Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

10
Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010

Transcript of Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Page 1: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Past – Present – Future

Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010

Page 2: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

National Transportation Safety Board & Fatigue

Wiggins, Colorado (1984)New Castle, Wyoming (1984)18 rail accidents related to fatigue 1984-2007.

Operator fatigue on NTSB Most Wanted List since (1990).

Page 3: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Train Accident & Medical Issue(S)Accident on November 15, 2001, between two

trains resulted in fatalities of two crewmembers and serious injuries to two others.

NTSB stated that the primarily cause of the accident was the obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) of two crewmembers.*

FRA’s Safety Advisory 2004-04, “Effect of Sleep Disorders on Safety of Railroad Operations”, issued on September 21, 2004.

Studies awarded by FRA to address fatigue concerns from the perspective of sleep disorders , depression, stress, etc.

*NTSB/RAR-02/04.

Page 4: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Proceedings of the Fatigue and Performance Modeling Workshop*Bio -mathematical models of fatigue and performance

CHS Chronic Fatigue Model – Spencer & BelyavinCircadian Alertness Simulator – Moore-EdeFatigue Audit Interdyne – Dawson & FletcherInteractive Neurobehavorial Model – Jewett & KronauerSleep, Activity, Fatigue, and Risk Task Effectiveness -

HurshSleep/Wake Predictor – Folkard & Akerstedt

* June 13-14, 2002, Seattle, WA. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine. March 2004 Vol. 75 No. 3, Section 111

Page 5: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling ToolFAST

On June 28, 2004 a westbound freight train collided with another freight train resulting in a subsequent derailment, etc.

NTSB determined that the probable cause of the collision was crew fatigue (westbound freight train) and the failure to respond to signals.

Initial use of a bio-mathematical model by FRA to determine that fatigue was a contributing factor.

NTSB recommendation – require use of scientifically based principles when assigning work schedules, consider sleep/health issues, etc.

Page 6: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Validation and Calibrate of a Model* Use of a bio-mathematical model to permit an objective

assessment of fatigue, so that employees and employers may schedule work and rest to minimize the degradation of operator performance by fatigue.

Partnership with 5 major carriers. Study involved 400 human factors and 1,000 nonhuman factors

accidents. Sleep. Activity, Fatigue, and Task Effectiveness model using

the Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool (FAST). Relationship between reduce effectiveness and human

factors accidents .

Validation and Calibration of a Fatigue Assessment Tool for Railroad Work Schedules, Final Report. DOT/FRA/ORD-08/04. November 2008. Initial report 2006/2007.

Page 7: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Rail Safety Improvement Act - 2008Fatigue Management Plan

Employee education and training - based on current scientific and medical research.

Sleep disorders.Scheduling practices.Alertness strategies – napping.Minimize accidents and incidents – scientific and medical research to indicate increased fatigue.

Page 8: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Rail Safety Improvement Act - 2008Hours-Of-Service Reform/Regulatory Authority

- be in any other mandatory service for the carrier in any calendar month where the employee has spent a total of 276 hours.

-- remain or go on duty after that employee has initiated an on-duty period each day for

6 consecutive days, unless that employee has had at least 48 consecutive hours off duty at the employee’s home terminal.

Any employee who works a seventh consecutive day – shall have at least 72 consecutive hours off duty at the employee’s home terminal.

Waivers & pilot programs.

Page 9: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Regulatory Perspective - FutureContinue usage of bio-mathematical models, along

with increase education and training regarding application. What does a model really tell us?

Linkage of models with medical issues/concerns.

Fatigue mitigation plans.Development of more refined evaluation

methodology. How do we measure improvements?

Continue use of work/rest diaries/studies.Quality of life concerns, how to address?

Page 10: Past – Present – Future Fatigue Risk Management Symposium May 11 – 13, 2010.

Evidence-based Fatigue Risk Management

Scott KayeProgram Manager, Fatigue Policy &

DevelopmentFederal Railroad Administration

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. Washington, DC 20590

202-493-6303 (office) 202-689-4778 (cell)