Fatigue Risk Management Systems Research Articles

Evolution of the American Petroleum Institute ANSI standard for fatigue risk management systems in the refining and petrochemical industry

During the past five years, a broad international consensus has emerged in many 24/7 industries regarding the optimal way to manage and reduce employee fatigue risk: via a process called a fatigue risk management system (FRMS). Government regulatory agencies, industry associations and many businesses with 24/7 operations have recently incorporated an FRMS into their regulations, industry standards, and their corporate policies. The development of the American Petroleum Institute (API) and American National Standards Institute's (ANSI) standard for FRMSs in the refining and petrochemical industries began after the US Chemical Safety Board (CSB) released its report on the 2005 Texas City Refinery explosion. The CSB report highlighted concerns about some of the operators on duty being on their 30th consecutive 12-hour shift. API decided to take a proactive approach and develop an industry standard by forming a committee of industry managers from many of the oil companies, union representatives, industry associations and scientific experts in circadian sleep physiology and fatigue in shiftwork operations. During the course of extensive consultations during a two year period, a clear consensus emerged that hours of service rules would be inadequate by themselves. A clear consensus emerged that a comprehensive scientifically-based, data driven FRMS was a superior and feasible tool for effectively managing fatigue risk. API developed a standards document published in April 2010 as API/ANSI RP-755 that makes FRMS the operating standard for managing employee fatigue risk in the refining and petrochemical industry. The extended abstract reviews the considerations that went into developing the ANSI standard, issues that were resolved and progress and hurdles faced by the many petrochemical companies as they are now progressively implementing ANSI RP-755 as a continuously-improving FRMS process.

Establishment of the Global International Fatigue Risk Management Forum

For many years, fatigue-related risk has been recognized as a significant issue for aircraft operators. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) states that a basic building block underlying the process of managing safety is “sharing safety lessons learned and best practices through the active exchange of safety information.” An example of this organized active exchange is the global Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) Forum which was launched in 2009 and includes 65 organizations (2011) (regulators, airline operators, and academic institutions). The Forum is apolitical and facilitates better communication between these bodies. New information from the ICAO and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) cites the fact that operators can no longer interpret binary compliance with prescriptive flight time limitations as ensuring “legality” or safety. This paper describes how the FRMS Forum can help.

Fatigue risk management: Organizational factors at the regulatory and industry/company level

This paper focuses on the development of fatigue risk management systems (FRMS) in the transport sector. The evolution of regulatory frameworks is traced, from uni-dimensional hours of service regulations through to frameworks that enable multi-dimensional FRMS. These regulatory changes reflect advances in understanding of human error in the aetiology of accidents, and in fatigue and safety science. Implementation of FRMS shifts the locus of responsibility for safety away from the regulator towards companies and individuals, and requires changes in traditional roles. Organizational, ethnic, and national culture need to be considered. Recent trends in the work environment have potential to adversely affect FRMS, including precarious employment and shortages of skilled labour. Essential components of an FRMS, and examples of FRMS in different transport modes, are described. It is vital that regulators, employer, and employees have an understanding of the causes and consequences of fatigue that is sufficient for them to meet their responsibilities in relation to FRMS. While there is a strong evidence base supporting the principles of FRMS, experience with implementation is more limited. The evidence base for effective implementation will expand, since FRMS is data-driven, and ongoing evaluation is integral. We strongly advocate that experience be shared wherever possible.

Prior Sleep, Prior Wake, and Crew Performance During Normal Flight Operations

Industries that operate outside daytime hours are known to carry higher safety risks related to fatigue. While we are beginning to understand better the role of fatigue in increasing the risk of accidents in the workplace, relatively little is known about the manifestation of fatigue in the multicrew environment, where operational safety involves interaction between two or more crewmembers and a complex operating environment. Data were collected by trained expert observers during 302 normal flight operations of a commercial airline flying short-haul jet operations. Crewmembers were asked to provide an estimate of their total sleep in the prior 24 h, total sleep in the prior 48 h, and total wake time since their last sleep period at the commencement of cruise. Observers used the Threat and Error Management Model, developed as a standardized and highly structured method to collect operational performance data. Restricted sleep in both the 24-h and 48-h period prior to each sector were found to be associated with changes in crews' threat and error management performance. However, prior wake was not associated with any significant changes in crew performance. Restriction to less than 6 h sleep in the prior 24 h was associated with degraded operational performance and increased error rates. The findings of this study provide support to the notion that prior sleep is a critical fatigue-related variable. Moreover, the use of individual subjective assessment of prior sleep as a component of an overall fatigue risk management system is reinforced.