HARD TIMES:A DIFFERENTIATED REGULATORY APPROACH

ANKIE PIENAARRAILWAY SAFETY REGULATOR SOUTH AFRICA

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Small operator characteristics

3. Permit class criteria

4. Safety management system

requirements

5. Safety permit fees

6. Operator survey results

7. Regulatory benefits derived

8. Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

Rail regulation in South Africa covers all rail operations

Mainline operations and small operators

World-wide economic recession

Differentiated regulatory approach implemented

Aim to enhance compliance by simplifying requirements, lowering cost of compliance

SMALL OPERATOR CHARACTERISTICS

Not core/Lack Knowledge

Compliance view (Believe safe)

Difficulty identifying rail risks

Nominated Manager turnover rate

Resist Guides

Cost of Compliance

PERMIT CLASSCRITERIA

CLASS A ACTIVITY CLASS B

Any involvement

PASSENGERS No involvement

> 50 000 net tons per annum

DANGEROUS GOODS

≤ 50 000 net tons per annum

> 500 000 net tons per annum

GENERAL FREIGHT

≤ 500 000 net tons per annum

> 500 000 gross tons per annum

RAIL MANUFACTURING AND MAINTENANCE

≤ 500 000 gross tons per annum

SAFETY MANAGEMENTSYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

1. No Annual Safety Improvement Plan

2. Policy, structure and procedures

• Nominated manager• Internal audits• Legal compliance

3. Operational rail risk management procedures

• Risk assessment• Risk control

4. Occurrence management

• Occurrence management procedures (including emergency preparedness)• Occurrence recording, reporting• Occurrence investigations (root cause)

5. Human factors management

• Safety-related grades• Human factors risk assessment• Gap analysis• Implementation plan

5. Safety standards: engineering and operations • Life-cycle management• Design and maintenance standards• Maintenance plans• Standard operating procedures

6. Interface, interoperability management

• Identify• Manage as per formal agreement

7. Changes to operations or systems

SAFETY PERMIT FEES

Supplement government grant

Permit fee to obtain a permit; annual fees

Based on annual rail cost figures higher cost = higher fee

Class B flat fee introduced• Audited rail costs not needed• Deliberately kept low

CLASS BSURVEY RESULTS

SUPPORT FOR APPROACH

Consultants needed?

Less time needed to apply?

Less complicated?

Guidance clear?

SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REPORT

Agree with tonnage caps?

Effective distinction between classes?

Easy to understand?

CLASS CRITERIA USED

0% 10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% AGREE %DISAGREE

Class B operator survey results 2010/11

REGULATORYBENEFITS DERIVED

1. More aligned international approach

2. Improved perception of RSR

3. 68% increase in first-time

applications

4. Administrative burden lowered

5. Frequency and scope of audits

amended

6. Resources focussed on Class A

7. Permit finalization improvements (2011/12)

(days)

CLASS A

CLASS B

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85

CLASS A CLASS B

RECEIVED TO INVOICED 61 33

INVOICED TO ISSUED 21 16

CONCLUSION

Successful implementation positive impact

Possible to effectively amend regulatory approach to assist operators

Remaining Challenges

• Simplify communication ever further• Future standard development