Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps April 2008 Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps Contents Summary........................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose of evaluation.................................................................................................. 1 Purpose and requirements of the regulations .............................................................. 1 Intended effect of the regulations ................................................................................ 1 Consultation................................................................................................................. 2 1. Background to the regulations ............................................................................. 3 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 3 Duties under the regulations........................................................................................ 3 Exemption Provisions .................................................................................................. 4 Annex A.......................................................................................................................... 5 Annex B.......................................................................................................................... 7 Annex C.......................................................................................................................... 9 OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATOR• April 2008 Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps Summary Purpose of evaluation 1. This evaluation of the Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 19971 (the regulations) is a formal part of the regulatory process required by the Government’s better regulation agenda. The evaluation’s aims are to: • assess the impact of the regulations against the policy objectives they were introduced to achieve, in terms of their effectiveness and value for money (i.e. cost to duty holders and stakeholders versus value of the benefits); and • make recommendations either to keep the regulations as they are or review and revise them, or revoke them. Purpose and requirements of the regulations 2. The regulations were introduced as part of a programme for modernising railway legislation. They replaced a large number of old provisions, dating back as far as 1839. They converted about 100 existing prescriptive requirements into five new goal-setting duties which cover: • preventing unauthorised access to the railway infrastructure (eg by means of lineside fencing); • providing means of passenger communication with staff on trains; • preventing collisions and derailments (eg by means of adequate signalling systems); • providing adequate braking systems; and • preventing accidents to staff (eg trackside workers) from moving vehicles. Intended effect of the regulations 3. The regulations were not intended to change railway operators’ safety obligations (including their general HSWA duties), but rather to focus on important aspects of those obligations and to express them in a modern, goal-setting way. The regulations aimed to substantially reduce the total volume of legislation whilst maintaining standards of safety. The five duties are qualified by “so far as is reasonably practicable” and “where appropriate” in order to ensure that safety 1 Statutory Instrument 1997 No. 553 attached at Annex C OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION • April 2008 1 Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps measures are required only if they are necessary in the particular circumstances, taking account of cost as well as benefit. Consultation 4. We are seeking your views to help us determine if the regulations have delivered the objective of providing a coherent, manageable and easily understood package of law, and to help us decide on their future. 5. The enclosed response sheet at Annex A has been developed to allow you to have your say and to influence the way forward. A list of organisations we are consulting is at Annex B. 6. We intend to publish all responses on our website and make them available in our library. Please indicate if you wish all or part of your response to remain confidential to ORR. If your response is made in confidence, please provide us with a statement which we can publish instead, summarising as much of it as is not confidential. 7. We would prefer to receive your responses by Email. You should send these to [email protected] by 12 July 2008. 8. You can also post your comments to: Mrs Chandrika Shah, Domestic Legislation, 2nd Floor, Office of Rail Regulation, 1 Kemble Street, London WC2B 4AN 2 April 2008 • OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps 1. Background to the regulations Introduction 1.1 These regulations were introduced as the last phase in a programme to modernise railway safety legislation following the introduction (in 1994) of new regulations covering railway safety cases, railway safety critical work, the approval of works, plant and equipment and the carriage of dangerous goods by rail. 1.2 Much of the legislation the regulations replaced was very old, some dating back to 1839. It was also prescriptive, and reflected practices and equipment which were uncommon on a modern railway. It needed a thorough overhaul to ensure that standards of safety on the modern railway were maintained and that sufficient flexibility was introduced to accommodate continuing technical developments. The regulations converted requirements dating back as far as 1839 into 5 key, goal-setting duties and repealed other provisions including those of 1871 concerning accident investigations and inquiries (which had been rendered superfluous by clauses in the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA) covering similar legal ground). Duties under the regulations 1.3 The regulations (copy attached) place duties on a number of different people. The guiding principle was to place the duty to comply with each of the five requirements on the party most likely to be in control of the matter in question. So the duty to comply with regulations 3 and 5, concerning the prevention of unauthorised access to the railway, collisions and derailments, is placed on the infrastructure controller, while the duty to comply with regulations 4 and 6 concerning the provision of means of passenger communication and suitable and sufficient braking systems rests on vehicle operators. However in the case of regulation 7, which concerns the prevention of accidents to persons at work from moving vehicles, the duty is placed on a number of different people, reflecting the different situations and employment relationships covered by the requirement. 1.4 The regulations apply to ‘transport systems’ as defined. This term covers railways, tramways (but only where they are not operating along a street or other public place) and prescribed systems of guided transport (such as cable railways). Sidings and depots are covered, as well as running lines. Excluded from the scope is any part of the transport system which is: (i) part of a factory or within a maintenance or goods depot, if the gauge is less than 920 mm; OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION • April 2008 3 Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps (ii) above ground at a mine or quarry, if the gauge is less than 1.432 m; (iii) below ground at a mine; (iv) used solely for the purpose of carrying out construction work. 1.5 The duties in regulations 3 to 7 apply to both passenger carrying and non- passenger carrying transport systems which differ widely in nature, size, complexity and in potential risks. Exemption Provisions 1.6 Regulation 8 allows ORR to exempt a duty holder (or class of duty holder) from any of the duties in the Regulations, with or without time limit or conditions. This provision is designed to meet practical difficulties in applying the new requirements to certain kinds of railway. The exemption meant that affected operators would not have to change current practice, but an administrative cost would be incurred in preparing an application for exemption. 4 April 2008 • OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and consultation on next steps Annex A Your views Organisation: Your contact details (in case we need to seek more information): Your role in organisation: Introducing the Regulations 1. How was your organisation affected by the Regulations? 2. If your organisation was affected by them, do you think the new regulations have allowed your organisation to focus more effectively on the five duties? 3. Do you think that the Regulations have enabled better management of safety on the modern railway? (tick which applies) Yes No Don’t know Please explain your answer Outputs of the regulations 4. Did your organisation have to take any new measures to comply with the duties in the Regulations? (tick which applies) Yes No Don’t know If you have answered “Yes” above, what were these? OFFICE OF RAIL REGULATION • April 2008 5 Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 Evaluation and