Risk is present in every railway activity, from safety concerns associated with rail accidents to less tangible issues such as reputation damage and business interruption. Whether your rail project is big or small, DNV’s experience can help you achieve your objectives in a practical and pragmatic manner.
Purpose
Our view of risk is coloured by many factors: lack of understanding; fear or dread of the consequences etc. Nuclear power for example is often feared and thought to put us at high risk of getting cancer, yet people often convince themselves that smoking and exposure to radiation in order to get a sun tan is OK.
The railway has its own set of factors that colour people’s perceptions of risk. These can lead to inappropriate decisions being made and our finite resources being channelled into projects which do not deliver the required benefits, or do so at disproportionate cost.
It is thus the job of a risk assessment to identify hazards, their likelihood and consequences such that an informed decision can be taken relating to the level of mitigation required.
Hazard identification
The first step in the process is to understand the hazards that exist in a railway undertaking. These usually include safety hazards but can also cover environmental concerns, business and operational losses, reputation damage and other factors which can lead to an unwanted outcome.
DNV is skilled in facilitating hazard identification sessions either as part of a full risk assessment or as a project in its own right. Our clients benefit from our amassed experience and the training we provide to our consultants who perform these activities so that you get the best benefit from this important activity.
Risk assessment
You have identified your hazards, so what next? It is unlikely that you will be able to deal with them all, nor is it likely that you will be required to do so. The next stage is to identify the “critical few” hazards that require the most urgent attention.
DNV are well versed in assessing and prioritising hazards using many techniques ranging from a simple risk matrix through to detailed fault and event tree modelling. The choice of appropriate methodology is usually made based on the complexity of the hazard being studied and/or any specific requirements that may exist.
Risk acceptability and mitigation
It is often queried what level of risk is acceptable? Ideally the answer to this question is that no level of risk is acceptable however even with infinite resources this can not be achieved.
National regulations may apply that define what is considered acceptable. In the United Kingdom the As Low As Reasonably Practicable principle is applied to the determination of risk acceptability (DNV even help to develop the standards and regulations that are applied in some cases.)
DNV has vast experience of determining risk acceptability, either based on a standards compliance argument or a cost-benefit analysis (in which risk mitigation options are considered to determine their effectiveness).
Our experience in this area is gained from 1000’s of studies for 100’s of industries.
Risk action and follow-up
Finally, to be a managed process, actions identified need to be progressed and the effectiveness of these monitored to ensure they are effective. Indeed, where a safety certificate is granted by an external body one of the first items likely to be audited is the completeness of the “hazard log” and the progress in completing actions that are contained on it.
DNV is experienced in hazard log management through the use of DNV’s own consultants to implement the process, or to assist clients in setting up their own processes. We even have our proprietary tools for capturing hazards, assigning a risk level and then tracking actions such that the process becomes documented and auditable.
Our experience
DNV has provided these services for many customers including Metronet, the Rail Safety and Standards Board, Copenhagen Metro and Northern Ireland Railways.