The Shared Railway System - The framework. Richard Lockett Head of Cross Acceptance European Railway Agency

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "The Shared Railway System - The framework. Richard Lockett Head of Cross Acceptance European Railway Agency"

Clyde Curtis
8 years ago
Views:

1 The Shared Railway System - The framework Richard Lockett Head of Cross Acceptance European Railway Agency

2 Agenda ERA A shared system 6 key principles Comparisons- Imagine if.? 2

3 The European Railway Agency ERA

4 The European Railway Agency - ERA Agency of the European Commmission Based in Valenciennes/Lille France 160 Staff Objective to contribute, on technical matters, to the implementation of the Community legislation aimed at improving the competitive position of the railway sector by enhancing the level of interoperability of railway systems and at developing a common approach to safety on the European railway system 4

legislation aimed at improving the competitive position of the railway sector by enhancing the level of

5 Tasks Drafting Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) Drafting Common Safety Methods Collecting and publishing national rules and their equivalence Registers and databases Reports and Opinions on Railway Technical and Safety Issues Training and Dissemination of the framework & standards 5

their equivalence Registers and databases Reports and Opinions on Railway

6 ERA Working Method The place where all the actors meet 50 working parties involving approx experts representing National Safety Authorities UNIFE (Manufacturers) CER (Train Operators and Infrastructure Managers) EIM (Infrastructure Managers) EPPTOLA (leasing Companies) UITP (Public Transport Association metros etc Wagon Lessors Combined Transport Association Unions 6

Operators and Infrastructure Managers) EIM (Infrastructure Managers) EPPTOLA (leasing

7 The Shared System

8 Why? Improving rail s competitive position Market opening For operations For supply of products, goods and services International Operation Interoperability Aviation and road transport have been open systems for several decades. 8

International Operation Interoperability Aviation and

9 Key principle #1- Each actor is responsible for what they do.

10 Shared systems - responsibility Without prejudice to civil liability in accordance with the legal requirements of the Member States, each infrastructure manager and railway undertaking shall be made responsible for its part of the system and its safe operation, including supply of material and contracting of services, vis-à-vis users, customers, the workers concerned and third parties. (Art 4 - Safety directive) 10

responsible for its part of the system and its safe operation, including supply of material and

11 Key Principle #1 Each actor is responsible for what they do (i.e. what they control) RUs (safety of) trains and their operation IMs (safety of) infrastructure Ministries framework and rules NSAs Supervision, authorisation, certificates NO actor is responsible for what other actors do Why does everybody in rail want to do everybody else s job? (Brian Simpson EP TRAN Committee Chair) 11

NSAs Supervision, authorisation, certificates NO actor is responsible for what other actors do

12 Principle #2 Horizontal Integration

13 Key Principle #2 Horizontal integration through common rules and processes Common rules and procedures ensure technical and operational compatibility between assets managed by different actors. TSIs for the target National rules for legacy parts of the system Common = Common no national interpretations, add-ons, mandatory options etc. 13

14 Principle #3 Separation of product authorisation from regulation of use

15 Key principle #3 - Separation of regulation of Authorisation from Operation Design, production and Authorisation for Placing in service, final testing placing in operation and service (NSA) maintenance Technical characteristics Operational/maintenance rules linked to the design Return of experience Technical compatibility Conformity with TSIs Safe integration Conformity with NNTR RA according to CSM Provisions and processes of SMS Supervised by NSA Check by NoBo Check by DeBo Check by Assessment Body

rules linked to the design Return of experience Technical compatibility Conformity with TSIs Safe integration Conformity with

16 Separation of Authorisation and use Products (e.g. vehicles) may be placed on the market already authorised To be ordered by many customers in any quantity (good for new entrants) With low risk already authorised proven design type (known reliability, performance, running costs etc) At low cost Economies of scale design costs shared over long runs High residual value (because can be used by any RU) 16

quantity (good for new entrants) With low risk already authorised proven design type (known

17 Principle #4 - Transparency

18 Key Principle #4 Transparency In the old days of monopoly state railways discrimination was mandatory: now it is illegal. To avoid discrimination, transparency of requirements, rules and procedures is necessary EC and Member States must take on the role of rule setter and clean up the rule base Decision making must ensure same as the other guy same as before 18

To avoid discrimination, transparency of requirements, rules and procedures is necessary

19 Transparency (2) This means requirements, rules and procedures must be Repeatable - same result for the same input every time Certain not changing over time or according to different individual s judgement Verifiable by an independent 3rd party NoBo, DeBo, CSM Asessment Body No more is show me a safety case and make me happy a viable way to verify compatibility 19

different individual s judgement Verifiable by an independent 3rd party NoBo, DeBo, CSM

20 The Triangle of Transparency From expert Judgement (single point of decision) Judgement of wise expert in NSA/IM Requirements Checking method Authorisation 3rd party verification of conformity to transparent, repeatable rules Rule setter (Ministry on NSA advice) Transparency 20 (Safety Case) ( approved by ISA based on judgement ) 3 rd party Checking Body (NoBo or DeBo) Authorising Authority (NSA)

transparent, repeatable rules Rule setter (Ministry on NSA advice) Transparency 20 (Safety Case) (

21 Transparency (3) The nature of the networks and paths offered for sale must also be transparent To avoid discrimination To ensure business certainty for RUs To maintain Technical Compatibility and (gradually) reduce network diversity. 21

22 Principle #5 Networks must support trains.

23 Principle #5 Networks must be managed to meet their purpose. The purpose of a network is to support the operation of a train. To this effect Licenced RUs with authorised vehicles have a right of access which can only be denied on capacity grounds No authorisations by IMs No Technical access conditions Networks must be maintained to conform to the rules for Technical Compatibility No new diversity Existing diversity recorded in network statement -> RINF No new exported constraints 23

24 Principle #6 Mutual Regognition

25 Mutual Recognition By order of the Treaty Member Sates must not call into question checks carried out in other Member States Unless they can demonstrate a substantial safety risk Unless a new check is necessary for compatibility with the other network and the relevant rules have not been assessed as equivalent between the MS 20/09/

26 What does this all mean? Imagine if..

27 Imagine if Each airline specified its own designs of plane? Airports could not tell airlines how long their runways were but asked them to pay to measure the runway length? try a test landing and see if the plane runs out of tarmac? Each airport and air traffic control had different navigation and radio systems? Each plane had to be checked for compatibility with each airport to which it might fly? 27

28 Or.. Each new motorway was built with different bridge heights, traffic signs and operational rules Existing bridges height was not published / labelled Lorry drivers needed a licence for each country. Lorries needed to be separately authorised for each country Road infrastructure managers insisted on checking the characteristics of cars before they would allow access to their roads 28

29 Or.. Police prosecuted motorists for speeding based on their judgement (risk assessment) of safe speed. Traffic at road junctions was managed by a process of cooperation ---..Then rail would be more competitive! 29

30 We make the railway system work better for society. era.europa.eu 30

Fit for the European Rail Market Training Competence - Certification

SIAFI Europe Seminar Paris, 29 September 2008 Fit for the European Rail Market Training Competence - Certification European Railway Agency Interoperability Unit n 1 EU Rail Policy: The Core Aim To adapt