1、Technical Support Document for ANSI/API RP 755, Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Personnel in the Refining and Petrochemical IndustriesAPI TECHNICAL REPORT 755-1APRIL 2010Technical Support Document for ANSI/API RP 755, Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Personnel in the Refining and Petrochemica
2、l IndustriesDownstream SegmentAPI TECHNICAL REPORT 755-1APRIL 2010Prepared for API by CIRCADIANSpecial NotesAPI publications necessarily address problems of a general nature. With respect to particular circumstances, local,state, and federal laws and regulations should be reviewed.Neither API nor an
3、y of APIs employees, subcontractors, consultants, committees, or other assignees make anywarranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of theinformation contained herein, or assume any liability or responsibility for any use, or the
4、results of such use, of anyinformation or process disclosed in this publication. Neither API nor any of APIs employees, subcontractors,consultants, or other assignees represent that use of this publication would not infringe upon privately owned rights.API publications may be used by anyone desiring
5、 to do so. Every effort has been made by the Institute to assure theaccuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, orguarantee in connection with this publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for los
6、s ordamage resulting from its use or for the violation of any authorities having jurisdiction with which this publication mayconflict.API publications are published to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operatingpractices. These publications are not intended to obviat
7、e the need for applying sound engineering judgmentregarding when and where these publications should be utilized. The formulation and publication of API publicationsis not intended in any way to inhibit anyone from using any other practices.Any manufacturer marking equipment or materials in conforma
8、nce with the marking requirements of an API standardis solely responsible for complying with all the applicable requirements of that standard. API does not represent,warrant, or guarantee that such products do in fact conform to the applicable API standard.All rights reserved. No part of this work m
9、ay be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Contact the Publisher, API Publishing Services, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.Copyrig
10、ht 2010 American Petroleum InstituteForewordFatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS) have emerged and been widely recognized as a more effectiveapproach to managing and mitigating employee fatigue risk in the 24/7 workplace. The core feature of the FRMS isthat it is a data-driven, risk-informed, safet
11、y performance-based system. The FRMS implementation process firstidentifies all sources of fatigue risk in the business operation, then introduces mitigating policies, technologies, andprocedures to reduce the risk, and most importantly then maintains them in a proactively-managed continuousimprovem
12、ent system. The history of FRMS was recently summarized1. This method represents a significant step change from the traditional approaches of either relying on maximum limitsto hours of work or minimum limits to hours of rest (variously called Hours of Service, Work-Rest Rules, Working TimeDirective
13、s), or adopting intermittent or piece-meal solutions (e.g. a fatigue training program or a shift scheduleredesign), depending on the interests and initiative of local site managers.One essential feature of FRMS is that it is a system meant to be improved upon on a regular and continuous basis. Itis
14、not a set of guidelines designed for one-time compliance, but instead provides a framework that will evolve overtime, driven by the collection of data on fatigue risk and fatigue outcomes (e.g. fatigue-related incidents).This document identifies and explains the scientific and operational issues con
15、sidered during the preparation of RP755. By providing the reasoning behind the specific wording in the RP755 document, this document supports eachkey statement in RP 755 in sequence so that it can be used in parallel with the RP 755 text. To make this documentaccessible and manageable, key scientifi
16、c sources and references are provided to help readers gain access to thescientific literature. Nothing contained in any API publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for themanufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters pate
17、nt. Neither should anythingcontained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent.Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the Director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs, API,1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.iiiCo
18、ntents page Foreword iii 1 Scope . 1 1.1 Overview 1 2 Normative References . 9 3 Terms and Definitions 9 4 Components of an FRMS. 9 4.1 Roles and responsibilities. 10 4.2 Positions covered by an FRMS 10 4.3 Staff-Workload Balance 11 4.4 Safety Promotion: Training, Education it also is a state of imp
19、aired alertness, attentiveness, and mental and physical performance. Being fatigued also causes reduced motor coordination and slower reaction times. A working definition of fatigue for the purposes of this document is found under Terms and Definitions in Section 3.3 of RP 755. Fatigue is a common i
20、ssue among workers. A survey of US workers found a fatigue prevalence of 37.9%4, which is consistent with other studies of working-age individuals5,6. When an individual is fatigued, the probability of poor, inefficient, and variable performance increases. Performance deficits include increased peri
21、ods of delayed response or no-response (lapses) during attention-based tasks, slowed information processing, increase in reaction times, reduced accuracy of short-term memory, and accelerated decrements in performance with time on task7. Fatigue is also associated with a loss of environmental (“situ
22、ational”) awareness, impairment of cognitive/logical reasoning skills, poor judgment, and diminished ability to communicate and/or process communications and information. 2 API Technical Report 755-1 The inevitable result of the reduced or impaired alertness caused by fatigue includes increased huma
23、n error, a reduced ability to work safely, and lower productivity. Numerous scientific studies and extensive field experience confirm that shiftworkers with excessive sleepiness as defined by the Epworth sleepiness score8are more likely to experience drowsiness on the job, nodding-off, and making mi
24、stakes while working, as well as nodding-off or fighting sleep while commuting to and from work.9Similarly, a study of shiftworkers found that employees who reported accidents also reported greater fatigue than employees who did not report accidents.10The increased accident rate and severity caused
25、by fatigue is reflected in Workers Compensation claims (Figure 1). The costs per employee per year are almost five times higher in facilities with severe fatigue problems as compared to facilities in which fatigue was not a problem.11 Circadian International, Inc. Figure 1Employee fatigue levels and
26、 Workers Compensation US$ costs per employee per year in a survey of 400 shiftwork operations Fatigue has been also been identified by the U.S. Department of Transportation as the number one safety problem in transportation operations. The number of fatigue-related traffic accidents is considerably
27、higher at night than during daytime.12In fact, a study found that drivers are 50 times more likely to fall asleep at 2 am than at 10 am.13Some studies estimate that the costs of fatigue in US transportation operations exceed $12 billion a year.14Most of these costs stem from the sleep deprivation an
28、d fatigue that occurs when work intrudes into normal nocturnal sleeping hours, although in some cases fatigue may be exacerbated by underlying sleep disorders. Fatigue in safety-critical employees impairs their judgment and cognitive reasoning. Divided attention tasks requiring anticipation and proa
29、ctive planning are typically the first to degrade. As fatigue impairment progresses, the likelihood of automatic behavior (performance of tasks without cognitive awareness) and “microsleep” lapses of attention significantly increases. The risk of such occurrences is proportionate to the degree of vi
30、gilance required to safely perform a task. Fatigue also affects mood.15The National Sleep Foundation16found that people who do not get enough sleep are more likely get impatient or aggravated and have difficulty getting along with others. Increased irritability and stress negatively influences perso
31、nal, work, and family relationships, resulting in inadequate/ineffective communications. 0100200300400500600NoproblemMinorproblemModerateproblemSevereproblemFatigueWorkersCompperemployeeTECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR ANSI/API RP 755 3 Circadian International, Inc. Figure 2Fatigue levels and absentee
32、ism in survey of 400 shiftwork operations comparing facilities with no significant problem with those with a severe fatigue problem. *: ANOVA, F=5.99, df=5, p.001 Fatigue also has been associated with an increase in Lost Productive Time (LPT).4Among workers reporting fatigue, 65.7% reported health-r
33、elated LPT compared to 26.4% of those without fatigue. Workers with fatigue cost employers $136.4 billion annually in health-related LPT, an excess of $101.1 billion compared to workers without fatigue. Fatigue impaired work ability primarily by increasing workers time to accomplish tasks and impair
34、ing their concentration. In addition, fatigued workers reported more physical health and social functioning problems than workers without fatigue. Fatigue also correlates with increased absenteeism (Figure 2) and turnover as well as reduced morale and poorer labor relations. Industrial surveys revea
35、l that absenteeism rates are nearly double in facilities that have severe fatigue problems among their employees, as compared to facilities in which fatigue is not a problem.11No matter how well-trained, skilled, motivated, or experienced they are, fatigued operators tend to behave more erratically
36、and unpredictably. Unfortunately, many of these incidents are incorrectly blamed on behavioral problems rather than on physiology. Thus understanding human physiology is the key to successfully identifying and managing the inherent problems of shiftwork and fatigue-related human error. The consequen
37、ces of fatigue also impact a companys operating efficiency and costs. Fatigue results in reduced productivity and customer service quality, reduced operating reliability and decreased operating profit, increased health and wellness costs, and higher overall costs, risks, and liabilities. There is co
38、nsiderable investigative evidence that fatigue has contributed to serious incidents and accidents in industrial operations, nuclear power plants, and in all modes of transportation.17Prescriptive Hours of Service rules should be supplemented It seems intuitive that fatigue risk could be controlled s
39、imply by limiting the number of hours of work and protecting the daily and weekly minimum hours of rest. This “Hours of Service” approach evolved in the early 1900s as the practice of operating at night with extended hours and 24/7 work schedules spread across multiple industries following the comme
40、rcialization of electric light. The emerging labor movement in the early 1900s eventually provided the impetus to implement Hours of Service (HoS) regulations. As a result, the issue of workplace fatigue became intertwined with labor pay and rights issues and led to regulatory limits on work/duty du
41、ration and minimums of off-duty time duration in all transportation modes by the middle of the 20th century, and eventually some other industries such as nuclear power. In Europe, influential research on both the risk of accidents and the sociological and medical impacts of shiftwork accelerated the
42、 momentum. The EU Working Time Directives have now placed limits on work and rest hours in most industries and occupations. However, advances in the science of sleep, circadian rhythms and workplace fatigue over the past 30 years have shown that relying simply on a prescriptive Hours of Service appr
43、oach is insufficient. In the 4 API Technical Report 755-1 late 1970s, two fast-growing areas of scientific researchthe electrophysiology of sleep and biological clock researchmerged into a dynamic new discipline because they proved to be so interrelated. One of the most influential early studies dem
44、onstrated that the brains circadian clock exerted a strong control over the timing, duration, and stages of sleep.18In fact, as was later demonstrated, there were two major interacting determinants of sleep: a homeostatic component related to the time spent awake and accumulated sleep deprivation, a
45、nd a circadian component related to the time of day of the individuals biological clock.19. Because of this circadian regulation of sleep, there was an important difference between a sleep opportunity and the amount of actual sleep it was possible to obtain during that opportunity. This research sho
46、wed that the most significant factors influencing employee fatigue are the circadian (24-hour biological clock) times of work and of sleep opportunity, the consecutive number of hours awake (both on duty and off-duty), and the 24-hour clock timing of work and rest patterns over the prior week. Howev
47、er, none of these are addressed by Hours of Service regulations.20,21Indeed, an employee can be fully compliant with Hours of Service but highly fatigue impaired, or conversely can be non-compliant with HoS but fully alert and safe. As a result, the measurement of “successful” fatigue management is
48、flawed if it relies on the business compliance with the input variables (e.g. number of work/rest hour HoS regulatory violations) rather than the evaluation of any output variables (e.g. actual employee fatigue impairment, fatigue-related accidents). Fatigue mitigation should be addressed through a
49、comprehensive fatigue risk management system (FRMS) Over the past five years, a broad international consensus has emerged across many 24/7 industries that the optimal way to manage and reduce employee fatigue risk is through a systematic process called a Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS). Government regulatory agencies, industry associations, and many corporations with 24/7 operations have recently incorporated FRMS into their regulations, industry standards, and corporate policies. FRMS is a significantly more effective approach t
