FRA’s Rail-Safety Oversight Framework Relies on Compliance- Based Inspections

FRA conducts inspections to ensure railroads’ compliance with federal  safety regulations. Thirty states also partner with FRA in providing FRA- certified state railroad-safety inspectors, who have been delegated  authority to enforce federal safety regulations. Many railroads have  additional safety programs, rules, and technologies beyond the required  federal standards. By FRA’s own estimation, its inspectors have  the ability to inspect less than 1 percent of the federally-regulated railroad  system. Railroads are required to comply with the safety standards set in federal  safety regulations. SOFA is a voluntary, non-regulatory, workplace-safety  partnership with railroads, rail labor organizations, industry  associations, and FRA. FRA Uses A Risk- Based Approach to Direct Inspections, but Has Been Slow to Implement Broader Risk Reduction Planning

Since 2006, FRA has developed a risk-based approach to help direct its  inspection efforts, but FRA regional officials expressed concerns about  how well its risk-based model appropriately balances inspector needs in  their regions. However, FRA has not yet issued  the final rule directing railroads to develop such plans, which, under RSIA,  was to be issued by October 2012. FRA’s National Inspection Plan and Staffing Allocation Model Incorporate an Assessment of Risk

FRA has developed a risk-based approach to its inspection program  using two quantitative tools to help direct its inspection efforts. These challenges include how FRA will: respond to  highway-rail grade crossing and trespasser fatalities; accommodate  adverse weather conditions; adjust its resources to industry changes like  increasing rail traffic flows; adapt to the new safety implications posed by  technology changes in the railroad industry, such as Positive Train  Control (PTC); implement its new comprehensive safety risk reduction  program; and ensure it has enough inspectors to fulfill its current and  future oversight workload. While FRA has developed long-term rail safety  goals, FRA’s ability to meet those goals and to respond to these  challenges is hampered by its lack of strategic human capital planning. As we have previously reported, PTC is a  communications-based system designed to prevent certain types of rail  accidents caused by human factors, such as train-to-train collisions. The speed  of the hiring process is important since FRA officials estimate that 150  inspectors (about 30 percent of the current field safety workforce) will be  eligible to retire over the next 5 years. To address this issue, we have determined that successful  strategic human capital plans should:  1.  involve top management, employees, and other stakeholders in  developing, communicating, and implementing the strategic workforce  plan;  2.  determine the critical skills and competencies that will be needed to  achieve current and future programmatic results;  3.  develop strategies that are tailored to address gaps in number,  deployment, and alignment of human capital approaches for enabling  and sustaining the contributions of all critical skills and competencies;  4.  build the capability needed to address administrative, educational,  and other requirements important to support workforce strategies; and  5.  monitor and evaluate the agency’s progress toward its human capital  goals and the contribution that human capital results have made  toward achieving programmatic goals. In addition, FRA may not have  enough specialists to oversee the rail industry’s implementation of both  PTC and railroad safety risk reduction plans. While the agency expects to  complete the regulations in 2015, FRA has not developed a detailed  strategy to manage the oversight of this effort to avoid further delays in  issuing the regulations and to ensure the timely evaluation and approval  of the railroads’ risk reduction plans when they are developed. Without a plan, FRA risks not having a skilled and trained workforce,  deployed in the right technical domains, to meet present and future  challenges to the FRA’s rail-safety oversight framework, especially to  oversee the railroad industry’s implementation of positive train control and  comprehensive rail safety risk reduction plans. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help ensure that the Federal Railroad Administration timely and  effectively implements oversight of railroad risk reduction programs,  manages its limited resources, and accounts for the evolving rail safety  environment, we recommend that the Secretary of Transportation direct  the Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration to:  (1) develop an implementation plan for oversight of risk reduction  programs for passenger and freight railroads, including interim milestones  for finalizing its rulemaking and milestones for the review and approval of  the plans; and  (2) develop a strategic human capital plan that identifies and prioritizes  FRA’s human capital needs and links them to FRA’s strategic goals and  objectives. This plan should include specific approaches for how FRA will  recruit, train, and retain both its current inspectors as well as its new  workforce of PTC and safety risk management specialists. DOT agreed to  consider our recommendations and also provided technical comments  that we incorporated as appropriate. 3) What are the challenges to FRA’s  current safety framework, and what are the ongoing and emerging issues  FRA faces in railroad safety oversight? We also reviewed and analyzed reportable accident and  incident data from 2003 through 2012 obtained from the FRA’s Railroad  Accident and Incident Reporting System (RAIRS) database. To determine the overall railroad safety framework that FRA, the states,  and the railroads use to ensure safety of railroad operations and  infrastructure, we examined applicable laws and regulations including the  Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) of 2008, FRA guidance, and other  documentation, including a recent Department of Transportation Inspector  General report and prior GAO reports describing the oversight  mechanisms that FRA uses to ensure railroad safety. To determine the extent to which FRA and the railroads assess safety  risks and allocate their resources to address those risks, we reviewed  FRA documentation on the NIP process and the SAM model and  interviewed FRA Office of Safety Analysis officials as well as all FRA  regional administrators and FRA regional specialists in FRA Regions 3, 4  and 5.
Why GAO Did This Study

Railroad accidents pose significant safety risks to railroads, their employees, passengers, and the public. FRA oversees safety of the nation's railroads. In light of three high profile accidents in 2012 involving fatalities or hazardous materials, GAO was asked to review FRA's oversight processes and the challenges to railroad safety. This report examines (1) the overall framework that FRA, the states, and the railroads use to ensure rail safety; (2) the extent to which FRA and the railroads assess safety risks and allocate resources to address those risks; and (3) what challenges, if any, exist to FRA's current safety framework, and what ongoing and emerging issues FRA faces. GAO analyzed FRA accident and incident data, reviewed the analytical models FRA uses to incorporate risk into its inspection program, and interviewed FRA headquarters and field safety staff, officials from the 7 largest freight railroads and 11 smaller railroads, industry associations and 7 rail labor organizations.

What GAO Found

The Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) rail-safety oversight framework relies on inspections to ensure railroads comply with federal safety regulations. FRA inspects railroad infrastructure and operations, identifies safety defects, and may, if warranted, cite the railroads for violations of federal safety regulations. The agency estimates that its inspectors have the ability to annually inspect less than 1 percent of the railroad activities covered in regulation. As a result, railroads have the primary responsibility for safety of the railroad system. To formulate regulations, FRA instituted the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, a forum for FRA, the railroads, rail labor organizations, and other stakeholders to arrive at a consensus on proposed rules. Thirty states partner with FRA in providing FRA-certified railroad safety inspectors who are also authorized to enforce federal safety regulations. Finally, many railroads have additional safety programs, rules, and technologies to ensure safety beyond the required federal standards.
FRA has developed a risk-based approach to direct its inspection efforts, but the agency has been slow to implement broader risk reduction planning. FRA has two tools to help direct its inspection efforts--the National Inspection Plan (NIP) and the Staffing Allocation Model (SAM). The NIP process uses past accident and other data to target FRA's inspection activities, and the SAM estimates the best allocation of the different types of inspectors across FRA regions in order to minimize damage and casualties from rail accidents. However, all eight FRA regional administrators expressed concerns about FRA's staffing process that relies primarily on the SAM to predict appropriate regional inspector needs, and that does not allow the flexibility needed to accommodate the regions' changing resource needs. In addition, the Railroad Safety Improvement Act of 2008 mandated safety risk reduction plans primarily for large freight and passenger railroads. FRA has not yet issued the final rule directing railroads to develop the plans, which was mandated to be issued by October 2012. According to FRA, the rulemaking was delayed due to concerns by railroads over their potential liability. Although FRA anticipates completing approval of railroad's plans by 2016, the agency has not developed an interim plan with specific timeframes to ensure that there are no further delays in issuing regulations and that timely evaluation and approval of the railroads' risk reduction plans occurs.
FRA faces several rail safety challenges, including how it will: (1) implement its oversight of positive train control (PTC), a technology designed to prevent certain types of rail accidents caused by human factors, and risk reduction plans; (2) adjust to changing rail traffic flows; and (3) ensure it has enough inspectors for its current and future oversight workload, as FRA expects 30 percent of field safety staff will be eligible to retire in 5 years. While FRA has long-term rail safety goals, its ability to meet those goals and respond to challenges is hampered by its lack of a strategic human capital plan. FRA officials stated that due to uncertainties about their budget, PTC implementation, and risk reduction plans, they plan for human capital needs in their annual budget request, rather than through a strategic human capital plan. However, without a plan, FRA may not make well-informed decisions about its workforce needs including having inspectors with the right skills for its current oversight activities and enough specialists to oversee the rail industry's implementation of PTC and safety risk reduction plans.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that FRA develop (1) a plan for finalizing its rulemaking and interim steps to implement its oversight of safety risk reduction programs, and (2) a strategic human capital plan that identifies and prioritizes FRAs human capital needs, links them to FRAs strategic goals and objectives, and includes approaches for how FRA will recruit, train, and retain inspectors and its new workforce of PTC and safety risk management specialists. DOT agreed to consider the recommendations and provided technical and other comments, which were incorporated as appropriate.