In
addition some escalation factors and next train on the line
probabilities have been revised.
0.0434
The hazardous event structure has been remodelled; and a
new dataset has been used.
This has resulted in an increase in the frequency and risk
estimated for HET-13 POS.
0.0487
HET-17 now includes HET-18 risk and the total frequency has
decreased due to the data update. However, due to changes
to the rule sets and the train loadings, the overall risk has
increased.
HET-18 has been amalgamated into HET-17 for SRMv6.
93
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
0.0310
-0.0199
The data update reduced the frequency, and this has resulted
in a reduction in overall risk due to freight train fires.
1.600
0.0050
0.0030
The frequency has increased due to the data update. As a
result, the risk has increased accordingly.
0.0045
4.66E-04
0.0063
0.0018
The frequency and risk has increased due to remodelling the
exposure of trains under structures.
1.71E-05
1.97E-05
4.74E-06
2.72E-06
-1.70E-05
The frequency and risk has decreased due to remodelling the
exposure of OTP and OTM cabs under structures and
reviewing the assumptions for the consequences.
5
0.0100
0.0387
0.0100
0.0387
0
Explosion on passenger train
5
0.0200
0.0046
0.0200
0.0050
4.13E-04
There has been no change in frequency. The increase in risk
is due to changes to the consequence modelling.
HET-24
Explosion on freight train
5
0.0184
0.0693
0.0172
0.0688
-5.20E-04
The changes in risk are due to a reduction in frequency from
updating the modelling with current diesel train utilisation
HET-25
Train divisions (not leading to
collision)
5
13.67
0.0128
11.67
0.0079
-0.0049
The reduction in frequency and risk is due to an observed
decrease in the frequency of passenger train division events
leading to a reduction in the estimated frequency of train
divisions.
HET-26
Collision between a failed train
and an assisting train
5
0.8571
0.0220
0.1870
0.0058
-0.0161
The estimated frequency has decreased due to an observed
decrease in the number of events observed. This has led to a
reduction in the estimated risk.
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5.5
27.46
0.0509
22.66
Fire on non-passenger train inside
possession
5
0.6360
0.0020
HET-21
Train crushed by structural
collapse or large object (not at
station)
5
3.96E-04
HET-21
POS
OTP crushed by structural
collapse or large object inside
possession (not at station)
5
HET-22
Structural collapse at station
HET-23
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HET-20
Fire on non-passenger train
HET-20
POS
Version 6.1 – June 2009
The estimated frequency and risk have not changed since
v5.5.
94
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
-0.2164
The hazardous event structure has been remodelled; moving
some incidents into HEN-62, POTOHEAT-E: Passenger ontrain fainting due to train overheating.
This has caused a reduction in the estimated frequency and
risk for HEM-01.
Movement accidents
HEM-01
Passenger injury during
evacuation following stopped train
HEM-02
Passenger fall from train in
running
HEM-03
Passenger struck while leaning
out of train (train in running)
HEM-04
HEM-05
HEM-06
5.5
5.5
2.567
0.7560
0.2358
0.0704
5
2.533
0.0447
Passenger struck by object
through train window
5.5
21.75
0.0774
Train door closes on passenger
5.5
275.7
0.6962
Passenger fall between train and
platform
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5.5
221.0
2.011
1.877
0.0194
Now moved to HEM-44
0.5421
0.0938
0.0490
Now part of HET-04
284.7
252.3
0.7115
1.770
This hazardous event has been restructured. The incidents
involving passengers deliberately jumping from a train in
running have been moved to a new hazardous event, HEM-44.
The remaining frequency and risk of passenger fall from train
in running is not significant.
Events previously covered by this hazardous event have
moved to HEN-62 resulting in a reduction in the scope of
events covered by this event - hence the estimated frequency
has reduced. The events that are still in scope are now of a
more severe nature and thus the average consequences have
increased. This coupled with the fact that the events covered
by this hazardous event have doubled on a like-for-like
comparison with SRMv5.5 results in an increase in the level of
risk.
These are now included in HET-04, precursor BVANOBJTHR.
0.0153
There has been slight increase in the estimated frequency
which has lead to a slight increase in the risk.
-0.2410
Since SRMv5.5 this hazardous event has been split into three
precursors, one each for boarding, alighting and
other/unknown. There has been an increase in the estimated
frequency of this hazardous event, mainly due to an increase
in boarding injuries. The severity of the injuries has also
changed, with fewer major injuries and more minor injuries in
recent years, leading to an overall reduction in injuries per
event and a decrease in overall risk.
95
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
HEM-07
Passenger fall out of train onto
track at station
5
0.6841
0.0093
0.7035
0.0302
0.0209
The estimated frequency has increased slightly due to the
application of a new modelling approach based on normalised
event counts. The consequences have increased due to
including a fatality component, resulting in an increase in the
level of risk.
HEM-08
Passenger fall from platform and
struck by train
5
5.667
2.357
5.980
2.189
-0.1688
There has been a minor increase in estimated frequency, but a
reduction in the consequences, resulting in a decrease in the
overall level of risk.
HEM-09
Passenger injury while
boarding/alighting train (platform
side)
5.5
460.4
3.593
507.6
3.870
0.2772
There have been increases in estimated frequency in this
hazardous event, due to changes in the number of events
recorded in the updated data, leading to an increase in risk.
HEM-10
Passenger struck by train while
on platform
5.5
7.150
0.5126
9.504
1.316
0.8030
There has been an increase in the number of fatalities due to
passengers standing too close to the platform edge, which has
resulted in an increase in the average consequences
associated with this hazardous event and hence an increase in
risk.
HEM-11
Passenger struck while crossing
track at station on crossing
5
0.5114
0.4449
1.114
0.9101
0.4652
The increase in risk is due to an increase in estimated
frequency. This is due to changes in the recorded number of
events in the updated data and identification of 'passenger'
related injuries previously considered in HEM-27
HEM-12
Adult/child trespasser struck while
crossing track at station
5.5
5.580
3.503
5.129
3.497
-0.0061
There has been a minor decrease in the estimated frequency
resulting in a slight decrease in the risk.
HEM-13
Passenger crushing caused by
crowding on train
5
10.33
0.0705
8.794
0.0623
-0.0082
There has been a minor decrease in the estimated frequency
resulting in a slight decrease in the risk.
0.0763
There has been a decrease in the estimated frequency due to
a reduction in the number of incidents that occur in
possession. However there has also been an increase in
average consequence associated with this hazardous event
resulting in an increase in risk.
0.1746
The increase in risk comes from an increase in the estimated
frequency of all precursors contributing to this hazardous event
and an increase in the average consequences associated with
this event. Both of these changes derive from changes to the
number of recorded events in the updated data.
HEM-14
Workforce (not track worker)
struck/crushed by train
HEM-15
Train crew/ track worker fall from
train/OTP in running
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
5
0.7121
1.100
0.3564
0.0613
0.5507
2.086
0.4326
0.2358
96
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
HEM-16
Workforce injury while
boarding/alighting train
5.5
229.3
0.9811
198.7
0.8090
-0.1721
The reduction in risk is due to the reduction in estimated
frequency as a result of a reduction in the number of incidents
recorded in the updated data. The most notable being the
reduction in boarding and alighting events for train crew at
platforms.
HEM-17
Train crew struck while leaning
out of train (train in running)
5.5
14.92
0.0315
2.143
0.0113
-0.0202
The risk has decreased significantly because this hazardous
event has been refined and remodelled. Injuries caused by
train defects are now considered in HEN-63.
HEM-18
Train crew hit by object through
train window
5.5
37.64
0.1754
Now part of HET-04
-0.2755
The model has been restructured to identify the proportion of
risk that occurs both inside and outside possession. The
reduction in both estimated frequency and risk is due to a
combination of changes in the number of events recorded in
the updated data and modelling changes.
0.1237
0.0123
Although there is a decrease in estimated frequency there has
been an overall increase in risk because of changes to the
number of events recorded in the updated data and expert
judgement increasing the estimated average consequences of
being struck by flying objects
107.6
0.5353
0.0316
The increase in risk is largely due to a slight increase in
estimated frequency due to changes in the number of incidents
recorded in the updated data.
0.0145
0.1000
0.0043
-0.0102
The average consequences have been updated for SRMv6
and based on data rather than expert judgement resulting in a
reduced risk estimate.
75.30
0.2373
72.36
0.2114
-0.0259
There has been minor a reduction in estimated frequency and
consequences since SRMv5.5, creating a slight decrease in
overall risk.
0.2000
0.0031
HEM-19
Track worker struck/crushed by
train
HEM-20
Workforce struck by flying object
(includes objects thrown by OTM
movements outside a possession)
5.5
46.13
0.1114
34.51
HEM-21
Workforce fall between train and
platform
5.5
103.6
0.5037
HEM-22
Workforce fall out of train onto
track at station
5
0.1000
HEM-23
Train door closes on workforce
5.5
HEM-24
Track worker struck while leaning
out of on-track machine/vehicle
5
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5.5
These are now included in HET-04, precursor BVANOBJTHR.
4.700
2.323
4.500
2.048
Now part of HEM-17
Now included in HEM-17 POS
97
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
HEM-25
Adult trespasser struck/crushed
while on the mainline railway
HEM-26
Child trespasser struck/crushed
while on mainline railway
HEM-27
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed
by train on level crossing or
footpath crossing
HEM-29
MOP outside mainline railway
struck/crushed as a result of
mainline railway operations
HEM-30
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5.5
38.53
25.95
35.26
23.97
-1.976
There has been a reduction in the estimated frequency and
estimated consequences due to observed reductions in the
data resulting in a slight decrease in overall risk.
5.5
2.210
2.237
2.004
1.853
-0.3842
There has been a reduction in the estimated frequency and
estimated consequences due to observed reductions in the
data resulting in a slight decrease in overall risk.
This hazardous event has undergone remodelling to account
for a greater resolution of level crossing types. This combined
with changes in the number of events recorded in the updated
data has resulted in an increase in the level of risk.
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
5.5
9.005
7.159
8.954
7.319
0.1596
5
0.0200
0.0024
0.0200
0.0024
0
MOP fall while riding illegally on
train
5.5
4.938
0.9393
4.241
0.8557
-0.0837
HEM-31
MOP suicide or attempted suicide
(open verdict)
5.5
266.7
222.5
268.0
225.3
2.821
HEM-32
MOP struck by object from the
mainline railway
5
2.667
0.0067
2.000
0.0052
-0.0014
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in estimated
frequency that results from changes in the number of events
recorded in the updated data.
HEM-38
Passenger injury due to sudden
train movement
5.5
98.73
0.5597
91.37
0.5409
-0.0188
There has been a slight reduction in estimated frequency
compared with SRMv5.5, creating a slight decrease in risk.
HEM-39
Train crew injury due to sudden
train movement
5.5
399.3
1.111
391.8
1.033
-0.0786
There has been a slight decrease in the estimated frequency
since SRMv5.5, due to changes in the recorded number of
events in the updated data, leading to a slight decrease in risk.
HEM-40
MOP struck by train due to
standing too close to platform
edge
5.5
0.2371
0.1837
1.001
0.1903
0.0065
Due to changes in the number of recorded events in the
updated data, the estimated frequency has increased
considerably - however, the average consequences have
reduced (previously they were over-estimated) and the overall
risk has therefore only increased slightly.
HEM-41
MOP fall between train and
platform
New
0
0
0.4286
0.1270
0
Version 6.1 – June 2009
The estimated frequency and risk have not changed since
SRMv5.5.
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in estimated
frequency that results from changes in the number of events
recorded in the updated data.
No significant change since SRMv5.5.
New hazardous event.
98
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
New
0
0
3.166
0.0048
0
New hazardous event.
Train door closes on MOP
New
0
0
1.050
0.0031
0
New hazardous event.
Passenger jump from train in
running
New
0
0
1.439
0.3861
0
This is a new hazardous event. The incidents were previously
listed under HEM-02.
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEM-42
Passenger struck by flying object
thrown up by passing train
HEM-43
HEM-44
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
Non-movement accidents
HEN-01
Workforce exposure to fire
5
3.000
0.0373
2.571
0.0203
-0.0170
The risk has decreased for two main reasons:
- The risk for this hazardous event is now based on data rather
than expert judgement.
- There have been no new incidents of train drivers being
exposed to line-side fires since 2005.
HEN-02
Line-side fire in station
5
0.4000
0.0027
0.5714
0.0067
0.0040
The increase in risk is due to an increase in estimated
frequency and the average consequences of recorded
incidents.
HEN-03
Fire in station
5
0.6667
0.0081
0.6667
0.0169
0.0088
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the average
consequences associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-04
Workforce exposure to line-side
explosion
5
0.2500
0.0106
0.5714
0.0241
0.0135
The increase in risk is due to the observed increase in the
number of events recorded in the updated data resulting in an
increase in the estimated frequency of this hazardous event.
HEN-05
Explosion at station
5
0.0500
0.1500
0.0500
0.1500
0
No new data to justify any change, hence the estimated
frequency and risk have not changed since SRMv5.5.
HEN-07
Passenger exposure to
hazardous substances
5
3.533
0.0217
5.441
0.0173
-0.0044
The average consequences for this hazardous event have
reduced, mainly as a result of considering the consequences
from animal/insect bites (less severe) separately from leaking
substances (more severe). The net effect is a reduction in
risk, though the estimated frequency has increased.
HEN-08
Passenger exposed to electrical
arcing at station
5
0.2000
0.0022
0.3299
0.0074
0.0052
The estimated frequency and risk have increased slightly due
to an increase in the average consequences associated with
this hazardous event.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
99
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
0.0134
-0.0533
The frequency, based upon expert judgement remains the
same. The consequences are based upon data for workforce
contact with OHL providing greater confidence in the likely
outcomes.
0.8870
0.3842
-0.1520
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced slightly due to
an update of the dataset
0.5421
0.0036
-5.25E-04
The change in estimated frequency is due to a reduction in the
observed number of relevant events over recent years. The
average consequences are now based on data for workforce
electric shock (non-traction supply) events.
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5
0.0667
0.0667
0.0667
Passenger electric shock at
station (conductor rail)
5
1.667
0.5362
HEN-11
Passenger electric shock at
station (non-traction supplies)
5
0.6667
0.0041
HEN-12
Passenger at station exposed to
smoke or fumes
5
0.0500
3.74E-04
HEN-13
Passenger fall from platform onto
track (no train present)
5.5
46.00
0.8095
42.59
0.7324
-0.0772
HEN-14
Passenger slip, trip or fall
5.5
2664.8
23.73
2914.7
25.28
1.553
HEN-15
Passenger fall from overbridge at
station
5
1.667
0.2931
0.3520
0.0943
-0.1988
HEN-16
Passenger fall during evacuation
at station
5
0.0500
0.0027
0.0500
0.0027
0
HEN-17
Passenger crushing caused by
overcrowding at station
5
1.000
0.0270
1.407
0.0379
0.0110
The estimated frequency has increased due to the higher
frequency of observed events in recent years. This has led to
an increase in the level of risk.
HEN-21
Workforce struck/crushed by
structural collapse or large object
5.5
130.8
2.097
113.7
1.804
-0.2935
The estimated frequency has reduced since v5.5 due to a
reduction in the observed number of events.
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-09
Passenger electric shock at
station (OHL)
HEN-10
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Now part of HEN-03 and HEN-07
Now included under HEN-03 and HEN-07
The reduction in risk is due to the observed decrease in
frequency.
The increase in the risk estimate is partly due to the update of
the dataset, and partly due to the revised modelling approach
applied, which takes account of the variation in passenger
journeys that have occurred over a number of years.
The estimated frequency has decreased significantly since
v5.5 due to a reduction in the number of events observed in
recent years. This results in a decrease in the level of risk.
The estimated frequency and risk have not changed since
v5.5.
100
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
HEN-22
Workforce trapped in machinery
HEN-23
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
0.1972
-0.0124
The reduction in risk is due to the observed decrease in
frequency.
566.7
1.139
0.0675
The estimated frequency has increased due to the observed
higher occurrence of events in recent years. This has led to
an increase in the level of risk.
7.489
1051.3
6.743
-0.7462
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the frequency of
observed events.
14.93
0.7507
18.18
0.5968
-0.1539
The frequency has increased due to an observed increase in
the occurrence of events in recent years. However, the
average consequences have reduced, resulting in an overall
reduction in risk.
5.5
15.20
0.3376
13.93
0.3259
-0.0116
The reduction in risk is due to the observed decrease in
frequency.
5.5
35.26
0.0945
35.32
0.0678
-0.0267
The average consequences and risk have both reduced due to
an update of the dataset.
5
8.667
0.0814
7.095
0.0982
0.0168
The estimated frequency has reduced due to a reduction in the
occurrence of events. However the risk has increased due to
an increase in the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
5.5
81.27
0.2442
76.52
0.1765
-0.0676
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced due to an
update of the dataset
Workforce electric shock
(conductor rail)
5
8.007
0.7155
4.600
0.5676
-0.1479
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced due to an
update of the dataset
HEN-31
Workforce electric shock (OHL)
5
2.807
0.3835
1.718
0.1258
-0.2577
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced due to an
update of the dataset
HEN-32
Workforce electric shock (nontraction supply)
5
13.67
0.1341
10.15
0.0675
-0.0666
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced due to an
update of the dataset
HEN-33
Workforce asphyxiation /
drowning
5
0.2702
0.1029
0.1855
0.0650
-0.0379
The estimated frequency and risk have reduced due to an
update of the dataset
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5.5
7.957
0.2096
7.480
Workforce struck by/contact
with/trapped in object at station
5.5
522.3
1.072
HEN-24
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
5.5
1150.9
HEN-25
Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
5.5
HEN-26
Workforce struck/crushed by nontrain vehicle
HEN-27
Workforce burns due to welding
etc
HEN-28
Workforce exposure to arcing
HEN-29
Workforce exposure to hazardous
substances (including stings, bites
and needle injuries)
HEN-30
Version 6.1 – June 2009
101
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5
1.470
0.1780
28.11
0.3647
0.1867
The increase in frequency is mainly due to increased reporting
in 2007-08, but a reassessment of the average consequences
based on a larger dataset results in only a doubling of the risk.
Adult trespasser fall while on the
mainline railway
5.5
20.67
1.246
19.00
0.9496
-0.2961
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-37
Adult trespasser electric shock
(OHL)
5.5
1.786
0.7835
1.743
0.6037
-0.1798
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-38
Adult trespasser electric shock
(conductor rail)
5.5
8.400
5.501
8.600
6.071
0.5702
There has been an increase in both the estimated frequency
and risk due to the observed increase in the frequency of
events.
HEN-39
Adult trespasser electric shock
(non-traction supply)
5.5
0.0741
4.59E-04
0.1379
0.0058
0.0054
There has been an increase in both the estimated frequency
and risk due to the observed increase in the frequency of
events.
HEN-40
Child trespasser fall while on the
mainline railway
5.5
1.670
0.0459
2.200
0.1100
0.0640
The increase in risk is due to increase in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-41
Child trespasser electric shock
(OHL)
5.5
2.714
0.3533
1.867
0.2434
-0.1099
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-42
Child trespasser electric shock
(conductor rail)
5.5
1.350
0.6936
1.214
0.5119
-0.1817
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-43
Child trespasser electric shock
(non-traction supply)
5.5
0.1111
6.88E-04
0.2000
0.0084
0.0078
The increase in risk is due to increase in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-44
MOP struck / trapped by level
crossing equipment
5.5
14.00
0.3175
14.47
0.3222
0.0046
The increase in risk is due to increase in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-45
MOP (non-trespasser) fall from
outside onto the mainline railway
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-35
Workforce involved in road traffic
accident whilst on duty
HEN-36
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5.5
16.53
3.336
14.26
3.202
-0.1333
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
102
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Last
updated
(version)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-46
MOP slip, trip or fall on level
crossing or footpath crossing
5.5
15.14
0.4026
15.34
0.4267
0.0241
This hazardous event has undergone remodelling to account
for a greater resolution of level crossing types. This combined
with the changes in the number of events recorded in the
updated data has resulted in a slight increase in the level of
risk.
HEN-48
MOP exposure to fire on the
mainline railway
5
0.0500
0.0025
0.0500
0.0015
-0.0011
The average consequences associated with this event are now
based on data from similar hazardous events rather than
expert judgement. This has led to a reduction in them and
hence the estimated risk has decreased.
HEN-49
MOP exposure to explosion on
the mainline railway
5
0.0500
0.3000
0.0500
0.3000
0
The estimated frequency and risk have not changed since
SRMv5.5.
HEN-50
MOP exposure to electrical arcing
5
0.0500
3.12E-04
0.2000
0.0045
0.0042
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated
frequency due to an increase in the observed number of
events.
HEN-51
MOP electric shock (OHL)
5
0.6667
0.1149
0.2000
0.0056
-0.1092
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-52
MOP electric shock (conductor
rail)
5
0.0500
0.0161
0.0595
0.0257
0.0096
The slight increase in risk is due to an increase in the
estimated frequency due to a modelling change in the method
used to estimate the frequency.
HEN-53
MOP electric shock (non-traction
supplies)
5
0.3333
0.0021
0.2500
0.0017
-4.01E-04
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-54
MOP exposure to hazardous
substances leakage on the
mainline railway
5
0.0100
0.1000
0.0100
0.1000
0
The estimated frequency and risk have not changed since
SRMv5.5.
HEN-55
Passenger struck by/contact
with/trapped in object at station
5
317.3
1.053
370.4
1.303
0.2501
The increase in risk is due to an increase in estimated
frequency due to an increase in the observed number of
events.
HEN-56
Workforce struck by/contact with/
trapped in object not at station
5.5
688.8
2.926
565.7
2.411
-0.5151
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-57
Passenger burn (not on train)
Version 6.1 – June 2009
5
6.333
0.0104
6.332
0.0109
4.36E-04
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
The increase in risk is due to an increase in estimated
frequency due to an increase in the observed number of
events and the use of normalised event counts to determine
the estimated frequency.
103
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
Last
updated
(version)
HEN-58
MOP injury on bridges/steps/
subways (other than in stations)
whilst on the mainline railway
HEN-59
MOP trapped at station
HEN-60
SRMv6
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
5
2.667
0.0228
2.200
0.0316
0.0089
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the average
consequences associated with this hazardous event.
5
11.33
0.0554
10.33
0.0755
0.0200
The reduction in estimated frequency is due to a slight drop in
the number of observed events. The average consequences
have also decreased resulting in a net increase in risk.
Workforce exposure to noise (not
on train)
5.5
3.800
0.0053
3.086
0.0038
-0.0015
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-61
Passenger exposure to noise (not
on train)
5
0.3333
4.49E-04
0.4394
4.39E-04
-9.91E-06
The increase in estimated frequency is due to using
normalised event counts to derive this figure. The average
consequences have reduced, resulting in a net decrease in the
level of risk.
HEN-62
Passenger on-train incident
(excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
5.5
793.8
2.736
846.9
3.184
0.4476
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-63
Workforce on-train incident
(excluding sudden train
movement & assaults)
5.5
1282.6
2.778
1276.0
2.666
-0.1118
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
-0.1885
Due to improved data quality and a modelling change in the
method used to assess assaults, the estimated frequency has
decreased considerably, by 47% for physical passenger
assaults. However, as the average consequences have also
been reassessed, and have significantly increased, the net
result is only a slight decrease in risk.
Passenger physical assault
5.5
3201.5
7.982
1691.7
7.794
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
HEN-64
HEN-65
Passenger non-physical assault
5.5
1959.5
0.5126
282.4
0.2824
-0.2303
Due to improved data quality and a modelling change in the
method used to assess assaults, the estimated frequency has
decreased considerably, by 86% for non-physical passenger
assaults. However, as the consequences have also been
reassessed, and have significantly increased, the net result is
approximately a 50% decrease in the risk.
Workforce assault
5.5
1862.0
3.560
1757.3
3.258
-0.3023
The reduction in risk is due to the decrease in the estimated
frequency associated with this hazardous event.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
104
Table A2
SRMv5.5
Hazardous
event no.
Hazardous event description
MOP physical assault
Last
updated
(version)
5.5
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
138.8
SRMv6
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
0.3486
National
average
frequency
(events/yr)
148.9
National
average
risk
(FWI/yr)
0.8679
Change
in risk
(FWI/yr)
Reasons for changes from SRMv5.5 to SRMv6
0.5193
Due to improved data quality and a modelling change in the
method used to assess assaults, the estimated frequency has
increased slightly, by 7% for physical public assaults. As the
consequences have also been reassessed, and have
significantly increased, the net result is an increase in the risk.
HEN-66
MOP non-physical assault
5.5
73.37
0.0192
21.15
0.0212
0.0020
Due to improved data quality and a modelling change in the
method used to assess assaults, the estimated frequency has
decreased considerably, by 71% for non-physical public
assaults. However, as the consequences have also been
reassessed, and have significantly increased, the result is a
slight increase in risk.
HEN-67
MOP fall from platform onto track
(no train present)
5.5
1.667
0.0301
2.857
0.0494
0.0193
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated
frequency.
HEN-68
MOP non-trespasser fall in
stations
5.5
98.00
1.416
85.33
0.7160
-0.6998
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-71
Adult trespass fall/jump from
outside onto the mainline railway
5.5
8.733
1.252
9.943
1.413
0.1606
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated
frequency.
HEN-72
Child trespasser fall/jump from
outside onto the mainline railway
5.5
0.9429
0.1164
1.119
0.1665
0.0501
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated
frequency.
HEN-73
Passenger manual handling
5
6.000
0.1112
5.323
0.0637
-0.0475
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the estimated
frequency and the average consequences associated with this
hazardous event.
HEN-74
Workforce manual handling
5.5
469.3
1.105
471.0
1.085
-0.0207
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the average
consequences associated with this hazardous event.
HEN-75
MOP involved in RTA on level
crossing.
New
0
0
1.258
0.0385
0.0385
This hazardous event was previously considered as part of
HEN-44 but has been separated into a new hazardous event
for SRMv6.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
105
Appendix A
Appendix A2
Changes in the risk profile
This section describes the main changes in the risk profile from version 5.5 to version 6. It
looks particularly at assaults, passenger, workforce, and MOP risk.
A.2.1
Passenger risk
Chart A1 shows the top 10 changes in the profile of passenger risk in FWI/year and broken
down into injury degrees. It can be seen that most of the risk from passengers has increased
since version 5.5. This is partly connected with how the passenger hazardous events have
been analysed in version 6 (see Section E.6 in Appendix E for details). Reasons for these
changes in risk are presented in Table A3 below.
Table A3. Change in passenger risk
Hazardous event
Change in
risk
(FWI/yr)
Reason for change in risk
HEN-14: Passenger slip, trip or
fall
+1.55
An increase of 1.55 FWI/year despite a small decrease in the
contribution of fatalities. Most of this change results from an increase in
major injuries.
HET-12: Derailment of
passenger trains
-0.95
Once again most of this change results from fatalities contributing 0.8
FWI/year to this decrease. Changes are from modelling changes and due
to changes in the number of events recorded in the updated data.
HEM-10: Passenger struck by
train while on platform
+0.80
0.72 FWI/yr of this increase results from fatalities and hence an increase
in the consequences.
HEM-11: Passenger struck by
train while crossing track at
station on crossing
+0.46
The increase in risk is due to an increase in frequency. This has been
derived from changes in the data set and identification of 'passenger'
related injuries previously considered in HEM-27
HEN-64: Passenger assault
-0.46
All of this decrease comes from minor non-reportable and
shock/trauma injuries with other injuries actually increasing. This
complete change of profile is due to more reliable data and also to
modelling changes described in the section above.
HEN-62: Passenger on-train
incident (excluding sudden
train movement & assaults)
+0.45
The increase in risk is due to an increase in the estimated frequency and
the average consequences, mainly due to an increase in the major injury
contribution associated with this hazardous event.
HET-10: Passenger train
collision with road vehicle on
level crossing
-0.30
The decrease is due to changes in the number of events recorded in the
updated data and considerable changes in the way collisions at level
crossings are analysed. This is explained in detail in Section D.5 (in
Appendix D).
HEM-09: Passenger injury
while boarding/alighting train
(platform side)
+0.28
There have been increases in frequency in this hazardous event, due to
changes in the number of events recorded in the updated data, leading
to an increase in risk.
HEN-55: Passenger struck
by/contact with/trapped in
object at station
+0.25
The increase in risk is due to an increase in estimated frequency due to
an increase in the observed number of events.
-0.24
There has been an increase in the frequency of this hazardous event,
mainly due to an increase in boarding injuries. The severity of the
injuries has also changed, with fewer major injuries and more minor
injuries in recent years, leading to an overall reduction in injuries per
event and a decrease in overall risk.
HEM-06: Passenger fall
between train and platform
106
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEN-14
HET-12
HEM-10
HEM-11
HEN-64
HEN-62
HET-10
0.5
1
1.5
2
Change in
fatalities
Change in risk
Passenger struck by/contact with/trapped in object at station
Passenger fall between train and platform
Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
Change in
shock/trauma
Change in
minor nonreportable
Change in
minor
reportable
0
Passenger on-train incident (excluding sudden train movement & assaults)
-0.5
Change in
majors
-1
Passenger assault
Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on crossing
Passenger struck by train while on platform
Derailment of passenger trains
HEN-55
HEM-06
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEM-09
Passenger slip, trip or fall
-1.5
Appendix A
Chart A1. Top 10 risk changes in passenger risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 –
FWI/year
107
Appendix A
A.2.2
Workforce risk
Chart A2 shows the top 10 changes in the profile of workforce risk in FWI/year since version
5.5, broken down into injury degrees. Most of the risk from the hazardous events is
decreasing, the main reasons for these changes in risk are shown in Table A4 below.
Table A4. Change in workforce risk
Hazardous event
Change
Reason for change in risk
HEN-24: Workforce slip, trip or
fall <2m
-0.75
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the frequency of observed
events and a decrease in major injuries being observed.
HEN-56: Workforce struck
by/contact with/ trapped in
object not at station
-0.52
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the frequency of observed
events and a decrease in major injuries being observed.
HEN-21: Workforce
struck/crushed by structural
collapse or large object
-0.29
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the frequency of observed
events and a decrease in major injuries being observed.
HEN-65: Workforce assault
-0.28
There has been a reduction in risk of 0.28 FWI/yr despite an increase in
the fatality and shock/trauma components of the consequences.
HEM-19: Track worker
struck/crushed by train
-0.28
There is a reduction in both estimated frequency and risk which is due
to a combination of changes in the number of events recorded in the
updated data and modelling changes. As would be expected from HEM19 nearly all of the reduction is risk is due to a reduction in fatality risk.
HEN-31: Workforce electric
shock (OHL)
-0.26
The reduction in risk is due to a decrease in the frequency of observed
events and a decrease in fatalities and major injuries being observed.
HEN-35: Workforce involved in
road traffic accident whilst on
duty
+0.19
There has been a significant increase in the frequency of HEN-35, from
1.47 events per year to 28.1 events per year. This combined with a
reduced average consequence has resulted in the risk more than
doubling. Most of this risk increase comes from fatality injuries.
HEM-15: Workforce fall from
train in running
+0.17
There has been an increase in frequency and consequence resulting in
an increase in risk. Most of this increase in risk is from an increase in
fatality risk.
HEM-16: Workforce injury
while boarding/alighting train
-0.17
There has been a reduction in frequency of this type of event. Most of
the reduction comes from a reduction in major injury contribution.
HEN-25: Workforce slip, trip or
fall >2m
-0.15
There has been an increase in the frequency of events. A combination
of a reduction in fatality and major injury contributions to the average
consequences means that there is an overall reduction in risk.
108
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEN-24
HEN-56
HEN-21
HEN-65
HEM-19
HEN-31
HEN-35
0
0.2
Change in majors
Change in
fatalities
Change in
workforce risk
Workforce fall from train in running
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting train
Train crew hit by object through train window
Change in
shock/trauma
Change in nonreportables
-0.2
Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty
-0.4
Change in minor
reportables
-0.6
Workforce electric shock (OHL)
Track worker struck/crushed by train
Workforce assault
Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large object
Workforce struck by/contact with/ trapped in object not at station
HEM-15
HEM-16
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEM-18
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
-0.8
Appendix A
Chart A2. Top 10 risk changes in workforce risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 –
FWI/year
109
Appendix A
A.2.3
Public risk
Chart A3 shows the top 10 changes in the profile of public risk including trespass in FWI/year
since version 5.5, broken down into injury degrees. The bulk of the risk from the hazardous
events is decreasing and as you would expect most of the change in risk comes from fatality
risk. The main reasons for these changes in risk are shown in Table A5 below.
Table A5. Change in public risk
Hazardous event
Change in
risk
(FWI/yr)
Reason for change in risk
HEM-25: Adult trespasser
struck/crushed while on the
mainline railway
-1.97
There has been a small reduction in the frequency and a large reduction
in fatality risk. This accounts for most of the reduction in risk of 1.97
FWI/yr. The reduction in risk associated with HEM-25 is mainly due to a
change in the way that the risk from this hazardous event is calculated.
The nature of the incidents covered by this model means that confident
coding of events contained within them requires an earlier data cut-off
th
date than the default SRMv6 date of 30 September 2008. This is
different from the method used in SRMv5.5 and effectively means that
the two values have been computed using similar data. The drop is due
to the version 6 figure being based on five years of data while the
version 5.5 figure was based on three years of data.
HEN-68: MOP non-trespasser
fall in stations
-0.70
There has been a decrease in the frequency and consequences. Almost
all of this change in risk comes from a reduction in fatality risk.
HEN-38: Adult trespasser
electric shock (conductor rail)
+0.57
The change in risk is due to an increase in the risk of fatalities and a
small increase in the frequency.
HEN-66: MOP assault
+0.52
There is an increase in fatalities, majors and minor reportable injuries.
This complete change of profile is due to more reliable data and also
due to modelling changes described in the assaults section above.
HEM-26: Child trespasser
struck/crushed while on
mainline railway
-0.38
The reduction in risk comes from a reduction in the fatality risk. There is
a small increase in major injury risk.
HET-10: Passenger train
collision with road vehicle on
level crossing
-0.30
The decrease is due to changes in the number of events recorded in the
updated data and considerable changes in the way collisions at level
crossings are analysed. This is explained in detail in Section D.5 (in
Appendix D).
HEN-36: Adult trespasser fall
while on the mainline railway
-0.30
The reduction in risk is due to a reduction in fatality and major injury
risk. There has also been a small reduction in the frequency from
version 5.5.
HET-04: Collision of train with
object (not resulting in
derailment)
-0.28
The main change in risk is due to there being fewer collisions with road
vehicles, hence explaining why the reduction in risk is all from fatality
risk with a small increase in major injury risk.
HEN-42: Child trespasser
electric shock (conductor rail)
-0.18
The reduction in risk is due to a reduction in fatality risk. There has been
a small reduction in the frequency from version 5.5.
HEN-37: Adult trespasser
electric shock (OHL)
-0.18
The reduction in risk is due to a reduction in fatality risk. There has been
a slight increase in major injury risk.
110
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HEM-25
HEN-68
HEN-38
HEN-66
HEM-26
HET-10
HEN-36
Child trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
Adult trespasser electric shock (OHL)
Collision of train with object (not resulting in derailment)
Adult trespasser fall while on the mainline railway
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
Child trespasser struck/crushed while on mainline railway
MOP assault
Adult trespasser electric shock (conductor rail)
MOP non-trespasser fall in stations
HEN-42
HEN-37
Version 6.1 – June 2009
HET-04
Adult trespasser struck/crushed while on the mainline railway
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Change in
shock/trauma
Change in minor
non-reportables
Change in minor
reportables
Change in
majors
Change in
fatalities
Change in public
risk
Appendix A
Chart A3. Top 10 risk changes in public risk between SRMv5.5 and SRMv6 – FWI/year
111
Appendix A
A.2.4
Assaults risk
Due to a data quality research project undertaken by RSSB and BTP culminating in better
data quality, there have been significant modelling changes in the analysis of assaults for
version 6. Chart A4 presents the change in the assaults profile for version 6. It shows
frequency versus consequence for assaults from versions 5.5 and 6, with the size of the
bubble representing the total risk value. It can be seen that although risk due to assault has
remained similar, the profile has changed considerably. The frequency from passenger
assaults has reduced significantly from over 5,000 in version 5.5 to less than 2,000 in version
6. This is mainly due to a more detailed dataset from BTP’s CRIME database, meaning that
non-passenger incidents and events not resulting in any injury were easily excluded where
previously this was not possible. Despite this, the risk has only reduced by less than 0.5
FWI/year as the consequence has more than tripled to over 0.004 FWI/event.
Public assaults have seen an increase in risk – even though the frequency has slightly
decreased, the consequences have increased considerably resulting in an increase in risk of
over 0.5 FWI/year (from 0.37 to 0.89 FWI/year). On the other hand, workforce assaults have
remained similar since 5.5, and are shown as overlapping on the chart.
Chart A4. Change in assaults risk profile – from SRMv5.5 toSRMv6
0.007
0.006
MOP assault
v6 - 0.889
FWI/yr
Consequence (FWI/event)
0.005
Passenger
assault v6 8.076 FWI/yr
0.004
Change in Public
risk profile
Change in Passenger
risk profile
0.003
Change in Workforce
Workforce
assault v5.5 3.560 FWI/yr
risk profile
0.002
MOP assault
v5.5 - 0.368
FWI/yr
0.001
Passenger
assault v5.5 8.495 FWI/yr
Workforce
assault v6 3.258 FWI/yr
0.000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Frequency (Events per year)
112
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix B
Appendix B: Table B1
Table B1 is now published in a separate document named Risk Profile Bulletin version 6:
Appendix B. This can be downloaded via the RSSB website.
Table B1 presents the risk contribution of each cause precursor to its associated hazardous
event and provides the risk contribution for precursors in FWI per year. The MS Excel
version of Table B1 has been extended and contains the risk contribution for precursors in
FWI/year, fatalities/year, major injuries/year and minor injuries/year. The risk contributions in
Table B1 represent how much the total risk for the hazardous event would reduce by if the
failure frequency or probability for the precursor were reduced to zero, as well as the
precursor percentage risk contribution.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
113
Appendix B
Page left blank intentionally
114
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix C
Appendix C: Key Risk Areas and Selected Risk Groupings
Table C3 below contains an expanded form of Table 6, described in Section 8.
Table C1 contains the full breakdown of the SRM into the Key Risk Areas. Table C2 contains
the full breakdown of the SRM precursors that contribute to this Table. Tables C1 and C2
have not been included in this report, and are available through the RSSB website.
Table C3. Selected risk groupings – summary of Table C2
Group description
Track faults - grouped
for both passenger
(PT) and nonpassenger trains (NPT)
Track faults
Train rolling stock
faults
Cat A SPADs resulting
in collision
(continued overleaf)
Description
Abnormal dynamic forces - only
considered for PT
Subsidence/landslip
Defective S&C
Track maintenance staff errors
Misc track faults - only considered for FT
Buckled rail
Broken rail
Track twist
Broken fishplate
Broken rail in tunnel
Gauge spread
Movement of points under train
Miscellaneous/unknown causes on S&C
Cyclic top - only applicable to FT
Track faults
Rolling stock door incidents (includes
door faults)
Rolling stock faults - other
Driver fails to react to cautionary aspect
Driver fails to check signal aspect
Driver fails to locate signal
Other environmental
Driver misreads by viewing wrong signal
Driver misjudges train behaviour
Driver anticipates signal clearance
Signaller communication errors
Driver misjudges environmental
conditions
Correct information given but
misunderstood by driver/signaller
Driver views correct signal but misreads
aspect
Ambiguous or incomplete information
given by driver/signaller
Driver violation of rules/instructions
Driver misreads previous signal
Wrong information given by
driver/signaller
Rolling stock faults
Version 6.1 – June 2009
PT
(FWI/yr)
NPT
(FWI/yr)
2.314
0.204
1.349
0.271
0.239
0.135
0.093
0.088
0.069
0.063
0.047
0.043
0.036
0.032
0.017
0.007
2.518
2.088
Total risk
(FWI/yr)
0.529
4.505
1.889
0.0971
0.0875
0.0328
0.0326
0.0277
0.0263
0.0159
0.0155
0.0270
0.0598
0.0346
0.0053
0.0368
0.0180
0.0051
0.0106
0.1241
0.1474
0.0675
0.0379
0.0646
0.0444
0.0210
0.0261
0.0150
0.0028
0.0178
0.0138
0.0109
0.0247
0.0127
0.0094
0.0221
0.0097
0.0137
0.0234
0.0096
0.0055
0.0258
0.0041
0.0354
0.0096
0.0050
0.0123
0.0173
0.0047
0.0081
0.0127
2.491
2.518
4.505
0.730
115
Appendix C
Group description
Cat A SPADs resulting
in collision (continued)
Cat A SPADs resulting
in derailment or level
crossing collision
Cat D SPADs/
runaways
Level crossings - High
level cause
Level crossings
(vehicle only) - by
type
Footpath crossings - by
cause
Level crossings - by
cause
116
PT
(FWI/yr)
0.0046
0.0044
0.0021
0.0020
0.0014
NPT
(FWI/yr)
0.0067
0.0058
0.0026
0.0034
0.0010
Cat A SPAD resulting in derailment or
level crossing collision
0.0180
0.0190
0.0370
0.0370
Cat D SPADs/ runaways
0.0136
0.2716
0.2852
0.2852
Misuse Error
Violation
Proper Use
Automatic Half Barrier Crossing
User Worked Crossing Protected with
Telephone
User Worked Crossing
Automatic Open Crossings Locally
Monitored
User Worked Crossing Protected by
Miniature Warning Lights
Manual Controlled Barrier
Manual Controlled Barrier with CCTV
Manual Controlled Gate
Automatic Barrier Crossings Locally
Monitored
Footpath Crossing
Open Crossing
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train
on footpath crossing
MOP slip, trip or fall on footpath
crossing
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train
on level crossing
Passenger train collision with road
vehicle on level crossing
Passenger struck/crushed by train on
station crossing
Non-passenger train collision with road
vehicle on level crossing
MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing
MOP struck/trapped by level crossing
equipment
0.717
0.112
7.3511
3.2045
1.2553
0.829
0.618
0.095
0.712
0.386
0.063
0.448
0.255
0.046
0.301
0.200
0.032
0.232
0.093
0.046
0.032
0.015
0.008
0.005
0.107
0.054
0.037
0.029
0.005
0.034
0.017
0.005
0.003
0.001
0.020
0.006
-
-
3.785
-
-
0.050
-
-
3.533
-
-
2.397
-
-
0.910
-
-
0.384
-
-
0.377
-
-
0.361
Description
Driver ignorance of rules/instructions
Information not given by driver/signaller
Signaller operating errors
Uncategorised driver error
Unknown driver misjudgement
Total risk
(FWI/yr)
0.0113
0.0102
0.0047
0.0054
0.0024
11.811
2.781
3.835
7.962
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix D
Appendix D: Individual Risk
This Appendix describes the details of individual risk assessment (which is summarised in
Section 9 of the RPB), demonstrating:
Which hazardous events have been included within each assessment.
Where the staff fatality risk is made up of contributions from more than one of the
workforce groups, how the overall level of fatality risk has been proportioned between
the groups.
The separate analyses for passengers, workforce, and public are all presented in Table D1,
which is included below.
Workforce Assumptions
The following assumptions were made during the assessment of workforce individual risk:
For train collisions and derailments, the ratio of driver to other train crew fatalities is
70:30. This is based on historical accidents of this type in the past 30 years.
For collisions between two trains, the driver of each train has an equal probability of
fatality. Similarly, the crew of each train have an equal probability of fatality.
For non-passenger trains (NPT), the ratio of the number of FT to the number of empty
coaching stock (ECS) is 70:30. This is based on an analysis of train mileage in GB over
the year ending September 2008.
For trains travelling on passenger lines, the ratio of the number of ECS to the number of
parcel trains is 99:1. This is based on an analysis of train mileage in GB over the year
ending September 2008.
The ratio of the number of PT to the number of FT is 90:10. This is based on an analysis
of train mileage in GB over the year ending September 2008. PT mileage also includes
that of ECS.
For on-track incidents, the ratio of the number of PT drivers to the number of FT drivers is
80:20. This has been altered from the ratio of PT to FT mileage (90:10) to reflect the
increased likelihood of FT drivers being involved in accidents of this type.
Within possessions, the ratio of the number of FT drivers to OTP drivers is 5:95. This is
based on an analysis of train accidents within possessions recorded in SMIS.
For fires and explosions in stations, only station staff are exposed to fatality risk. This
excludes fires on-train in-station, where only train crew are exposed to fatality risk.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
117
Appendix D
Page left blank intentionally
118
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix D
Table D1. Individual risk data for SRMv6
HE no.
Hazardous event description
Passenger
Individual risk (fatalities per year)
Passenger train
Freight train driver
driver
3.67E-06
HET-01
Collision between two passenger trains
8.89E-08
HET-02
Collision between a passenger train and non-passenger train
1.07E-07
2.49E-06
4.78E-06
HET-03
Collision between two non-passenger trains
3.01E-10
2.14E-07
2.40E-06
HET-06
Collision between two passenger trains in station (permissive
working): potential for high speed
1.95E-09
1.47E-07
HET-09
Collision with buffer stops: potential for high speed
6.61E-09
5.05E-07
HET-10
Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
6.95E-08
3.90E-06
HET-11
Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
3.30E-10
2.01E-07
HET-12
Derailment of passenger trains
4.26E-07
1.26E-05
HET-13
Derailment of non-passenger train
7.33E-08
3.46E-07
HET-17
Fire on passenger train (in station)
2.09E-08
3.82E-07
HET-20
Fire on non-passenger train
HET-21
Train crushed by structural collapse or large object (not at station)
1.95E-09
HET-22
Structural collapse at station
9.22E-09
HET-23
Explosion on passenger train
5.48E-10
HET-24
Explosion on freight train
3.43E-11
HET-25
Train divisions (not leading to collision)
1.79E-09
1.35E-07
6.42E-08
HET-26
Collision between a failed train and an assisting train
1.44E-10
1.79E-08
3.59E-08
HEM-01
Passenger injury during evacuation following stopped train
(uncontrolled evacuation)
1.13E-09
HEM-03
Passenger struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
2.99E-08
HEM-06
Passenger fall between train and platform
1.94E-07
HEM-07
Passenger fall out of train onto track at station
5.60E-09
HEM-08
Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
6.72E-07
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Track worker
2.01E-06
1.59E-05
2.37E-07
1.27E-08
6.04E-09
2.57E-06
119
Appendix D
HE no.
Hazardous event description
Passenger
Individual risk (fatalities per year)
Passenger train
Freight train driver
driver
Track worker
HEM-09
Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
1.82E-07
HEM-10
Passenger struck by train while on platform
3.28E-07
HEM-11
Passenger struck by train while crossing track at station on
crossing
3.18E-07
HEM-14
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train
1.72E-05
1.93E-05
HEM-15
Workforce fall from train in running
6.11E-07
4.32E-06
HEM-19
Track worker struck/crushed by train
HEM-20
Workforce struck by flying object (includes objects thrown by OTM
movements outside a possession)
HEM-22
Workforce fall out of train onto track at station
HEM-44
Passenger jump from slam door train in running
1.14E-07
HEN-03
Fire in station
1.19E-09
HEN-04
Workforce exposure to line-side explosion
HEN-05
Explosion at station
3.58E-08
HEN-09
Passenger electric shock at station (OHL)
3.41E-09
HEN-10
Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
1.27E-07
HEN-13
Passenger fall from platform onto track (no train present)
2.43E-08
HEN-14
Passenger slip, trip or fall
6.40E-07
HEN-15
Passenger fall from overbridge at station
2.80E-08
HEN-21
Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large object
HEN-22
Workforce trapped in machinery
HEN-24
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m
6.31E-07
3.00E-07
1.41E-06
HEN-25
Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m
4.97E-07
2.37E-07
4.61E-06
HEN-26
Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle
HEN-30
Workforce electric shock (conductor rail)
Version 6.1 – June 2009
2.16E-06
6.09E-05
1.11E-07
5.71E-08
3.89E-07
2.72E-08
3.75E-07
1.96E-08
9.33E-09
3.97E-06
1.95E-06
2.06E-06
7.01E-06
3.34E-06
1.25E-05
120
Appendix D
HE no.
Hazardous event description
HEN-31
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) electric shock (OHL) (direct
contact)
HEN-33
Workforce asphyxiation / drowning
HEN-35
Workforce (other than OTP workforce) involved in road traffic
accident while on duty
HEN-64
Passenger assault
HEN-65
Workforce assault
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Passenger
Individual risk (fatalities per year)
Passenger train
Freight train driver
driver
5.50E-07
2.62E-07
Track worker
1.87E-06
1.91E-06
8.78E-07
4.18E-07
5.98E-06
2.01E-07
9.56E-08
1.24E-08
5.29E-07
121
Page left blank intentionally
122
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
Appendix E: Modelling Approach
E.1
Risk at level crossings
E.1.1
Overview
The key level crossing hazardous events models have been restructured to align better with
the All Level Crossing Risk Model [ALCRM, Ref. 16] and therefore make it easier to calibrate.
This has led to the creation of 17 common sub-hazardous events: one for each crossing type
considered plus one for events in possession. This resulted in the restructuring of the
precursors of the following hazardous events:
HET-10, HET-11, HEM-11, and HEM-27 were restructured to ensure that a consistent
set of precursors was considered when categorising incidents across the crossing
types.
HEN-44 and HEN-46 were restructured to consider each crossing type and splitting
out the proper use precursors into more detail where sufficient data was recorded.
HEN-75 was restructured to consider each crossing type and combine some
precursors due to limited data.
The most severe accidents at level crossings result from road vehicle collisions that lead to
derailments. To ensure compatibility with the derailment models outlined in Section E.2, each
of the HET-10 and HET-11 level crossing event tree models were updated to include the
relevant escalation factors and consequences.
The following sections describe in more detail the changes that have taken place.
E.1.2
Background
The ALCRM was developed in 2003 as a joint RSSB and Network Rail (NR) project. In 2007,
the model was implemented and NR started to populate it with level crossing risk
assessments. Now, the details of nearly all the crossings have been entered and the model
is ready to be calibrated.
The ALCRM presently comprises of 14 core types of crossing and uses base events similar
to the precursors within the SRM as part of its calculations. To improve the efficiency of
updating the model, changes have been made to restructure the level crossing precursors so
that they consider at least the same level of detail as the ALCRM. In some areas, it has been
possible to add a greater level of detail than that contained in the ALCRM.
E.1.3
Level crossing hazardous events and sub-hazardous events
The level crossing related hazardous events within the SRM are:
HET-10 Passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
HET-11 Non-passenger train collision with road vehicle on level crossing
HEM-11 Passenger struck while crossing track at station on crossing
Version 6.1 – June 2009
123
Appendix E
HEM-27 MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing or footpath
crossing
HEN-44 MOP struck/trapped by level crossing equipment
HEN-46 MOP slip, trip or fall on level crossing or footpath crossing
HEN-75 MOP involved in road traffic accident on level crossing
A common set of sub-hazardous events have been applied to the above hazardous events
as shown in Table E1. One sub-hazardous event has been created for:
Each crossing type considered in the ALCRM
Station barrow crossings (SBC) with and without indicator lights
Incidents that occur in possession
Changes to the precursors contributing to sub-hazardous events are considered in
the following sections
E.1.4
Road vehicle collisions (HET-10 and HET-11)
The HET-10 and HET-11 fault and event tree models were revised to ensure a consistent set
of precursors have been considered across all crossing types and that they can be mapped
to causes in the ALCRM.
For the SRMv6, HET-10 and HET-11 model precursors were reviewed with some new
precursors added and some deleted. For each identified cause of a level crossing collision a
precursor will exist for every level crossing type where a collision due to that cause is a
possibility. Where the cause of collision is not possible at a particular crossing type the
precursor has been removed. For example, a collision can occur at a level crossing caused
by ‘road user turns onto the railway’. This is considered possible at most types of crossing
except Manual Crossings with Gates (MCG) where in general the gates will block the railway
off to the road user.
All the precursors in the revised HET-10 and HET-11 models are considered to be a possible
cause of a level crossing collision and therefore none of the precursors should have a
frequency of zero.
Precursors were grouped by common causal action for different level crossing types. Where
no incidents were recorded against some precursors in a group the frequency estimates
were made using Empirical Bayes or data sharing (based on crossing exposure measured by
traffic-train moment and in conjunction with expert judgement). The theory of Empirical
Bayes is based on grouping together precursors which are expected to have a similar rate of
occurrence and sharing the data between the group in relation to the number of events seen
and the traffic-train moment.
If all the precursors within a group had no data then chi-squared ( 2) analysis was used to
give an estimate of the frequency for an event based on the probability that no events have
been seen in the data period.
124
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
Table E1. The Crossing types considered for each hazardous event
SubHE
Crossing type
HET-10
A
Manual crossing with CCTV

B
Manual crossing with barriers
C
HET-11
HEM-11
HEM-27
HEN-44
HEN-46
HEN-75













Manual crossing with gates







D
Automatic half barrier crossing,
locally monitored







E
Automatic half barrier crossing







5


F
Automatic open crossing





G
User worked crossing with
miniature warning lights



1




H
User worked crossing with
telephones







I
User worked crossing










1


5


Included
in L
Included
in L





2
7





2
J
Open crossing
K
Footpath crossing with
miniature warning lights
L
Footpath crossing

M
Station pedestrian crossing
with miniature warning lights
N
7


2

2


4

5

6

2
Station pedestrian crossing

2

2


4

5

6

2
O
Station barrow crossing with
white light indicators

2

2


4

5

6

2
P
Station barrow crossing

2

2


4

5

6

2
POS
In possession

3



3

3

1
No crossings of this type known to be located at station/used passengers
2
Not intended for road vehicle use
3
Not considered to be effected by possession
4
Assumed only used by passengers (therefore included in HEM-11)
5
Assumed no equipment present to strike users
6
Considered in HEN-14
7
Included because of historical incidents of footpath crossing misuse by motorcyclists

3
The risk for HET-10 and HET-11 is assumed to be proportional to the number of level
crossings, so the precursor frequencies have been modelled to take into account the
changing number of level crossings over the data period.
With the development of a separate fault and event tree model for each crossing type, it has
been possible to add in an additional level of detail to account for the road and rail traffic that
use different types of crossing. In particular the following changes have been made:
Version 6.1 – June 2009
125
Appendix E
The distribution of road vehicle types using crossings is significantly different for user
worked crossings compared to other crossing types. Therefore the models have been
updated to account for the different distribution of road vehicle types.
The potential derailment speed following a collision is dependant on the likely speed
that a particular crossing is operated at. Therefore, the operational speeds at each
crossing have been used to estimate the likelihood that a collision is at a slow,
medium or high-speed (see Section E.4 covering derailment) which correspond to
derailment consequences.
The probability of a derailment following a collision depends upon the type of road
vehicle struck; this has now been expanded in the event trees.
E.1.5
Passenger and MOP collisions (HEM-11 and HEM-27)
Both HEM-11 and HEM-27 represent level crossing users on foot being struck by a train. The
key difference between the two is the type of person using the crossing: HEM-11 considers
passengers, HEM-27 considers members of public. HEM-11 includes station pedestrian and
barrow crossings, both with and without warning lights; the users of these are assumed to be
only passengers and therefore only feature in HEM-11. The precursors for both HEM-11 and
HEM-27 have been restructured to feature the key crossing types and to consider a
consistent set of incident causes. Where a particular precursor was not considered credible it
was removed.
Evaluation of precursor frequencies was largely based on the data recorded in SMIS
supplemented by Formal Inquiry reports and HMRI Annual Safety Reports where available.
As the number of precursors is now considerably greater than the number of incidents
recorded in the SMIS data (the last 15 years for HEM-27 and seven years for HEM-11), the
full data sets have been used to ascertain the likely ratios between precursors at different
crossings types. Where no incidents have been recorded against a precursor but it is still
considered credible, estimates have been made using Empirical Bayes, data sharing (based
on crossing exposure measured by pedestrian-train moment and in conjunction with expert
judgement), or chi-squared ( 2) analyses.7
The consequences for HEM-11 and HEM-27 have been estimated using the severities
observed in the last seven years for both hazardous events combined, to maximise the
breadth of incident exposure. This suggests that around 8 out of 10 pedestrians struck on
level crossings result in a fatality.
E.1.6
Non-movement hazardous events (HEN-44, HEN-46 and HEN-75)
HEN-44 has been reviewed and subsequently incidents involving road traffic accidents (RTA)
have been moved to a new hazardous event: HEN-75. This leaves HEN-44, only to
represent MOP being struck by level crossing equipment. The precursors have been split out
according to the crossing types given in Table E1 and the structure for user error, user
violation and proper use remains largely as in SRMv5.5. The majority of incidents involving
users being struck by level crossings involve barriers/gates at manual crossings (MCB +
CCTV, MCB, MG). Now that a reasonable number of incidents have been recorded it was
7
Chi-squared analysis performed at the 50% confidence level, grouping all the zero precursors
together.
126
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
possible to carry out further analysis to determine (when used properly) whether the injury
was the result of signaller/crossing keeper error, equipment failure or other causes.
HEN-46 precursors have been revised according to the crossing types given in Table E1.
Precursors are still assigned to MOP pedestrian, cyclists and motorcyclists coupled with user
error, user violation or proper use as per SRMv5. However, similarly to HEN-44 a reasonable
number of events have now been recorded against proper use and therefore it was possible
to carry out further analysis to determine whether or not the injuries were the result of
crossing surface in need of maintenance.
HEN-75 was created out of precursors previously included in HEN-44A and split into the
crossing types given in Table E1. Few incidents in this group have been recorded therefore a
decision was made to simplify some of the precursors by joining MOP injury due to road
vehicle striking level crossing equipment following RTA and MOP injury due to road vehicle
striking level crossing equipment into a single precursor as the consequences are unlikely to
differ significantly.
The number of incidents across HEN-44, HEN-46 and HEN-75 is sparse when broken down
into the 12 key crossing types (these exclude station crossings). For those precursors that
had no data but are considered credible, techniques such as Empirical Bayes, data sharing
across crossing types, or chi-squared ( 2) analysis were used to estimate the frequencies.
Precursors not considered credible such as MOP injury due to road vehicle striking level
crossing equipment – on AHB – proper use have been removed from the model.
Consequences for HEN-44 and HEN-46 were updated in line with the incidents recorded.
With few incidents occurring for HEN-75 it was decided to use road statistics to gain an
understanding of the full complement of injuries. As such, the consequence profile is
comparatively similar to that for HEN-35: Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on
duty.
E.2
Derailment risk
The modelling of passenger train derailments has been enhanced for this issue of the RPB.
This has involved specific modelling of high-speed derailments; previously, only derailments
at slow-speed (less than 15 mph) and high-speed (above 15 mph) were modelled. For
version 6, a detailed analysis of derailment speeds was undertaken to determine suitable
speed ranges and modelling speeds for slow, medium, and high-speed passenger train
derailments. Slow-speed derailments remain at less than 15 mph and are modelled at 15
mph. Medium speed derailments are those occurring between 15 and 75 mph and are
modelled at 40 mph. High-speed derailments are those occurring above 75 mph and are
modelled at 100 mph. Non-passenger trains have been modelled at slow and medium
speeds only (the fastest non-passenger train derailment in the data set is 75 mph). This
analysis also enabled a review of the escalation factors that are most likely to vary with
derailment speed, namely; train maintaining clearances, train falling on its side and hitting
line-side structures.
In addition to the enhanced modelling, allowance has been made for greater use of
laminated glass in modern rolling stock providing better containment in the event of vehicles
rolling over. This allowance has been made because of the finding of the RSSB research
project T424 Requirements for train windows in passenger train vehicles. This has resulted in
Version 6.1 – June 2009
127
Appendix E
a change to the number of predicted fatalities in the event of a train turning on its side
following a derailment.
Following on from the additional modelling work a routine review of all the precursor
frequencies was undertaken, considering all derailments that have occurred in the period
1990 and 2008. Some new expert judgement values have also been introduced as a result of
an expert judgement workshop that considered relevant structural failures. An update of the
passenger loading data and the next train on the line probabilities have been updated which
have both added to the predicted consequences of derailments.
E.2.1
Details of Passenger train derailments
Each derailment incident is recorded in SMIS and is then transferred to RSSB’s Train
Accident database. In the database the derailments are given a precursor code according to
cause, this often involves waiting for the formal investigation or RIAB report to be published.
Sometimes there may be multiple causes, in which case either the most dominant cause will
be recorded or a miscellaneous / unknown cause category may be selected. In addition, the
speed of the derailment, where recorded, is entered into the database. Where the speed is
not recorded this has been classified as slow, medium or fast by making reference to the
consequences of the incident.
Chart E1. Distribution of derailment speeds
Derailment incidents
140
Derailment speed (mph)
120
100
Medium Speed
Derailments
15 - 75mph
80
Fast Speed
Derailments
>75mph
60
Slow Speed
Derailments
<15mph
40
20
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Cumulative derailment incidents
These derailments are shown in Chart E1. This compares the speed for each of the 75
derailments (sorted from slow to fast) used in the analysis, and indicates the separations
applied between slow, medium, and fast.
128
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
Passenger Train Derailments are modelled using fault tree and event tree analysis. They are
broken down into several trees as follows:
SLOWOPEN – covers slow (<15mph) passenger train derailments on open track
MEDIUMOPEN – covers medium (15 – 75mph average speed 40 mph) passenger train
derailments on open track
FASTOPEN – covers fast (>75mph average 100mph) passenger train derailments on
open track
SLOWSTN – covers slow passenger train derailments in stations
MEDIUMSTN – covers medium passenger train derailments in stations
FASTSTN – covers fast passenger train derailments in stations
TWIN TRACK – covers passenger train derailments in twin track tunnels
SINGLE TRACK – covers passenger train derailments in single track tunnels
BRIDGE-PT – covers passenger train derailment due to bridge collapse
VEHICLE OCC – covers passenger train derailment due to collision with vehicle (not on a
level crossing)
The base events of the fault trees are populated using the coded precursors – where a
credible precursor has no supporting data this is estimated using expert judgement. The
open track and station fault trees mostly share the same structure except at the top level,
where different probabilities are fed in for derailment speed and derailment at station/not at
station.
For each fault tree there is an equivalent event tree, with the top event frequency of the fault
tree feeding the relevant event tree. The event trees consider a number of possible
outcomes, listed below:
What is the train loading (time of day)?
Does train maintain clearances?
Derailment towards cess or adjacent line?
Do one or more carriages fall on its side?
Does the train hit a significant line-side structure?
Does the structure collapse onto the train?
Is the next train a freight train or passenger train?
Is there a secondary collision?
If a freight train, is it carrying toxic or flammable goods?
Is there a fire?
This results in a large number of possible outcomes which are listed below; including train
loading, (which is split into night, off-peak, peak and crush loaded) there are 96 outcomes for
each of the main slow, medium and fast trees.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
129
Appendix E
Table E2. Typical event tree end descriptions
inside train clearances
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage not on its side
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage not on its side, hits line-side structure, no fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage not on its side, hits line-side structure, with fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage not on its side, hits line-side structure, structure collapses onto train, no fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage not on its side, hits line-side structure, structure collapses onto train, with fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, no fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, with fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, hits line-side structure, no fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, hits line-side structure, with fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, hits line-side structure, structure collapses onto train, no fire
outside train clearances, towards cess side, carriage on its side, hits line-side structure, structure collapses onto train, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with PT, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with PT, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying non-hazardous goods, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying non-hazardous goods, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying toxic haz goods, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying toxic haz goods, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage on side, secondary collision with FT carrying flammable haz goods, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage not on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying flammable haz goods, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage on its side, secondary collision with PT, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage on its side, secondary collision with PT, with fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying non-hazardous goods, no fire
outside train clearances, towards adjacent line, carriage on its side, secondary collision with FT carrying non-hazardous goods, with fire
Each of these end events has an associated ‘Rule Set’, which describes the anticipated
consequences to passengers, workforce and the public in terms of fatalities, major and
reportable minor injuries (all minor injuries resulting from train accidents are classified as
reportable).
In addition to the separate modelling of high-speed derailments, allowance has been made
for improvements made to train windows resulting in greater containment of passengers in
the event of carriages falling over during a derailment. The changes have been made based
upon the findings of RSSB research project T424 Requirements for train windows in
passenger train vehicles.
E.3
Use of loading and timetable data in the SRM
This section describes the SRM assumptions concerning the distribution of trains throughout
the day and the number of passengers on these trains (train loading). These assumptions
affect the probabilities used in the event trees for the train accident models in the SRM. In
particular:
They define the probability that the train(s) involved in the incident are either lightly
loaded or heavily loaded (the SRM uses four loading bands – see Sections E.3.1 and
E.3.2 for details).
For incidents where a secondary collision is possible, i.e. another train striking the
wreckage following a collision or a derailment, they define:
130
•
the probability that a secondary collision occurs based on the frequency of trains;
•
the probability that the next train is passenger or non-passenger.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
In SRMv5 (and SRMv5.5) the probabilities of each of the SRM loading bands, as well as the
distribution of trains, were based on expert judgement, and were constrained such that the
passenger km calculation based on them was correct8. For SRMv6 it was decided to use
new databases and models that have become available to estimate more accurate
aggregated national averages for these probabilities. Two sources of information were
chosen:
NMF demand and allocation data – the DfT have developed the Network
Modelling Framework (NMF), which was then used to help prepare the High Level
Output Specification (HLOS) published by the Department on 24 July 2007. The
NMF contains a demand and allocation module based on Rail Industry
Forecasting Framework (RIFF) and MOIRA [for more details see Ref. 2].
TSDB database – the train services database (TSDB) contains details of planned
train services in the timetable (data analysed 14/12/2008 to 16/05/2009).
E.3.1
SRM train loadings
The NMF demand and allocation data indicates that the average train formation is 4.96
vehicles per train. This is in agreement with the SRMv6 assumption of five vehicles per train
on average. Table E3 below shows the loading bands for trains used by the SRMv6.
These loadings have remained fixed between SRMv5 and SRMv6. However, the probability
that a train has each of these loadings has changed. Note that these loadings are not directly
dependent on the time of day, so that it is possible for a train to be night loaded at any time
of day (e.g. contra-peak flows).
Table E3. Train loading bands
E.3.2
SRM loading
band
Number of passengers
per vehicle
Number of passengers
per train
Night
2
10
Off-peak
10
50
Peak
50
250
Crush
90
450
Changes for SRMv6
The NMF groups services into seven loading bands, as shown on Chart E2.
Off peak
AM shoulder; AM peak
PM shoulder; PM peak
Peak not calculated
All day
8
Since passenger km can be derived from passenger train kilometres and train loadings.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
131
Appendix E
Chart E2. Distribution of train km by time of day and train loading.
100,000
Train km (per hour of one day)
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
Passenger (crush
loaded)
50,000
Passenger (peak
loaded)
40,000
Passenger (off-peak
loaded)
30,000
Passenger (night
loaded)
20,000
ECS train km
10,000
Freight train km
03:00-04:00
04:00-05:00
05:00-06:00
06:00-07:00
07:00-08:00
08:00-09:00
09:00-10:00
10:00-11:00
11:00-12:00
12:00-13:00
13:00-14:00
14:00-15:00
15:00-16:00
16:00-17:00
17:00-18:00
18:00-19:00
19:00-20:00
20:00-21:00
21:00-22:00
22:00-23:00
23:00-00:00
00:00-01:00
01:00-02:00
02:00-03:00
-
Time of Day
For each of these NMF loading bands, the proportion of trains with each SRM loading has
been calculated in such a way that the total number of passenger km is preserved. The train
services database (TSDB) has then been used to calculate the distribution of trains
throughout an average day. By combining these two datasets the following distribution of
trains by loading band can be derived (see Chart E2).
Using the data contained in the Chart E2 all the probabilities based on the loading or
distribution of trains have been calculated. The revised methodology for the derivation of
these probabilities in SRMv6 has had significant effects on train accident risk, as described
below. The overall loadings have increased as shown in Table E4.
Table E4. Final train loadings for SRMv6
SRM Loading Band
132
Percentage of Passenger Trains in each vehicle
SRMv5.5
SRMv6
Night
10%
10%
Off-peak
72%
62%
Peak
13%
25%
Crush
4%
3%
Average passengers
per train
90
107
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
The figures in Table E4 show an increase of 19% in average loading between SRMv5 and
SRMv6. This is a result of significant increase in the number of passenger journeys and
passenger kilometres compared to train kilometres over recent years that have now been
accounted for. The average number of passengers per train is now 107, which is in line with
the passenger kilometres figure quoted in Table E9.
For collisions between trains (HET-01, HET-02 & HET-03), the frequency of passenger train
collisions with non-passenger trains has increased. This is because the assumption in
SRMv5 was that non-passenger trains travelled mainly at night, whereas it is assumed in
SRMv6 that non-passenger trains are distributed more evenly throughout the day.
The probability of a non-passenger train colliding with a peak loaded passenger train has
increased significantly due to the more even distribution of non-passenger trains throughout
the day. This has increased the risk per event both for HET-02, but also other train accident
models (HET-11 & HET-13) where a derailed non-passenger train is involved with a
secondary collision with a passenger train.
The use of the SRM to monitor performance against the HLOS safety metrics means that it is
now important that changes in passenger loading are reflected in the train accident risk
figures. For future updates, the loading bands will remain fixed but the probability of a train
being in each loading band will be varied to ensure that the correct loading is used.
E.4
Risk inside possessions
Previously, in SRMv5 and SRMv5.5, there were sub hazardous events which described the
risk from the movement and operation of on-track plant (OTP) inside possessions. Following
feedback from the SRM practitioners working group the scope of these hazardous events
has been widened and in SRMv6 there are now specific sub-hazardous events for risk inside
possessions. The risk inside possessions is a small percentage of the overall risk on the
railway. Where possible, the number of precursors that describes the inside possession risk
have been minimised so that the level of detail for these events is commensurate with the
amount of risk.
Definitions:
Possession: Includes both possession and protection as defined by the Rule Book
(GE/RT 8000).
Train inside possession: A train inside a possession is any self-powered machine
that runs on rails.
Inside possession risk: The risk that ‘originates’ within a possession and therefore
includes events where an action inside the possession affects an adjacent line that is
open to normal traffic.
E.4.1
Train accident risk inside possessions
The original ‘on-track plant’ train accident sub-hazardous events inside possessions have
remained the same in SRMv6, although the referencing has changed from ‘OTP’ to ‘POS’.
However, some additional modelling refinements have been undertaken to three of the
models. The number of precursors in HET-11 POS: Collision with a road vehicle on a level
Version 6.1 – June 2009
133
Appendix E
crossing inside possession has been reduced by grouping all events with the same cause
but at different types of level crossings to a single cause precursor applicable to all level
crossings. In order to separate out these precursors into the individual crossing types the
SRM user is required to apply a proportioning factor based on the traffic moment for each
different level crossing.
The following significant changes have been made to the HET-03 POS: Collision inside
possession and HET-13 POS: Derailment inside possession:
The number of precursors has been reduced by grouping similar precursors together.
The range of consequences has been increased to consider a range of escalating events
such as:
•
the train moving out of possession and obstructing the adjacent line
•
a secondary collision with either a passenger or a freight train
•
consideration of a freight train carrying hazardous goods
•
a subsequent fire
In addition to the changes mentioned above, some further modelling refinements have been
undertaken to three of the models, namely HET-03 POS, HET-11 POS, and HET-13 POS.
Details of the modelling changes for these three models are given in the following sections.
HET-03 POS, Collision between trains inside possession (including OTP)
In previous versions of the SRM, collisions between trains inside possessions were analysed
under the hazardous event HET-03 OTP Collision between OTP and non-passenger train
inside possession. The precursor definitions, precursor frequencies and consequences for
HET-03 OTP were based on expert judgement from the original movement and operation of
on-track plant analysis, reported in the OTP RPB [Ref. 15].
For SRMv6, HET-03 OTP has been renamed HET-03 POS Collision between trains inside
possession (including OTP) and there has been a major restructuring of the analysis:
The precursors from SRMv5 have been reviewed and rationalised to reduce the
number of precursors. For example, the SRMv5 precursors covering, collisions
between OTP and engineering trains have been combined with collisions between
OTP and another vehicle into just collisions for SRMv6.
The precursor frequencies are now based on train accident data inside possession
recorded in SMIS over a five year period. For precursors where no data was
available, the frequency was assigned using chi-squared ( 2) analysis estimates.9
The analysis utilises a fault and event tree model structure, which includes the
assessment of the potential for a secondary collision with a train on the adjacent track
(not under possession). The model separately assesses the collision potential
between different types of vehicles inside possession, namely on-track machines,
road-rail vehicles, and small plant.
The consequences have been reviewed and updated taking into consideration both
the OTP RPB analysis and collision data recorded in SMIS.
9
Chi-squared analysis performed at the 50% confidence level, grouping all the zero precursors
together.
134
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
HET-11 POS, On-track plant collision with road vehicle on level crossing inside
possession
There has been a major restructuring of the analysis of OTP collision with road vehicle on
level crossing inside possession for SRMv6. The main changes are:
The precursors from SRMv5 have been reviewed and rationalised to reduce the
number of precursors. Instead of separating the precursors into 11 different types of
level crossings as developed in the other HET-11 risk models, the precursors in
SRMv6 would be representative of any type of level crossings on the rail network.
Changes have also been made to the fault and event tree model to align with the
changes made to the precursors;
The consequence rulesets have been reviewed and updated taking into consideration
both the assumptions made in the previous version and the collision consequences
from the main HET-11 SRMv6 models;
The hazardous event has been relabelled from HET-11 OTP to HET-11 POS (Ontrack plant collision with road vehicle on level crossing inside possession).
HET-13 POS, Derailment of on-track plant inside possession
Derailment of OTP inside possessions was previously analysed in the hazardous events
HET-13 FTP OTP Derailment of OTP on passenger lines inside possession and HET-13 FTF
OTP Derailment of OTP on freight only lines inside possession. These two hazardous events
covered both OTP derailments and OTP rollover incidents. The precursor definitions,
precursor frequencies and consequences for HET-13 FTP OTP and HET-13 FTF OTP were
based on expert judgement from the original movement and operation analysis of on-track
plant reported in the OTP RPB [Ref. 15].
For SRMv6, these two hazardous events have been combined into a single hazardous event
HET-13 POS Train derailment inside possession (including OTP). The main changes are:
The precursors from SRMv5 have been reviewed and rationalised to reduce the
number of precursors by combining the passenger lines and freight-only lines
precursors.
The precursor frequencies are now based on train accident data inside possession
recorded in SMIS over a five-year period. For precursors where no data was
available, the frequency assigned was estimated using chi-squared ( 2) analysis.
Two fault and event tree models have been developed to separately assess
derailments inside possessions and rollover incidents inside possessions for different
types of vehicles, namely: on-track machines; road-rail vehicles; and small plant. The
structure of the event trees includes the assessment for the potential of a secondary
collision with a train on an adjacent track which is not under possession.
The consequences have been reviewed and updated taking into consideration both
the OTPRPB and derailment consequence data recorded in SMIS.
E.4.2
Movement accident risk inside possessions
A thorough review has been undertaken of all the movement hazardous events to identify
those events that could occur within a possession and, where relevant, sub-hazardous
events have been added to the main movement hazardous event to identify the ‘inside
Version 6.1 – June 2009
135
Appendix E
possession’ risk. Where the risk is to members of the workforce working within the
possession the precursors identify which member of the workforce is affected:
Train crew (driver) – the person driving the vehicle.
Train crew (other) – any other person who has a task on board the train, e.g. the train
guard.
Track worker – any member of the workforce whose role is primarily based outside on
the track rather than the vehicle e.g. track maintenance personnel.
E.4.3
Non-movement accident risk inside possessions
There are no specific sub-hazardous events which describe the non-movement accident risk
inside possessions. Instead, all non-movement precursors have been tagged in Appendix B
to identify what proportion of the risk occurs inside possessions. The rationale for this change
is that the consequences of non-movement accidents are not dependent on whether or not
they occur within a possession, and therefore do not need to be modelled separately.
The method for determining the HEN possession splits was based on an assessment of what
proportion of the incident data in each hazardous event precursor, and each workforce type,
is in a possession. The default figure for track workers is 80%, based on several previous
assessments of the proportion of time a track worker spends inside a possession during their
normal working day. For train drivers and train crew, none were considered to be in
possession, unless the data indicated otherwise. For other workforce types, assessments
were undertaken for each precursor separately.
E.4.4
Possession risk figures
Table E5 presents the SRMv6 HEN possession figures. In SRMv5.5 the analysis was
concerned only with OTP, whereas for SRMv6 the definition has been widened to
encompass risk inside possession in general – hence the scope for analysis has increased,
but a comparison cannot be made directly between version 6 and previous versions.
The full detailed list of possession risk separated for each relevant hazardous event in
SRMv6 is shown in Tables E6, E7, and E8 below.
Table E5. SRMv6 possession figures
National average
POS frequency
(events/year)
National average
POS risk
(FWI/year)
Train accidents (HETs)
64
0.25
Movement accidents (HEMs)
13
1.24
Non-movement accidents (HENs)
1299
8.41
Total
1376
9.9
Hazardous event group
136
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
Table E6. Possession risk for all train hazardous events (HETs) for SRMv6
Subhazardous
event name
HET-02NP POS
HET-03 POS
HET-04 POS
Sub-hazardous event description
Collision between OTP and passenger train resulting from OTP
incorrectly outside possession
Collision between OTP and non-passenger train inside possession
Collision of OTP with object on line inside possession (not resulting
in derailment)
V6 national
frequency
(events/yr)
V6 risk
contribution
(FWI/yr)
0.050
0.046
6.738
0.0336
14.824
0.0114
HET-09 POS
HET-11 POS
HET-13 POS
Collision with buffer stops: OTP inside possession
OTP collision with road vehicle on level crossing inside possession
Derailment of trains inside possession (including OTP)
0.133
0.136
40.94
0.00055
0.022
0.130
HET-20 POS
Fire on OTP inside possession
OTP crushed by structural collapse or large object inside
possession (not at station)
1.60
0.0050
0.000005
0.000003
64.42
0.2486
HET-21 POS
HET Subtotal
Table E7. Possession risk for movement hazardous events (HEMs) for SRMv6
Subhazardous
event name
HEM-10 POS
HEM-11 POS
HEM-12 POS
HEM-14 POS
Sub-hazardous event description
Passenger on platform struck by train inside possession
Passenger struck/crushed while crossing track at station on crossing
by a train inside possession
Adult/child trespasser struck while crossing track at station in
possession
Workforce (not track worker) struck/crushed by train inside
possession
V6 national
frequency
(events/yr)
V6 risk
contribution
(FWI/yr)
0.0062
0.00048
0.00076
0.00062
0.0035
0.0024
0.173
0.134
HEM-15 POS
HEM-16 POS
Workforce fall from train in running inside possession
Workforce injury while boarding/alighting inside possession
1.80
5.10
0.212
0.025
HEM-17 POS
HEM-19 POS
HEM-20 POS
Workforce struck while leaning out of train inside possession
Track worker struck/crushed by train inside possession
Workforce struck by flying object inside possession
0.143
1.88
1.44
0.00075
0.815
0.0107
HEM-21 POS
HEM-23 POS
Workforce fall between train and platform inside possession
Train door closes on workforce inside possession
0.165
1.70
0.0008
0.0050
HEM-25 POS
HEM-26 POS
Adult trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
Child trespasser struck/crushed by train inside possession
MOP pedestrian struck/crushed by train on level crossing inside
possession
MOP outside mainline railway struck/crushed due to mainline
railway operations inside possession
0.064
0.0037
0.0250
0.0019
0.0061
0.0050
0.000014
0.0000016
MOP fall while riding illegally on train inside possession
MOP struck by object from the mainline railway thrown from inside
possession
0.0029
0.00054
0.400
0.0010
Workforce injury due to braking or lurching inside possession
MOP struck by train due to standing too close to platform edge
inside possession
0.143
0.00038
0.00069
0.00013
13.0
1.24
HEM-27 POS
HEM-29 POS
HEM-30 POS
HEM-32 POS
HEM-39 POS
HEM-40 POS
HEM
Subtotal
Version 6.1 – June 2009
137
Appendix E
Table E8. Possession risk for non-movement hazardous events (HENs) for SRMv6
Subhazardous
event name
HEN-01 POS
HEN-04 POS
Sub-hazardous event description
Workforce exposure to fire
Workforce exposure to line-side explosion inside possession
Workforce struck/crushed by structural collapse or large
object inside possession
V6 risk/
frequency
percentage
V6 national
frequency
(events/yr)
V6 risk
cont.
(FWI/yr)
75%
80%
1.93
0.46
0.015
0.019
79%
90.0
1.43
Workforce trapped in machinery inside possession
Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object at
station inside possession
90%
6.70
0.177
7%
38.2
0.077
Workforce slip, trip or fall <2m inside possession
Workforce slip, trip or fall >2m inside possession
Workforce struck/crushed by non-train vehicle inside
possession
46%
65%
482.6
11.74
3.1
0.385
56%
7.85
0.184
Workforce burns due to welding etc inside possession
Workforce exposure to arcing inside possession
Workforce exposure to hazardous substances (including
stings, bites, needle injuries, etc) inside possession
56%
71%
19.67
5.05
0.038
0.07
41%
31.74
0.073
HEN-30 POS
Workforce electric shock (conductor rail) inside possession
71%
3.28
0.405
HEN-31 POS
Workforce electric shock (OHL) inside possession
Workforce electric shock (non-traction supply) inside
possession
93%
1.59
0.116
28%
2.84
0.019
Workforce asphyxiation / drowning inside possession
Workforce involved in road traffic accident whilst on duty,
inside possession
86%
0.16
0.056
13%
3.65
0.047
76%
428.9
1.828
28%
0.87
0.001
0.8%
9.89
0.021
0.4%
31%
7.64
144.5
0.014
0.333
1299
8.41
HEN-21 POS
HEN-22 POS
HEN-23 POS
HEN-24 POS
HEN-25 POS
HEN-26 POS
HEN-27 POS
HEN-28 POS
HEN-29 POS
HEN-32 POS
HEN-33 POS
HEN-35 POS
HEN-56 POS
HEN-60 POS
HEN-63 POS
HEN-65 POS
HEN-74 POS
HEN
Subtotal
Workforce struck by/contact with/trapped in object not at
stn inside possession
Workforce exposure to noise (not on train) inside possession
Workforce on-train incident (excl sudden movement &
assaults) inside possession
Workforce assault inside possession
Workforce manual handling inside possession
The percentage splits determined for the HENs are shown together with the actual POS risk
values in Table E8. The split percentage is the proportion of the overall risk for that HEN that
has been ascribed to POS risk. The subsequent frequency and risk values are the
proportioned values.
138
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
E.5
Normaliser data
The following normaliser data shown in Table E9 has been used for SRMv6:
Table E9. Normaliser data for SRMv6
Description
V5.5 value
V6 value
Total number of train kilometres
per year
536,538,768
533,908,519
Source: Paladin database
v5.5 represents the figure for 2006
v5.5 represents the figure for 2007
Number of passenger train
kilometres per year
452,354,048
452,901,284
As train kilometres above
Number of non-passenger train
10
kilometres per year
84,184,720
81,007,235
As train kilometres above. It includes freight,
empty coaching stock (ECS) and parcels.
Number of freight train
kilometres per year
59,429,714
55,873,431
As train kilometres above
Number of ECS stock
kilometres per year
24,430,723
24,809,522
As train kilometres above
324,283
324,283
As train kilometres above
Number of freight train
kilometres on freight-only lines
per year
3,849,237
3,618,898
Number of freight train
kilometres on passenger lines
per year
55,580,477
52,254,533
Number of DLOCO passenger
stock kilometres per year
1,051,271
1,052,543
Number of DMU passenger
stock kilometres per year
203,055,702
198,739,348
Number of ELOCO passenger
stock kilometres per year
17,862,493
17,791,123
Number of EMU passenger
stock kilometres per year
205,370,970
209,296,893
Number of HST passenger
stock kilometres per year
25,013,612
26,021,377
Number of hours per year of ontrack plant operation
2,017,080
2,261,376
Number of parcels train
kilometres per year
10
Comments
Source: ACTRAFF
6.48% of freight train kilometres travel on
freight-only lines
This value is the difference between total
freight train kilometres and the number of
freight train kilometres travelled on freight- only
lines.
Source: Paladin – SRMv6 represents the
figure for the 2007 calendar year. SRMv5.5
represents the figure for P13 05/06 to P12
06/07 (i.e. the year from Feb/March 2005 to
Feb/March 2006.
The analysis is based upon a comparison of
Paladin train kilometres for the various
operators with unit km data from ATOC.
DLOCO is based upon an assessment of the
journeys that now use Diesel Locomotives.
These are non-HST Diesel loco hauled train
kilometres.
The SRMv5.5 figure has been derived from the
book On-track Plant, 2007. Hours/wk per
machine is estimated as 18 hours for 52
weeks/year for RRVs and RMMMs. For
SRMv6 consideration was also given to OTMs
operating inside possessions as well. These
were assumed to operate 9 hrs/wk, 52 weeks
of the year, inside possession. Although the
machine counts were still taken from the book
On-track Plant, 2007 (the most recent version)
some small changes to the counts were made:
> No. RRVs: 1788
> No. RMMMs: 371
> No. OTMs: 514
Figures may not sum to total exactly due to rounding
Version 6.1 – June 2009
139
Appendix E
Description
V5.5 value
V6 value
Number of full time equivalent
track workers
30,500
30,500
Source: Network Rail's timesheet database.
There is an ongoing initiative between RSSB
and NR to derive an improved estimate of
track worker hours and hence the full time
equivalent track worker hours.
Number of full time equivalent
track worker hours per year
54,900,000
54,900,000
Based upon 30,500 full-time equivalent
workers above. Hours worked are based on a
40 hour week for 45 weeks per year.
Number of passenger journeys
per year
1.125 x10
Number of passenger
kilometres per year
45.2 x10
9
9
1.228x10
48.4 x10
9
9
2518
2541
31,049,202
31,151,000
Number of manual gated level
crossings
213
191
Number of manually controlled
barrier level crossings
238
234
Number of closed circuit
television level crossings
377
380
Number of automatic half barrier
level crossings
451
452
Number of automatic barrier
crossings locally monitored
50
48
Number of automatic open
crossings locally monitored
128
Total number of NRMI stations
Number of track metres on
NRMI
120
Comments
Data is from the ORR publication, National Rail
Trends Yearbook 2007/8. The SRMv6 number
represents the number for the 2007 calendar
year.
Source: RSSB SIDB, supplemented with ORR
station usage data and stations listed in TSDB.
Increase is mainly due to including stations on
the Tyne & Wear extension to South Hylton
and the re-opening of the line to Ebbw Vale to
passenger traffic.
Source:
GB Common Safety Indicators 2007.
SRMv6 uses the 2007 version of Network
Rail’s level crossing census.
For SRMv6, the level crossings have been
broken down further:
Number of footpath/bridleway
crossings
2,255
Number of footpath/bridleway
crossings + miniature warning
lights
35
Manual crossings have been split into
manual gated, manually controlled
barriers and CCTV crossings.
Number of station pedestrian
crossings
77
Footpath crossings have been split
into footpath/bridleway, station
pedestrian, and station barrow
crossings.
Number of station pedestrian
crossings + miniature warning
lights
2,586
19
Number of station barrow
crossings
63
Number of station barrow
crossings + white warning lights
34
63
51
Number of user-worked
crossings with telephone
1,661
1,624
Number of user-worked
crossings
1,060
980
93
88
Number of open crossings
Number of user-worked
crossings + miniature warning
lights
140
This is to produce results that are further
aligned with the All Level Crossing Risk Model
(ALCRM).
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
E.6
Revised approach to trending using normalisers
Previous versions of the SRM, up to and including SRMv5.5, have generally estimated the
frequency of precursors by calculating the average number of events that occurred during a
certain time period, where sufficient data is available. With regard to this practice, the SRM
Independent Review [Ref. 3] made the following recommendation:
Precursor frequencies should be calculated by taking account of the change in the
normaliser with time. As part of moving to this approach, proper consideration is
needed of the uncertainties in the normalisers and their effect on the precursor
frequency estimates.
RSSB responded to this recommendation, as follows:
We acknowledge the potential significance of this issue for certain hazardous
events. We have prioritised immediate work to focus on areas of risk that most
strongly impact on HLOS metrics - this involved consideration of:
• The extent of risk impacted upon by the change in the normaliser
• Our confidence in the accuracy of the normaliser
• Our view of the strength of correlation between the normaliser and risk
• Our view as to whether significant changes in the normaliser are likely over
Control Period 4
On this basis, it was agreed that it was sensible to address the recommendation for
passenger movement and non-movement hazardous events that are normalised by either
passenger journeys or passenger kilometres.
The rationale for this decision was that these are the only hazardous events where it is
believed that the frequency is strongly correlated to the normaliser, and that we have
confidence in the change in the value of the normaliser over recent years.
In general, the train accident hazardous events were analysed as before. This is because
they typically involve averaging over longer time periods where there are other more
significant factors such as changes to infrastructure or operations that affect risk. Also train
accidents tend to be normalised by the number of train kilometres which has not increased
as dramatically as passenger kilometres in recent years. The only exception is the analysis
of the data for HET-10 and HET-11 where changes to the population of level crossings over
time were taken intro consideration (see Section E.1.4 for details).
This recommendation was implemented by updating the HEM/HEN analysis to consider
normalised event counts and trend lines which take account of the variability in the
normaliser.
This means that about 97% of the HLOS passenger safety metric (see Section 2) is
calculated taking account of the change in normaliser with time. Only 3% of the HLOS
workforce safety metric will be calculated using this technique.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
141
Appendix E
When reliable time series data for workforce hours becomes available, the frequencies of
workforce hazardous events could also be calculated using this technique. Similarly, the
intention is to consider application of this technique to the hazardous events correlated to
other normalisers when better normalisation time series data becomes available.
E.6.1
Example of the normalised event count technique in HEM/HEN
analysis
An example of the application of the normalised event count technique in the HEM/HEN
analysis, as described above, can be shown using the data from HEN-14 passenger slip, trip,
or fall. In this example one of the HEN-14 precursors, PSTRUNSPEE: Passenger slip, trip or
fall on stairs – other cause has been analysed. The data is displayed on Chart E3 below.
The actual observed incident data is shown as green bars and the normalised data is shown
as orange bars. The orange line represents the changing normaliser figure, in this case
passenger journeys. The normalised figures are determined by increasing (or reducing) the
observed data counts by the ratio of the normaliser for the respective year with that of the
current year. For example, if the observed figure for 2003-04 is normalised, the data count
would be divided by the 2003-04 normaliser and then multiplied by the current normaliser. If
the normaliser has increased then the event count will increase by the same ratio to give the
normalised event count.
Chart E3. Use of normalised event counts for analysis of HEN-14: PSTRUNSPEE.
Normalised Events/yr
Passenger Journeys
700.000
1.400
600.000
1.200
500.000
1.000
400.000
0.800
300.000
0.600
200.000
0.400
100.000
0.200
0.000
Billion pass. jour.
Events per year
Events/yr
0.000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
Annual periods (from 01/10 to 30/09)
Using the observed data, the average number of events per year, based on the last three
years, is 533.33. If the normalising approach outlined above is applied, the average number
of events per year increases to 562.81.
142
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix E
Alternatively, if a seven-year period is used for the analysis, the observed data gives an
average number of events per year of 483.00. Applying the normalising approach outlined
above gives an average number of events per year of 557.70.
Table E10. Normalisers used for SRMv6 HEM/HEN analysis
HE name
Hazardous Event Description
Normaliser
HEM-01
Passenger injury following stopped train
Passenger journeys
HEM-02
Passenger fall from train door in running (including jumped from
train)
Passenger journeys
HEM-03
Passenger struck while leaning out of train (train in running)
Passenger journeys
HEM-05
Train door closes on passenger
Passenger journeys
HEM-06
Passenger fall between train and platform
Passenger journeys
HEM-07
Passenger fall out of train onto track at station
Passenger journeys
HEM-08
Passenger fall from platform and struck by train
Passenger journeys
HEM-09
Passenger injury while boarding/alighting train (platform side)
Passenger journeys
HEM-10
Passenger struck by train while on platform
Passenger journeys
HEM-11
Passenger struck while crossing track at station on crossing
Passenger journeys
HEM-13
Passenger injury following stopped train
Passenger journeys
HEM-38
Passenger injury due to sudden train movement
Passenger kilometres
HEM-42
Passenger struck by flying object thrown up by passing train
Passenger journeys
HEM-43
Train door closes on MOP
Passenger journeys
HEN-07
Passenger exposure to hazardous substances
Passenger journeys
HEN-08
Passenger exposed to electrical arcing at station
Passenger journeys
HEN-09
Passenger electric shock at station (OHL)
Passenger journeys
HEN-10
Passenger electric shock at station (conductor rail)
Passenger journeys
HEN-11
Passenger electric shock at station (non-traction supplies)
Passenger journeys
HEN-12
Passenger at station exposed to smoke or fumes
Passenger journeys
HEN-13
Passenger fall from platform onto track (no train present)
Passenger journeys
HEN-14
Passenger slip, trip or fall
Passenger journeys
HEN-15
Passenger fall from overbridge at station
Passenger journeys
HEN-16
Passenger fall during evacuation at station
Passenger journeys
HEN-17
Passenger crushing caused by crowding at station
Passenger journeys
HEN-55
Passenger struck by, contact with, or trapped in object at station
Passenger journeys
HEN-57
Passenger burn (not on train)
Passenger journeys
HEN-61
Passenger exposure to noise (not on train)
Passenger journeys
HEN-62
Passenger on-train incident (excluding sudden train movement
& assaults)
Passenger kilometres
HEN-64
Passenger assault
Passenger journeys
This method has been applied to a number of HENs and HEMs in the version 6 analysis, as
listed in Table E10 above.
Version 6.1 – June 2009
143
Page left blank intentionally
144
Version 6.1 – June 2009
Appendix F
Appendix F: Key Assumptions and Hazardous Event
Definitions
Appendix F describes the details of the assumptions and definitions used in the analysis for
SRMv6. A more detailed breakdown of the definitions used in the update of the various
hazardous events is contained in Table F2. This table is not included in this report, and is
available through the RSSB website.
Table F1 below lists the key assumptions and exclusions that are applicable to SRMv6.
Table F1. Assumptions relating to the SRM modelling processes
No.
Assumption details
1
Train accident event frequencies include all incidents irrespective of injury whereas
movement and non-movement event frequencies only record incidents that resulted in an
injury to a person.
2
The distribution of passenger train loadings is shown in Section E.3 and in particular Table
E3.
3
Normalisation data can be found in Section E.5
4
Train crew deployed on trains is assumed to be:
- Passenger trains – a driver and a guard
-
Freight, ECS and parcels trains – a driver
-
On Track Machines / Road Rail Vehicle – Two Operators
-
Small Plant Vehicles – Four Operators
5
Class 14X Pacers are assumed to have equal crash-worthiness to Mark 1 rolling stock.
6
The frequency of train accidents at stations and in tunnels is based upon their respective
proportions of overall length compared with total track kilometres. The length of each
platform is assumed to be 200m.
7
OTM km travelled inside possession is assumed to be 10% that of OTM kilometres
travelled outside possession
8
The average possession workforce is made up of 10% train drivers, 20% machine
operators and 70% track workers.
9
Track worker hours are assumed to be split 20% inside possessions and 80% outside.
10
Any injuries from a fall that subsequently results in electrocution on the 3 rail are
included in the electrocution related hazardous events.
11
Passengers who are trespassing in places they are never authorised to be are classed as
members of the public. (i.e. passengers legitimately on the track at a station level crossing
count as passengers – whereas passengers taking a shortcut across the tracks at stations
count as members of the public).
12
The risk from ‘High Speed 1’ train operations is modelled in the same way as all other
lines, i.e. as an average railway, rather than explicit modelling of High Speed 1
characteristics. The contribution of Eurostar services to HEM/HEN risk is included.
13
Any elements of the ERTMS trials that are planned for the Cambrian Coast are excluded
from the model.
rd
Version 6.1 – June 2009
145
Page left blank intentionally
146
Version 6.1 – June 2009