RSIA’s Requirements Increased Rest Time and Decreased Fatigue Risk While Leaving Opportunities for Further Reductions in Fatigue Risk from Night Work

		New Hours of Service Requirements Have Led to Changes in Covered T&E Employees’ Work Schedules and Increased Rest Opportunity While Decreasing Hours Worked

RSIA’s new hours of service requirements have led to changes in  covered T&E employees’ work schedules. Both the limits on consecutive  work days without required rest (referred to hereafter as consecutive work  day limits) and the new requirements for rest, including the requirements  for increasing the minimum rest at the end of a shift from 8 to 10 hours,  and for this rest to occur during the 24 hours before the start of a new  shift and be undisturbed (referred to hereafter as the increased rest  requirements) have contributed to the schedule changes. According to our analysis of  covered T&E employee work schedules, the potential for covered  employees to work at high risk of fatigue—a level associated with  reduced alertness and an increased risk of errors and accidents— decreased after RSIA took effect. It is still early in the implementation process, yet  class I railroad officials and rail labor officials we spoke with said that  RSIA’s requirements, including longer, undisturbed rest time should  contribute to a better rested workforce. New Hours of Service Requirements Have Led to Operational and Administrative Changes That Have Increased Some Railroads’ Costs

		Operational Changes Have Affected Railroads’ Scheduling, Staffing, and Customer Service

According to our survey results, RSIA’s hours of service requirements led  to a number of effects on railroads’ operations, as would be expected with  any significant change in statutory or regulatory requirements aimed at  improving safety by reducing covered employee fatigue. Costs for additional staff could  also be related to service increases responding, at least in part, to  improvements in the economy that followed RSIA’s implementation in  July 2009. Nevertheless, even though we did not determine the specific financial  effects of RSIA’s changes on railroads, it is likely the changes affected  the costs, revenues, and earnings for some railroads, at least temporarily. Railroad officials  we spoke with largely attributed these effects to RSIA’s consecutive work  day limits and requirements for increased rest. This was one of these  railroads’ main issues with RSIA’s changes. Too Soon to Assess FRA’s Hours of Service Oversight, but Implementation of Pilot Project and Waiver Provisions Could Yield More Data to Address Fatigue

		FRA Uses a Risk-Based Approach to Oversee Compliance with Hours of Service Requirements

To plan its oversight of railroads’ compliance with hours of service  requirements, FRA applies the same risk-based approach that it uses to  assess compliance generally. FRA has been unable to implement  two pilot projects mandated under RSIA because no railroads have  chosen to participate, and has not exercised its pre-RSIA authority to  approve voluntary pilot projects designed to examine the fatigue- reduction potential of alternatives to the current hours of service laws  because of flaws in the applications it received. RSIA did not require FRA to collect data or report on the safety effects of  approved waiver petitions, as it did for the voluntary pilot projects, and  FRA has not taken steps to do so. Our work shows that some covered  employees saw reductions in their work hours and, according to  information from our survey of the railroad industry and related interviews,  many railroads made changes in crew and train schedules, incurred  additional costs to hire new employees or bring employees back from  furlough to maintain operations and comply with the law, and saw  reductions in their ability to provide service to customers when and where  needed. More important, although the time spent working at a high risk of  fatigue decreased for some T&E employees, RSIA did not address work  performed during night hours, which, according to both scientific literature  and our analysis of covered T&E employee work schedules, represents a  major factor in fatigue risk. Recommendations for Executive Action

To ensure that FRA’s implementation of hours of service requirements in  the freight railroad industry maximizes opportunities to reduce the risks of  accidents and incidents related to fatigue, we recommend that the  Secretary of Transportation direct the Administrator of FRA to take the  following action:    Evaluate and develop recommendations about the relative impact of  consecutive days worked and work performed during night hours on  the potential for fatigue and risk of accidents in the freight railroad  industry. Also, collect safety indicator and  accident and incident data from participants in pilot projects and  railroads with waivers of compliance with hours of service  requirements to determine the effects of such pilot projects and  waivers on covered employee fatigue and participant safety  performance. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

To better understand the changes to freight railroad hours of service  requirements made by the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA),  we reviewed the (1) impacts of the hours of service changes on the  covered train and engine (T&E) workforce, including potential impacts on  fatigue; (2) operational and administrative impacts of the hours of service  changes on the railroad industry; and (3) actions taken by the Federal  Railroad Administration (FRA) to oversee compliance with hours of  service requirements and implement RSIA provisions related to hours of  service pilot projects and waivers. Both of these models require similar data on railroad workers’ work  schedules and provide generally similar outputs.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) overhauled requirements for how much time certain freight railroad workers can spend on the job (called "hours of service"). Changes included limiting the number of consecutive days on duty before rest is required, increasing minimum rest time from 8 to 10 hours, and requiring rest time to be undisturbed. RSIA also provided for pilot projects and waivers. RSIA's changes became effective for freight railroads in July 2009. GAO was asked to assess (1) the impact of these changes on covered train and engine (T&E) employees, including implications for fatigue, (2) the impact of the changes on the rail industry, and (3) actions the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has taken to oversee compliance with hours of service requirements and implement RSIA provisions for pilot projects and waivers. To perform this work, GAO analyzed covered employee work schedules and used models to assess fatigue, surveyed the railroad industry, analyzed FRA inspection and enforcement data, and interviewed federal and railroad officials as well as fatigue and sleep experts.

What GAO Found

According to GAO's analysis of covered employee work schedules, RSIA's requirements led to changed work schedules, increased rest time, and reduced risk of fatigue for covered T&E employees. RSIA's consecutive work day limits and rest requirements contributed to work schedule changes and increases in rest time. Increased rest time also led to equivalent decreases in the hours that covered employees worked. Overall, GAO found, using an FRA-validated fatigue model, that the time covered employees spent working at a high risk of fatigue-- a level associated with reduced alertness and an increased risk of errors and accidents--decreased by about 29 percent for employees of class I railroads (those with the largest revenues) and by about 36 percent for employees of selected class II railroads (those with smaller revenues). GAO's analysis also shows that there are further opportunities to reduce fatigue risk. Specifically, RSIA's changes did not result in material decreases in night work, yet scientific literature and GAO's analysis show night work represents a major factor in fatigue risk. As might be expected from changes aimed at improving safety by reducing covered employee fatigue, the railroad industry reported that RSIA's hours of service changes had operational and administrative effects on it, some of which increased some railroads' one-time or ongoing costs. GAO did not determine how RSIA's changes affected railroads' earnings; but the act took effect as the economy was starting to recover from the recession that began in late 2008. Through its industry survey and interviews, GAO found that RSIA's changes affected railroad operations, including changes to crew and train schedules and increases in staffing levels. Railroad officials GAO spoke with attributed these changes to RSIA's consecutive work day limits and rest requirements, both of which acted to reduce people's availability to work. To maintain operations while complying with the law, railroad officials told GAO they, among other things, hired new employees or brought employees back from furlough. GAO estimated that adding people--120 to 500 each by some class I railroads--increased these railroads' annual costs by $11 million to $50 million. Administrative effects reported by railroads included a need for railroads to revise their hours of service timekeeping systems. FRA uses a risk-based approach to oversee compliance with hours of service and other safety requirements, analyzing inspection and accident data to help target inspections to activities where noncompliance is associated with a greater risk of accidents. GAO's analysis of inspection and enforcement data for the years before RSIA took effect and for the following year show it is too early to determine if FRA has changed the priority it assigns to overseeing hours of service requirements or if a change in priority is warranted. FRA has not been able to implement RSIA-required pilot projects because no railroads have chosen to participate. Nor has it approved voluntary pilot projects designed to test the fatigue-reduction potential of alternatives to RSIA requirements. FRA has approved petitions for waivers of compliance with hours of service requirements for some railroads, but is not required by RSIA to collect data on the safety effects of the approved alternatives. Data from pilot projects--if implemented-- and waivers could be used to improve FRA's assessment of fatigue issues. FRA should, among other things, assess the fatigue risk of work performed during night hours and develop data from pilot projects and waivers to help assess fatigue issues. The Department of Transportation raised concerns about findings related to the oversight process and provided additional clarifying information. Based in part on this additional information, GAO withdrew part of a recommendation. GAO also made other clarifications in the report.