Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
-
Upload
john-siraut -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
1/123
1
Final Report for the
Study of the Publication and Availability of NationalSafety Rules in some EU Member States and Norway
(With the comments on Sections 5 and 6
made by the National Safety Authoritiesof the countries in the scope of this study)
Colin Buchanan and Partners May 2008
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
2/123
2
1. MANAGEMENT SUMMARY 41.1 This report 41.2 Scope 41.3 The structure of the rule-making process 41.4 Publication of the rules 41.5 Stakeholders view of the rules 51.6 Proposals 52. INTRODUCTION 62.1 This report 62.2 Structure of the report 62.3 The remit for the study 72.4 The notifications 92.5 Glossary of terms 92.6 The Consortium 92.7 Acknowledgements 113. THE BACKGROUND 123.1 Structure of the section 123.2 Transport policy background 123.3 The role of the European Railway Agency 133.4 National safety rules 133.5 The key issue 144. DELIVERY 154.1 Structure of the section 154.2
Scope of the work 15
4.3 Methodology 154.4 Progress achieved 164.5 The responses 234.6 Analysis of the results 255. THE RESULTS 265.1 Structure of the section 265.2 Belgium 265.3 Denmark 345.4 Estonia 42415.5 France 49485.6 Ireland 55535.7 Italy 61595.8 The Netherlands 67655.9 Norway 73715.10 Sweden 79776. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 86846.1 Structure of the section 86846.2 Summary 86846.3 Analysis: How national safety rules are established
in national legislation 8785
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
3/123
3
6.4 Comment: How national safety rules areestablished in national legislation 9290
6.5 Analysis: The way in which rules are published 94926.6 Comment: The way in which rules are published 97946.7 Analysis: The way in which rules are made available99966.8 Comment: The way in which the rules
are made available 102996.9 Analysis: Ease of understanding the rules 1041016.10 Comment: Ease of understanding the rules 1111086.11 Analysis: Comprehensiveness of the content
of national safety rule notifications published andmade available in the selected countries: 112109
6.12
Comment: Comprehensiveness of the content ofnotifications on national safety rules publishedand made available in the selected countries 113110
6.13 Analysis: General issues 1131106.14 Comment: General issues 1141127. PROPOSALS 1161137.1 Structure of the section 1161137.2 Proposals 116113Appendices bound separately 122119Appendix A Glossary of abbreviations
Appendix B Excerpts from the Safety Directive
Appendix C1 Structured interview questions - government
Appendix C2 Structured interview questions national safety authorities
Appendix C3 Structured interview questions infrastructure managers
Appendix C4 Structured interview questions railway undertakings
Appendix C5 Structured interview questions - other
Appendix D List of bodies interviewed
Appendix E Information available to stakeholders
Appendix F Information supplied to interviewees before the interview
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
4/123
4
1. MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
1.1 This report
1.1.1 This report is the Final Report for the ERA study procured under the
procurement procedure ERA/2007/SAF/OP/02 and entitled Study of the
publication and availability of national safety rules in some EU Member States
and Norway issued by the European Railway Agency (the Agency).
1.2 Scope
1.2.1 Ministries, national safety authorities and infrastructure managers in all nine
states were interviewed. In addition twenty-five separate railway undertakings,
some operating in several states and three other stakeholders were
interviewed using structured interviews.
1.3 The structure of the rule-making process
1.3.1 The legislative process for direct national safety rules tends to follow the same
pattern in all the states surveyed. Arrangements for consultation vary
considerably however and some stakeholders feel there is insufficient
consultation. Only Belgium, Denmark, France and Italy have indirect rules andthe actors involved and the processes for enacting the rules vary considerably.
It seems clear that this area is still in a state of flux. The arrangements for
review and amendment of the rules also differ, in some states there is a regular
formal process; in others the process is essentially reactive.
1.4 Publication of the rules
1.4.1 The responsibility for publication for statutory purposes varies between the
various states (particularly for indirect rules). In practice however, both the
competent bodies and the stakeholders in all the states regarded the Internet as
the medium in which the rules are made available. No respondent referred topaper copies of the official journal as his source of the rules. Only in Norway
and Sweden are the rules in any language but a national language. In general,
the competent authorities also take the view that publication on the Internet
means there is no question of setting up special means to ensure availability.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
5/123
5
1.5 Stakeholders view of the rules
1.5.1 With the general exception of the Netherlands, stakeholders find the rules easy
to access, clear and user-friendly. There was evidence that access and clarity
have become better in recent years (as safety authorities become more active).
Respondents said that written guidance is available in all the states surveyed
except Estonia (which provides other types of assistance) and the Netherlands
and there seems to be a commitment on the part of the national safety
authorities (in particular) to provide help tailored to applicants for safety
certificates.
1.6 Proposals
1.6.1 Proposals are made for improving the process of consultation on the rules and
for improving the accessibility of the rules.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
6/123
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
7/123
7
progress achieved by the study, and its
organisation.
5. The results State by state analysis of the results,
with a separate sub-section for each
state.
6. Analysis and conclusions A summary of the material from the
various states and conclusions.
7. Proposals The proposals resulting from the
analysis and conclusions.
The appendices, which are bound separately, include further information on
method and an analysis of the information available publicly.
2.3 The remit for the study
2.3.1 The remit for the study is contained in the document Specifications attached to
the Invitation to Tender No ERA/2007/SAF/OP/02.
2.3.2 The material section is section C2.2.2, which requires:
The Contractor shall collect information on the following five aspects:
1. How national safety rules are established in the national legislation:
the collection of information from the competent ministry, the
national safety authority or other body will focus on the form of
the legislative process, the allocation of responsibilities and the
management of the rules system, including the monitoring
process by the national safety authority, in the Member State.
2. The way in which the rules are published:
collection of information from the competent ministry, the
national safety authority or other body about the publishing ofthe rules will focus on identifying the body or bodies responsible
for publishing the rules, the means by which the rules are
published and the management of the publication process.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
8/123
8
3. The way in which the rules are made available:
collection of information from the competent ministry, the
national safety authority or other body on the provision of
means to support access to the rules and the control
mechanisms in place to oversee the accessibility of the rules
to obtain the relevant stakeholders views on the availability of
the rules by recording subjective assessments of the ease of
access to the rules in general and the ease of finding specific
rules for a defined part of the infrastructure in each selected
country
to check the availability of the rules according to the means
described by the competent ministry, the national safety
authority or other body using the usual communication channels
open to stakeholders (telephone, Internet searches, published
documents etc.
4. Ease of understanding the rules:
collection of information on the available languages of the
national safety rules using the means of access identifiedduring the information collection activities on the availability of
the rules
collection of information from the competent ministry, the
national safety authority or other body on the provision of
support material such as guidelines, glossary of terms and
references to technical advice on the application of the rules
to obtain the stakeholdersviews on the ease of understanding
the rules for the purposes of applying for safety certificates by
railway undertakings and the applying for authorization by
infrastructure managers
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
9/123
9
5. Comprehensiveness of the content of the notifications in relation to
the national safety rules which are published and made available in the
selected countries:
by comparison between the national safety rules contained in
the notifications and the published rules
to obtain the opinions of the competent ministry, and the
national safety authority or other body on the fulfilment of Article
8(1) of the Railway Safety Directive in their respective country.
2.4 The notifications
2.4.1 The study was based on notifications of binding national safety rules notified by:
Belgium dated 4 July 2006,
Denmark dated 26 April 2005,
Estonia dated 29 April 2005,
France dated 10 May 2005,
Ireland dated 8 July 2005,
Italy dated 13 June 2005,
The Netherlands dated 2 June 2005,
Norway dated 29 April 2005,
Sweden dated 15 June 2005.
2.5 Glossary of terms
2.5.1 A glossary of abbreviations has been included as Appendix A. It includes
abbreviations which are used more than once but does not include those terms
which are defined where they are used.
2.6 The Consortium
2.6.1 The Consortium is led by Colin Buchanan (UK) who are the contracting party forlegal purposes. The Consortium includes Pegasus Transconsult Ltd (UK),
Ecorys (The Netherlands), ELLE (Estonia), DITS (Italy) NESTEAR (France),
and NTU (Denmark). A brief description of the members of the Consortium
appears below.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
10/123
10
2.6.2 Colin Buchanan is a British and Irish consultancy. The firms work covers urban
and regional planning, roads, traffic engineering, public transport, economics,
market research and software development. Its staff includes traffic engineers,
public transport specialists, architects, development planners, urban designers,
landscape architects, economists, systems analysts and market researchers.
2.6.3 Pegasus Transconsult (PTC) provides a complete range of transportation
consultancy services, based on the skills and knowledge of some of Europe s
leading transport experts. It has a particular focus on European issues, having
a broad range of expertise extending from high level policy to detailed technical
issues.
2.6.4 DITS: Universit di Roma La Sapienza - Dipartimento di Idraulica Trasporti e
Strade. DITS is the Department of Hydraulics, Transport, and Roads of the
Faculty of Engineering of the University of Rome Sapienza. Its teaching and
research are mainly in the field of planning and management of passenger and
freight transport systems.
2.6.5 ECORYS is a European consultancy and research organisation founded by the
Netherlands Economic Institute (NEI). ECORYS has an extensive record of
national and international projects in the rail sector.
2.6.6 ELLE, an acronym for Estonian, Latvian & Lithuanian Environment, is a Baltic
consultancy with an established record in working with the railway industry.
2.6.7 NESTEAR is an applied research organisation linked to INRETS (Institut
National de Recherche sur les Transports et leur Scurit (The French National
Institute for Transport and Safety Research).
2.6.8 NTU: Strategic Development & Consulting Ltd. NTU is a private Danish
consulting company, which has been working internationally with consulting and
development projects since its foundation in 1993. Rail studies represent oneof NTUs core competences.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
11/123
11
2.7 Acknowledgements
2.7.1 The Consortium would like to acknowledge the help offered by the European
Railway Agency and of course the numerous respondents who gave freely of
their time and expertise to provide answers to our questions.
.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
12/123
12
3. THE BACKGROUND
3.1 Structure of the section
3.1.1 This section of the report puts the study into context, with sub-sections on
transport policy background, the role of the Agency, safety rules, and the key
objective of the study.
3.2 Transport policy background
3.2.1 Article 8 of the Railway Safety Directive1 places a duty on Member States:
Member States shall establish binding national safety rules and shall ensure
that they are published and made available to all infrastructure managers,
railway undertakings, applicants for a safety certificate and applicants for a
safety authorisation in clear language that can be understood by the parties
concerned. This process is essential to give railway undertakings (in
particular) a clear understanding of the legal requirements in the states in which
they operate or propose to operate.
3.2.2 The duty placed on national safety authorities has a further aspect. Only if
regulations are clear, and assistance is provided to facilitate compliance can
wider participation in the provision of services by rail be guaranteed. Thecontinuing need to open up the market for rail services to new undertakings,
particularly those extending their geographic range, is therefore conditional on
safety rules being freely available, safety rules being unambiguous and help
being available to interpret and implement them. Whilst the opening of the
market has a particular relevance to railway undertakings, the market for the
provision of rolling stock and the provision (for example) of maintenance
services would also be invigorated by new entrants. Clarity and certainty in the
safety rules are an essential precondition to achieve this wider participation,
conversely failure to provide this clarity and certainty could frustrate operation of
the Single Market in the provision of rail services.
1Directive 2004/49/ECof the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the
Community's railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakingsand Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges forthe use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive) published as acorrigendum in OJ EU L220/16 of 21 June 2004.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
13/123
13
3.3 The role of the European Railway Agency
3.3.1 Member States are required to notify the European Commission of all the
relevant national safety rules in force as set out in Annex II (to the Safety
Directive) and indicate their area of application. The notification shall further
provide information on the principal content of the rules with references to the
legal texts, on the form of legislation and on which body or organisation is
responsible for its publication. The Agency is required to evaluate the way in
which national safety rules are published and made available in accordance
with Article 8(1). It is also required to make appropriate recommendations to
the Commission for the publication of such rules in order to make the relevant
information more easily accessible.
3.4 National safety rules
3.4.1 National safety rules are described either directly in the national legislation or
indirectly, by requiring in the legislation that rules published by a third party
should be applied. Indirect safety rules may have their origin in the rules of the
former national railway or be requirements in standards or publications of
organisations such as the UIC. If the rule has no legal basis, it is not binding
and therefore, not a national safety rule. Seven types of national safety rulesare described in Annex II to the Safety Directive. (Annex II of the Safety
Directive is reproduced in Appendix B (Excerpts from the Safety Directive) of
this report).
3.4.2 A useful explanation of the safety rules is to be found in the ERA Guideline for
Member States on the Notification of National Safety Rules (ERA-20070731-
SAF).
3.4.3 In addition to these safety rules imposed by law, infrastructure managers may
have their own regulations which they impose on railway undertakings through
their access contracts. These safety regulations are not binding national safetyrules (because they are not imposed by law) but rather are a condition of a
contractual agreement between two parties - the railway undertaking and the
infrastructure manager.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
14/123
14
3.5 The key issue
3.5.1 There are therefore two key issues, firstly to ensure the national safety rules are
available and secondly to ensure the national safety rules are easy to
understand. The consultants have therefore sought to check that:
there are binding national safety rules,
that they are published,
that they are available,
that they are in a clear language that can be understood by thewider railway community.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
15/123
15
4. DELIVERY
4.1 Structure of the section
4.1.1 This section describes the work done to achieve the objectives of the project,
with sub-sections describing the scope of the work, the methodology adopted,
the progress achieved by the study, and its organisation.
4.2 Scope of the work
4.2.1 All the tasks and activities identified in the Agencys specification were
undertaken. The publication and availability of national safety rules in the
following EU Member and EFTA States were examined:
Belgium,
Denmark,
Estonia,
France,
Ireland,
Italy,
The Netherlands,Norway and
Sweden.
4.3 Methodology
The structure of the work
4.3.1 In accordance with the specification, the work was divided into two work
packages: Work Package 1, and Work Package 2.
4.3.2 Work Package 1: Preparatory work reviewed and presented at the Intermediate
Review Meeting including the Interim Report. This comprised the following
activities:
developing the structured interviews including the means to collect
information and subjective assessments, as described in the
ERAs Tender Specification;
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
16/123
16
proposing suitable organisations to be interviewed in the selected
states to achieve an appropriate balance;
selecting other sources of information to fulfil the objectives in the
specification;
preparing the Interim Report;
presenting Work Package 1 at the Intermediate Review Meeting.
4.3.3 Work Package 2 (which followed the Intermediate Review Meeting): The
information collecting activities, presenting the results and delivery of the Final
Report. This comprised the following activities:
carrying out the structured interviews;
collecting the required information as described in the
specification;
analysing results and their assessment in relation to the objectives
of the work;
preparing the Final Report
presenting Work Package 2 at the final meeting.
4.4 Progress achieved
Initial tasks
4.4.1 When the Consortium considered the structure of the work it concluded that
presenting both the proposed list of interviewees and proposed interview dates
at the Intermediate Review Meeting would not be productive. Any change
would involve restarting. Accordingly, it was agreed during the kick-off meeting
to supply a list of the organisations to be interviewed, have those approved,
then the list of interviewees, have those approved and only then fix interviews.
Work Package 1
4.4.2 Two activities were carried out in parallel in Work Package 1. The first of these,
identification of stakeholder organisations and choice of appropriate
interviewees was carried out in parallel with the second, developing the
structured interviews and starting work on other data collection.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
17/123
17
Choice of stakeholders
4.4.3 In preparing the list of stakeholders to be consulted for approval at the
intermediate review meeting, the Consortium took account of the need to admit
new entrants to the market on equitable terms. In addition to including the
incumbent (passenger and freight) railway undertaking in every case, the
Consortium included new open access railway undertakings as far as was
possible (Ireland was a notable exception) and a limited number of railway
undertakings from adjacent countries (to get third party opinion) in its initial list
of stakeholders. Applicants for safety certificates (and safety authorisations)
were also considered for inclusion in the list of stakeholders to be contacted.
4.4.4 The choice of new railway undertakings was made such that the issue of
operation across the frontiers into adjacent countries could be covered in a
single interview.
4.4.5 A limited number of other stakeholders were included in the list, such as wagon
keepers, representatives of employees, and traction hiring companies. Wagon
keepers and traction hirers with extensive European operations were chosen.
The inclusion of these groups and representatives of employees was not
intended to be comprehensive but merely to identify any issues that particularlyaffect those groups.
4.4.6 Accordingly, the Consortium made an initial choice of fifty-nine bodies to
interview, these were composed of nine ministries, nine Safety Authorities, eight
infrastructure managers, one integrated railway, twenty-five railway
undertakings, three wagon keepers, two traction hirers, and two representatives
of employees. This initial list was designed to provide a balance between
passenger and freight and new and old railway undertakings. There were
three passenger/freight incumbent undertakings, five incumbent passenger
undertakings, five incumbent freight undertakings, six new passenger
undertakings and six new freight undertakings. Of these, one passenger
undertaking and three freight undertakings operate through international
services and other undertakings have certificates to allow them to do so. The
other parties were added to investigate if there were particular issues that only
affect those groups.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
18/123
18
4.4.7 The Consortium supplied the agency with a draft list of the organisations to be
interviewed on 16 December 2007. The Agency accepted the list in an e-mail
of 21 December 2007 but asked for further railway undertakings such as Thalys
and Eurostar to be included. The Agency also asked for First-DSB to be
included, First-DSB is particularly significant in two ways, it will operate
international services and in that the company has not yet started its services
and will thus be going through a learning curve.
Identifying interviewees
4.4.8 Once the Agency had given its approval of the stakeholder organisations, the
Consortium started to identify appropriate initial contact points. This was
undertaken centrally, details for competent ministries and national safety
authorities were taken from ERA sources, for railway undertakings and
infrastructure managers from contacts nominated by the UIC and from existing
contacts from an earlier study on the certification of railway undertakings. Initial
contacts were supplied with a copy of the letter of introduction and a summary
of the objectives of the study, wherever appropriate. They were asked to
confirm that they were in fact the appropriate interviewee and where appropriate
(Belgium) they were asked for their preferred language.
4.4.9 Three issues affected the nomination of interviewees:
Firstly there was reluctance by some organisations to become
involved, e-mails were not answered and contacts were permanently
unavailable. A list of these organisations was supplied to the Agency
for help in resolution.
Secondly, in some states (principally Belgium and Italy) the roles of
legislator, national safety authority and infrastructure manager are
shared by more than one organisation and were therefore less
differentiated.
Lastly, the initial contact was not always the right interviewee. Some
organisations made it clear they expected to field more than one
interviewee and would make the final decision only when they had
seen the list of questions.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
19/123
19
4.4.10 The draft list of interviewees was supplied to the Agency at the Intermediate
Review Meeting on 25 January 2008 although it still contained some gaps,
which were subsequently finalised.
4.4.11 In the process of arranging interviews, one railway undertaking said it no longer
wanted to be involved, and a second was taken over by a larger group. A
substitute was found for the first of these and the new company was interviewed
in the second case. A large incumbent railway undertaking said it no longer had
any responsibility for rules (presumably following changes in the organisational
arrangements in the country in question) and declined to answer further
questions. A railway undertaking operating high-speed international services
referred the team to its parent companies on the basis that the high-speed
company had no direct safety responsibilities. A wagon owner said that he had
no trackside activities and no longer wished to be interviewed, a traction
provider finally declined to make any contribution. The survey however did
interview other traction providers and wagon keepers. Against these negative
features, many of the Scandinavian railway undertakings had looked at the
rules in other states and so the final number of railway undertaking/state pairs
is higher than was originally envisaged.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
20/123
20
4.4.12 The final list of organisations interviewed is shown in Appendix D (List of
interviewees). Table 4.1 below summarises them. Note that the table counts
double in the sense that if a railway undertaking (for example) provided
responses for more than one state, it is shown for all the states for which it
provided responses.
Table 4.1 Table of Respondents
Ministry
Nationals
afety
authority
Infrastruc
ture
Manager
Integrated
railway
Incumben
t
railway
undertaki
ng
Newrailway
undertaki
ng
Wagonke
eper
Tractionh
irer
Rep.
employee
s
Total
Belgium 1 1 1 1 4 8
Denmark 1 1 1 2 4 9
Estonia 1 1 2 1 5
France 1 1 1 1 3 7
Ireland 1 1 1 1 4
Italy 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 8
Netherlands 1 1 1 2 3 8
Norway 1 1 1 3 2 8
Sweden 1 1 1 3 4 10Total 9 9 7 3 13 23 1 1 1 67
Note: the table counts double in the sense that if a railway undertaking (for example)provided responses for more than one state, it is shown for all the states forwhich it provided responses
Incumbent railway undertakings are shown as new in states other than theirhome state.
High-speed railway undertakings are shown as new.
Obtaining the information - the structured interviews
4.4.13 Developing the structured interviews for approval at the intermediate review
meeting took place concurrently with the identification of the potential
interviewees. A Microsoft Visio diagram defining the structure of the
interviews and the issues to be investigated was prepared and sent to the
Agency on 16 January 2008 to allow appropriate consideration in advance of
the Intermediate Review Meeting. In addition to the structured interview plan,
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
21/123
21
notes for interviewers were prepared. These are both dealt with in greater
detail below.
Obtaining the information - the logic of the structured interviews
4.4.14 It was initially intended to have a single logic for the structured interviews to
sidestep the issue of differing tasks being allocated to different bodies (for
example, extreme decentralisation). This should have avoided the possibility of
issues being missed. However, this finally proved to be impractical. Structured
interviews were therefore prepared for the five distinct groups: ministries, safety
authorities, infrastructure managers, railway undertakings, and third parties
such as traction hirers.
4.4.15 The interview structure specifically provided for stakeholders to be asked about
their roles in the preparation and amendment of rules. It also specifically
allowed for both direct and indirect safety rules (see section 3.4 for a statement
of the distinction). Questions were also phrased so that the distinction between
responsibility for making rules and for publishing them was clearly made.
4.4.16 Any role that organisations subject to the rules structure (such as railway
undertakings) have in monitoring compliance (by internal procedures) has been
ignored. The monitoring role has been assumed to be that defined in Article
16 (f) of the Safety Directive.
4.4.17 The questioning followed a similar pattern in each case. Questions were
tailored to the bodies in question so that bodies without supervisory roles were
not asked supervisory questions, for example. Exceptionally, it was considered
that infrastructure managers have a legitimate interest in the safety rules
applicable in other states (to allow them to propose alignment of rules
structures, etc). Questions were designed to elicit information and where
possible yes/no questions were avoided. These structured questions are
shown in Appendices C1 to C5 (Structured interview questions)1. Theinterviews were necessarily detailed.
1 The original Visio logic was designed to fit on A3 paper, unfortunately reproduction in an A4 documentmakes the five appendices more difficult to read.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
22/123
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
23/123
23
have notified, no check was made that later rules were in the process of being
notified.
Obtaining the information preparation for the interviews
4.4.23 All members of the Consortium were consulted on the preparation of the
structured interviews to prevent national peculiarities being overlooked. It was
decided however not to translate them until the general approach and structure
was approved in the Intermediate Review Meeting.
The interview process
4.4.24 Danish staff conducted the interviews in Sweden and Norway. Belgium was
covered by the separate Dutch and French teams as appropriate. The Estonian
Consortium member was provided with the technical knowledge necessary to
fulfil the task.
4.5 The responses
Degree of response
4.5.1 In general railway, undertakings were prepared to co-operate with the study and
presumably expected to benefit from it. The only major exception was in
France for reasons discussed at the beginning of the French section. The
statutory authorities and infrastructure managers likewise cooperated. Other
groups were materially more reluctant to cooperate. Significantly, perhaps,
other stakeholders were not systematically involved in the rule-making
process.
4.5.2 The degree to which complete answers were provided to questions varied very
considerably but not consistently.
Quality of the responses
4.5.3 Inevitably some responses were of better quality than others. There was no
pattern to that, the quality of the responses from some governmental bodies, for
example, was not as good as might have been expected.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
24/123
24
4.5.4 Many of the questions asked of railway undertakings were judgemental, of the
form how easy did you find ?, the consortium considered that stakeholder
satisfaction was the criterion in these cases and did not attempt to set
standards for degrees of satisfaction. Fortunately, stakeholders appeared to be
either satisfied or dissatisfied so degrees of satisfaction did not arise. In
many cases stakeholders qualified their comments by providing examples of
what was (or was not) particularly satisfactory. This provided reassurance as
well as material on which to base proposals.
4.5.5 Answers given by the respondents were not always consistent. This was to be
expected and was not as much of a problem as may be thought. Where the
inconsistent was at a judgemental level (what did you think of?) respondents
are encouraged to hold conflicting views. Where it was clear that respondents
were actually wrong on a question of fact, their reply was nevertheless
recorded. Omissions were more common but the fact that a number of parties
were asked the same question filled them (the example in paragraph 6.9.10 of
the authorities in Italy and the Netherlands not mentioning the help they had
provided to railway undertakings may be cited).
Status of the respondents
4.5.6 There were particular issues in Belgium and Italy in that the governmental
organisation having the department of state role and the governmental
organisation having the NSA role are very close organisationally. In both cases
the interviews with the ministry acting as a ministry and the ministry acting as an
NSA were held together at their specific request. The consortium extracted
appropriate comments from the joint interviews.
Level of confidence
4.5.7 Much of the information which the study revealed (such as the national
legislative framework) is factual and as such was checked by members of theconsortium. Other data, such as the arrangements for consulting stakeholders,
could only be obtained by asking the various actors. In fulfilling its remit the
consortium insisted on getting an answer from one body or another to every
question for every state. In this way a complete picture was possible. In the
vast majority of cases (and particular for stakeholder views) there was ample
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
25/123
25
corroborative material and the consortium is therefore confident that the results
of the study may be relied on.
4.6 Analysis of the results
4.6.1 Appendices C1 to C5 show the questions that were asked of each respondent
group together with the way the replies were grouped. The raw data from the
replies was then extracted to form the basis for the analysis for each state.
Likewise, when analysing the issues across all states (stakeholder views on
accessibility, for example), this process was repeated to create the tables in
section 6. This repetition formed a useful control on the state by state analysis.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
26/123
26
5. THE RESULTS
5.1 Structure of the section
5.1.1 This section contains the state by state analysis of the results, with a separate
sub-section for each state. The detailed responses of the interviewees are not
included in this report.
5.1.2 Appendix C shows the questions that were asked and how the replies to those
questions mapped across to the national summaries below.
5.2 Belgium
Belgian introduction
5.2.1 Belgium has only comparatively recently set up a separate infrastructure
organisation and some organisational issues are still being resolved. The
national safety authority DVIS/ SSICF (Dienst Veiligheid en Interoperabiliteit der
Spoorwegen/Service de Scurit et dInteroprabilit des Chemins de fer) is
closely integrated with the ministry.
5.2.2 The national notification dated 4 July 2006 was taken as the basis for the work.
5.2.3 The direct national safety rules are on the ministry webpage3 and the indirect
ones on the Infabel access website4 in both cases in the two principal national
languages, Dutch and French.
How national safety rules are established in the national legislation:
5.2.4 Belgium has both direct and indirect national safety rules.
The form of the legislative process
5.2.5 Direct safety rules are made through the parliamentary legislative process. Rail
safety issues are covered by the railway law (loi/wet of 19 December 2006
(published in the Official Journal on 23 January 2007). Article 6 of this law sets
out the legislative framework and the arrangements for publication of national
3 Dutch: http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/rail/railcode.htmFrench: http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/rail/railcode.htm
4 http://www.railaccess.be
http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/rail/railcode.htmhttp://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/rail/railcode.htmhttp://www.railaccess.be/http://www.railaccess.be/http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/rail/railcode.htmhttp://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/rail/railcode.htm -
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
27/123
27
safety rules. Paragraph 3 provides that in the absence of a TSI, rules made by
the infrastructure manager shall have legal force.
The allocation of responsibilities
5.2.6 The ministry legislator is responsible for formulation of direct national rail safety
rules. The infrastructure manager, Infrabel, advises the ministry on the content
of these direct rules.
5.2.7 The railway law empowers the infrastructure manager, Infrabel, to make indirect
rules for railway undertakings and construction companies. The law requiresthe DVIS to approve these rules and in practice railway undertakings are also
consulted. Infrabel said that it believed that this allowed the stakeholders to
buy in to the rules. The principal indirect rules made by the infrastructure
manager are:
VVESI/RSEIF (VeiligheidsVoorschriften betreffende de Exploitatie
van de Spoorwegstructuur/Rglement de Scurit de lExploitation
de lInfrastructure Ferroviaire);
ARGSI/RGUIF: Algemeen Reglement voor het Gebruik van de
Spoorweg Infrastructuur/Rglement Gnral de lUtilisation de
lInfrastructure Ferroviaire;
BVT/ LST: Boek van de Treindienst/Livre de Service de Train;
ARM/RGM: Algemeen Reglement van het Materieel/Rglement
Gnral du Matriel;
ARB/RGV: Algemeen Reglement van de Baan/Rglement Gnral
de la Voie;
ARS/RGS: Algemeen Reglement van de Seininrichting/Rglement
Gnral de la Signalisation.
Withdrawal of the former regulations (ARB, ARGSI, ARM, ARS).
They will be replaced by new regulations (new VVESI).
The management of the rules system
5.2.8 A Safety Platform has been set up as a forum to discuss safety issues (only
indirect rules). In this forum, railway undertakings, Infrabel, the ministry and
Comment [ERA1]: The Belgian NSAbrought to ERAs attention the important
objection that the consultation is not only a
the level of the safety plat form, itsnecessary to make a distinction between
direct and indirect rules. See more details ithe insertion below this paragraph.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
28/123
28
DVIS are represented with a standing representation. The platform discusses
all amendments to legislation, presented by Infrabel (VVESI) or DVIS (EU or
national legislation). In addition, any problems encountered can be raised by
Infrabel itself or railway undertakings and the process of implementation
discussed. One railway undertaking said that Infrabel tries to involve all the
operators but the smaller railway undertakings found it difficult to contribute fully
because of time constraints. It also commented that although Infrabel is trying
to be autonomous, they are formally still part of the SNCB/NMBS Holding and
that could inadvertently lead to closer relationships with incumbents. Likewise,
one railway undertaking said it feels disadvantaged on many operational andformal activities.
Direct rules:
The consultation is the competence of the Ministry/DVIS (NSA) on every change
in regulation.
There are two possibilities:
transfer of EU rules into national rules or important amendments on
legislation is discussed with the rail sector in the consultation platform. In
this platform railway undertakings, Infrabel, the Ministry and DVIS (NSA)
are represented;
other modifications are being shared with the rail sector through letters or
mailings.
Indirect rules:
The consultation is the competence of Infrabel (IM).
Infrabel (IM) develops the indirect rules and discusses its proposals with the RUs
in the safety platform where DVIS is represented.
5.2.85.2.9 The ministry explained that there are four types of rules:
1. EU rules,
2, direct national safety rules,
Comment [ERA2]: This insertion wasrequested by the Belgian NSA and should
be considered as prevailing over otherstatements in this section, as follows from
the objection in the previous comment.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
29/123
29
3. indirect national safety rules imposed by the infrastructure manager
(Infrabel) and
4. internal company rules for Infrabel and railway undertakings
(outside the scope of this study)
5.2.95.2.10 Transposition of EU rules into national rules is being discussed with the rail
sector in the Safety Consultation Platform.
5.2.105.2.11 The seven types of rules are covered in the following way:
Type 1: Safety targets are formulated by the ministry, this is notimposed by law. Common safety methods will be formulated
in EU legislation, no transfer to national rules exists. (New
Royal Decree in preparation.)
Type 2: The requirements of the safety management system of the
infrastructure manager (Infrabel) are defined by national
legislation. The national legislation specifies no norms for the
content of the safety management system. National rules
require railway undertakings to have safety management
systems.
Type 3: Requirements for rolling stock are dealt with in national rules
based on EU legislation. The interface between infrastructure
and rolling stock (which rolling stock is allowed to run on what
parts of the network) is dealt with by the NSA based on the
national rules. In Infrabels view, not all specifications are
already specified in national rules. Therefore the former
SNCB/NMBS regulations on rolling stock are still used as
guidance. (New Regulation in preparation.)
Type 4: The operating rules are formulated in the VVESI, ARGSI,
BVT, ARM, ARB, and ARS, which are drawn up on basis ofnational and European rules and define the operational
requirements for Infrabel and the working procedures for
railway undertakings. Withdrawal of the former regulations
(ARB, ARGSI, ARM, ARS). They will be replaced by new
regulations (new VVESI).
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
30/123
30
Type 5: Internal company rules for Infrabel and railway undertakings.
Infrabel has to approve the internal rules of the railway
undertakings (outside the scope of this study).
Type 6: The Minister is responsible.
Type 7: The Minister is responsible. DVIS is only responsible for the
follow-up of the measures to be taken to avoid another similar
accidenthas the remit to investigate incidents, the National
Investigation Body (part of the ministry) investigates structural
problems and major accidents. Infrabel also executes internal
research by incidentsinvestigates incidents.
5.2.115.2.12 Monitoring is the joint task of the ministry and the DVIS. Discussion of
amendments takes place in the Safety Consultation Platform and with help of
the documents sent to the railway undertakings and Infrabel. As a
consequence the railway undertakings and the infrastructure manager have the
opportunity to respond to amendments to regulations and to new regulations
with help of written documents and with feedback from the Safety Platform.
Ultimately the ministry/DVIS and Infrabel (VVESI amongst others) are
responsible for amending the rules, but in close coordination with the sector.
5.2.125.2.13 In addition, the national law is evaluated and (if necessary) amended twice
a year by the ministry/DVIS in close consultation with all rail stakeholders., the
periodicity depends on the necessity. If amendments on legislation are
necessary, that is the beginning of the consultation process.
5.2.135.2.14 Updating of the rules for new EU legislation and as necessary following
discussions on the effectiveness of the current rules in the Safety Platform
likewise takes place on a half-yearly cycle.
5.2.145.2.15 The close relationship between the ministry and the national safety
authority is a subject of some concern to some railway undertakings whobelieve if might give rise to the risk of political control.
The way in which the rules are published
5.2.155.2.16 Whilst not having statutory effect, in practice the Internet has become the
prime means of publication.
Comment [ERA3]: Belgian NSAcorrected that the six monthly reviewprocess is only an internal processbetween the Ministry and DVIS (NSA).
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
31/123
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
32/123
32
The ministry said that this is very much appreciated by the infrastructure
manager and railway undertakings. The ministry and DVIS said they take great
pains to draw the attention of stakeholders to the website and the information it
contains.
Control mechanisms to oversee access
5.2.225.2.23 The ministry/DVIS and Infrabel think that communication by means of the
Safety Platform and e-mail is good. There are no specific means of overseeing
access but the DVIS maintains a watching brief.
Stakeholders views on the ease of access
5.2.235.2.24 The ministry/DVIS and Infrabels view that communication by means of the
Safety Platform and e-mail is good, appears to be echoed by railway
undertakings, DLC for example said publication is organised and complete.
Infrabel said stakeholders have the opportunity to express complaints. They
are informed by the ministry/DVIS of every change in the regulations and have
the opportunity to react by letter and make comments at meetings of the Safety
Platform.
Stakeholders views on access to specific rules
5.2.245.2.25 There are rules for particular types of line (such as single lines or
electrified lines) but there are none for defined specific lines. Stakeholders had
a positive view of access in general.
The availability of rules
5.2.255.2.26 The consultants looked at the Department of Transport and the Infrabel
(rail access) websites, their findings are shown in Appendix E. The consultants
concluded that the rules are all available on electronic data media. Hard copies
of the national safety rules shown in the notification are available from theofficial journal office (for direct rules) and from the infrastructure manager,
Infrabel, for indirect rules.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
33/123
33
Ease of understanding the rules
5.2.265.2.27 Stakeholders were generally very positive. DLC described the way the
rules are presented as rather good.
Languages
5.2.275.2.28 The official journal (and its website) is available in Dutch, German and
French. The Infrabel website is in Dutch and French. The special document
which has been prepared to explain the procedure for attaining a safety
certificate is available on the Internet in Dutch, English and French. The DVISis able to provide help in English, French, and Dutch.
Support material and technical advice
5.2.285.2.29 Every new railway undertaking may request assistance from the DVIS on
the procedures and regulations. In particular, technical advice is offered for
safety certificate applications. DVIS has a help desk. (Infrabel is also willing to
advise new railway undertakings on how to develop their internal regulations.)
Comprehensibility of the rules for applying for safety certificates and
authorisation
5.2.295.2.30 The ministry/DVIS website describes the procedure, timescale and costs
of acquiring a safety certificate. Also a special document has been prepared
explaining the procedure for attaining a safety certificate (this is available on the
Internet in Dutch, English and French) 7. Railway undertakings said that they
thought that the interface is user-friendly.
5.2.305.2.31 The implementation of the new EU law resulted in completely different
rules for railway companies. Some railway undertakings thought that several
changes are unclear, and it is not clear which new EU Directives have been
implemented and which have not.
7 For the English version see: (http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/rail/safcere.pdf)
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
34/123
34
Comprehensiveness of the content of the notifications in relation to the national
safety rules which are published and made available in the selected countries:
5.2.315.2.32 There are two issues here:
Are all the documents listed in the notification freely available?
and,
Are there in fact safety rules which have not been made listed in
the notification?
On the first, the ministry/NSA were clear that all the rules were properly
published. A useful inventory of the rules is to be found on the Internet.8
Interestingly, railway undertakings in the Netherlands regarded Belgium as a
model for what should be done. On the second, the six monthlyperiodical
review process is designed to ensure all the material is up-to date and none of
the respondents were able to identify material which had not been properly
notified at the time of the notification.
5.2.325.2.33 The ministry/NSA said that all the national safety rules are published in
accordance with Article 8(1) of the Railway Safety Directive.
Belgium conclusions
5.2.335.2.34 Stakeholders held a very high opinion of the Belgian system. Belgium has
a thorough and systematic procedure for involving stakeholders at all stages
and systematically reviewing its rules. In particular, the six monthlyperiodical
review is very positive. (See proposal 7.2.10). Its arrangements for publication
are organised and complete.
5.3 Denmark
Denmark introduction
5.3.1 Denmark has the classic pattern of a quite separate ministry, national safety
authority, infrastructure manager and independent freight and passenger
railway undertakings.
8 http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/rail/invraif.pdf
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
35/123
35
5.3.2 The national notification dated 26 April 2005 was taken as the basis for the
work.
5.3.3 The national safety rules are to be found from links on the national safety
authority website9 in Danish only.
How national safety rules are established in the national legislation
5.3.4 Denmark has both direct and indirect national safety rules.
The form of the legislative process
5.3.5 Direct safety rules are made through the legislative process. There are four
phases to this process: initiation, preparation, decision, and implementation.
Although the Ministry of Transport and the National Rail Agency (the national
safety authority) are currently working on the implementation of the rules, the
process is not yet complete.In terms of secondary legislation on railway safety
the NRA prepares a proposal for new legislation which is sent out for
consultation to anyone whom may have an interest, i.e. the industry, unions,
local authorities, etc. As part of the consultation procedure proposals are further
more published on "hoeringsportalen.dk" on which all proposals for new
legislation are published. After the consultation the NRA undertakes anyrelevant modifications to the draft legislation and publishes the final and binding
version on "retsinformation.dk" and on the NRA homepage.
5.3.6 The Minister of Transport has the overall responsibility for the national
legislation within this area. Certain of the Minister's powers have been
delegated to the NRA in accordance with 24 a in "lov om jernbane"10 . The
extent to which the Minister's powers have been delegated is set out in the
administrative order "Bekendtgrelse om Trafikstyrelsens opgaver og
befjelser". It is provided that the Minister's powers in terms of implementation
and administration of EU rules on railway safety have been delegated to theNRA in accordance with 3, section 3 of the administrative order. In addition,
3, section 1 sets down that the Minister's powers to provide secondary
legislation concerning safety and interoperability have been delegated to the
9 http://www.trafikstyrelsen.dk/sw148200.asp#10 lovbekendtgrelse nr. 1171 af 2. december 2004 med senere ndringer
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
36/123
36
NRA. As a general rule it is thus the NRA rather than the Minister that
undertakes the implementation and administration of EU rules on railway safety.
5.3.7 Indirect rules are made by the infrastructure manager who comments All rules
made by Rail Net Denmark (RND) should be accepted approved by the
National Rail Authority before they can go into practice. Some of the operational
rules have been included in law, others have not. Currently RND is taking part
in a group which purpose is to investigate the possibilities for having indirect
rules imposed by law. At present stage the SR "safety regulations" belong to
RND and are not legally binding.
The allocation of responsibilities
5.3.8 As mentioned above, Tthe Ministry of Transport, in consultation with the
Ministry of Justice, is responsible for safety rules to the extent it has not
delegated its powers to provide secondary legislation to the National Rail
Authority (NRA).. Whilst the Ministry of Transport is responsible for setting the
direct rules, it devolves responsibility for their implementation onto the National
Rail Agency (NRA). When framing primary legislation, the ministry liaises with
the National Rail AgencyAuthority, which is responsible for managing the
consultation process with the rail industry. In all cases the Ministry of Transportdetermines any delegation of responsibilities. The National Rail Agency
Authority is also responsible for approving indirect rules proposed by Rail Net
Denmark.
The management of the rules system
5.3.9 Consultation onPublication of rules follows the general procedures which apply
to publishing of Danish legislation. These are set out in "lovtidendeloven"11. In
accordance with this Act the NRA makes its draft legislation available on the
retsinformation12 website (see Appendix E) which is the official homepage for all
Danish legislation. As a service the NRA also publishes the legislation on itshomepage. As part of the consultation procedure proposals/draft legislation are
11 lov nr. 842 af 16 December 199112 http://www.retsinformation.dk
Formatted: Not Strikethrough
Comment [ERA4]: NRA comment:The last part of the sentence is notprecise e.g. Authority orderimplementing TSI operation (BJ 5-04Bestemmelser om gennemfrelse afden tekniske specifikation forinteroperabilitet (TSI) for delsystemetdrift og trafikstyring i dettranseuropiske jernbanesystem forkonventionelle tog) and Authority orderregarding driving train for work in thetracks (Bekendtgrelse omarbejdskrsel m.v. (BJ 5-08)).
https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=116648https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=116648https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=116648https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=116648https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=116648 -
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
37/123
37
further more published on the hoeringsportalen13 website on which all proposals
for new legislation are published.
5.3.10 The National Rail Agency Authority considers that all interested parties are
involved in the rule-making process and that they are systematically contacted
by the NRA them. This is achieved by means of a mail shot.
5.3.11 An annual safety conference is held and the consultants understand that all the
rules are reviewed systematically as part of a process which the NRA described
as on-going.
5.3.12 Amendments to rules are initiated as a result of initiatives from the European
Union, the National Rail AgencyAuthority, requests from the trade organisation
representing the rail industry, and as a result of political will. The annual safety
and security conference hosted by the National Rail AuthorityAgency provides a
feedback mechanism to assist in developing the rules. In addition the National
Rail AuthoritysAgencys supervisory role in overseeing of the application of the
rules can also trigger the updating process for the rules where issues emerge.
A particular watch is kept for repetition of a dangerous practice or situation, this
is taken as an indication that the rules need review. The National Rail
AuthorityAgency has a particular responsibility to manage the transitionsmoothly when new or revised rules are put in place.
5.3.13 Members of the National Rail AuthoritysAgencys staff have been allotted
responsibility to monitor changes in EU legislation and to initiate the process for
amending the national safety rules, if this is appropriate. Project groups are
established as required to facilitate this process. In the case of changes to
direct rulesa law which has to be passed in the Parliament the mechanism is via
the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Justice.
5.3.14 Whilst DSB acknowledged that it had participated in the consultation process
for drawing up or amending rules is considered the feedback process did notwork well, Railion Danmark echoed this saying it often considered that its
comments were not taken into consideration by either the Ministry of Transport
or by the National Rail AuthorityAgency. In this respect Railion considers that
Denmark lags behind the comparable experience in Norway and Sweden.
13http://borger.dk/forside/lovgivning/hoeringsportalen
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
38/123
38
5.3.15 The National Rail Agency noted that some problems were experienced when
the Accident Investigation Board surrendered responsibility in some areas to
the National Rail Agency. The problem was identified after a short period and
management action was taken to delineate areas and extents of responsibility.
The way in which the rules are published
5.3.16 As the direct rules are primary legislation; in principle therefore they are
contained in statute books. All the safety rules are published by the National
Rail Agency Authority in both paper form and on their website. The National
Rail Agency Authority is currently working on an improved search engine on its
website to make access to the rules easier. In addition rules are published on
the retsinformation website14 and the Lovtidende website, in addition Rail
Net Denmark provides links to the rules from their website.
5.3.17 The National Rail AuthorityAgency has an internal control body, one of the
tasks of which is to verify that updates to rules are published promptly.
5.3.18 SJ reported in contrast to the situation in Norway and Sweden that Danish
legislation seems to be split into so many different pieces that it is quite
difficult to get an overview of. It also reported that not all of the legislation
appears to have been published, at least not in a clear manner
The body responsible for publication
5.3.19 The Ministry of Transport is responsible for publishing the rules in areas which
have not been delegated to the NRA. The NRA is responsible for the
publication of rules in areas which have been delegated to the NRA, but they
are also published by the National Rail Agency, which is responsible for the
publication of the infrastructure rules. In addition, the National Rail Agency has
been given responsibility for ensuring that the Infrastructure Manager and
railway undertakings are aware of the rules.
14 http://www.retsinfo.dk.
Comment [ERA5]: NRA comment:The accident Investigation Board hasnot surrendered responsibilities to theNRA. We do not understand thissentence. That is why we suggest it isdeleted.
Comment [ERA6]: By the time of thechecking this report the work had beencompleted by the NRA.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
39/123
39
The means of publication
5.3.20 Direct rules are established in statute books and on the retsinformation
website. The national safety authority website has links to individual laws on
the retsinformation website.
The management of publication
5.3.21 The Ministry of Justice is responsible for determining what should be published
and how it should be published (direct rules).
The way in which the rules are made available:
5.3.22 Both the National Rail Agency Authority and Rail Net Denmark have a
responsibility to facilitate access to national safety rules.
5.3.23 The rules are sorted into topics, e.g. into legislation, authority tasks, etc.
Means to support access
5.3.24 The National Rail AuthorityAgency has nominated contact staff in place to field
questions on the meaning and content of the rules and to receive feedback on
them from users. The National Rail AuthorityAgency have undertaken aninternal review of this process and determined that they were under-resourced;
in consequence more staff were engaged. Every area/topic has a contact
person responsible for the area in question.
5.3.25 The support available from the National Rail AuthorityAgency includes technical
support and it is available free of charge. Views on the value of the technical
support vary, one freight railway undertaking considers that these arrangements
work well and that accurate information is available in a timely manner, both by
telephone and by e-mail, a passenger undertaking prefers to rely on its own
staff.
Control mechanisms to oversee access
5.3.26 There is an independent review process to verify that access to the rules is
impartial. This is undertaken by AMWAB (Activity Measurement of a
Companys Administrative Burdens) a technique which is used to examine the
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
40/123
40
administration of public authorities. The AMWAB review has resulted in a
development plan by government to improve access.
Stakeholders views on the ease of access
5.3.27 DSB commented that access has improved in recent years. Railion Danmark
considered that the accessibility of the information is satisfactory, although
some rules are only available in paper form. It found that easiest way to obtain
the rules is to ring up the National Rail AuthorityAgency and ask for them.
Railion Danmark considers that access to the rules is only a user-friendly
experience if you can speak Danish, but notes that a command of the language
is essential in any event to operate safely on the national rail network.
Stakeholders views on access to specific rules
5.3.28 Railion Danmark considers that the accessibility of the information is
satisfactory but both Railion Danmark and DSB said they found it difficult to get
information about local arrangements (these may be outside the scope of the
study). SJ consider that not all of the rules in Denmark are yet available. Two
railway undertakings mentioned the need for good personal contacts.
5.3.29 DSB, Railion Danmark, SJ and First DSB all considered that the clarity of theinformation available in Denmark lags behind that of Norway and Sweden.
5.3.30 The NRA said that its website has a clear structure and that the information is
structured by topic.
The availability of rules
5.3.31 The consultants looked at the Ministry of Transport, the National Rail Authority
and Rail Net Denmark websites, their findings are shown in Appendix E. The
consultants concluded that the rules are all available on electronic data media.
Hard copies of the national safety rules shown in the notification are availablefrom the official journal office.
Languages
5.3.32 The rules are only available in Danish; however, assistance on the rules is often
available in other languages, but this depends on the linguistic competence of
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
41/123
41
the National Rail AuthorityAgency staff member nominated as the contact point
for the area in question. The NRA said that generally information and
guidance can be provided in English.
Support material and technical advice
5.3.33 The NRA said that its website contained a number of guidelines. It also shows
contact details for the NRA.
Comprehensibility of the rules for applying for safety certificates and
authorisation
5.3.34 DSB did not consider that the published requirements for obtaining a safety
certificate are always easy to understand and describes the authorities as
always a step behind. Railion Danmark considers that some of the phrasing
of the transposition of TSI requirements into Danish rules are ambiguous and
have the potential for misinterpretation. However, it found these issues were
easily resolved through telephone conversations with the National Rail
AuthorityAgency. DSB First wanted more clarity.
5.3.35 Railion Danmark considers that the rules are somewhat uneven in quality. A
particular problem is ambiguity in the way that the rules are written, in somecases this is so serious as to amount to inaccuracy. Again however, it
considered that it is easy to resolve these issues with a telephone call to the
National Rail AuthorityAgency.
Comprehensiveness of the content of the notifications in relation to the national
safety rules which are published and made available in the selected countries:
5.3.36 There are two issues here:
Are all the documents listed in the notification freely available?
and,Are there in fact safety rules which have not been made listed in
the notification?
The National Rail AuthorityAgency considers that Article 8(1) of the Railway
Safety Directive is adhered to in Denmark, noting that the information required
is available on the retsinformation website. The Consultants examination of
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
42/123
42
the National Rail AuthorityAgency website appeared to bear this out. Secondly,
neither the respondents nor the consultants were able to identify material which
had not been properly notified at the time of the notification. It should be noted,
however, that the law implementing the Railway Safety Directive
(Bekendtgrelse om gennemfrelse af jernbanesikkerhedsdirektivet) has been
passed since the date of the notification, and the consultants are not aware of a
new notification having yet been made.
5.3.37 The ministry/NSA said that all the national safety rules are published in
accordance with Article 8(1) of the Railway Safety Directive.
Denmark conclusions
5.3.38 Stakeholders were critical of the Danish arrangements, complaining of a lack of
clarity and perhaps of organisation. It seemed as it staffing levels might be an
issue. Nevertheless, the Danish practice of nominating an individual as the
contact for particular issues is good practice (see proposal 7.2.18). Likewise is
the Danish practice of putting draft legislation on a website for consultation (see
proposal 7.2.5).
5.4 Estonia
Estonia introduction
5.4.1 In many respects, Estonia is unique amongst the states in the study. The
railways of Estonia were re-gauged to the 1520mm gauge in the 1940s and the
operating traditions were replaced by those of Soviet Railways. Reponses to
the questionnaires indicate that this still has a significant influence. Technical
standards are still those of the 1520mm railways, indeed the comment was
made that a lot of the documentation was still Russian.
5.4.2 The national notification dated 29 April 2005 was taken as the basis for the
work.
5.4.3 The national safety rules are to be found on the ministry website15 in Estonian
only.
15 http://www.mkm.ee/index.php?id=3593
Comment [ERA7]: NRA commentedthat it is unclear what was meant by this la
sentence.
Field Code Changed
http://147.29.40.90/DELFIN/html/b2006/0003805.htmhttp://www.mkm.ee/index.php?id=3593http://www.mkm.ee/index.php?id=3593http://147.29.40.90/DELFIN/html/b2006/0003805.htmhttp://147.29.40.90/DELFIN/html/b2006/0003805.htm -
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
43/123
43
How national safety rules are established in the national legislation:
5.4.4 Estonia only has direct rules.
The form of the legislative process
5.4.5 The more important safety rules pass through the Riigikogu (the Estonian
Parliament); the less important safety rules are made as regulations by the
Minister of Transport and Communications.
The allocation of responsibilities
5.4.6 Both the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Technical Surveillance Authority
made it clear that it is the ministry which is responsible for the national safety
rules. The Railways Act 2003 (RT I 2003, 79, 530) which entered into force on
31 March 2004 is the prime legal instrument. Chapter 4 of the 2003 Railways
Act covers Railway Traffic and Safety. Whilst the Act was amended (to take
effect on 1 January 2008), the only amendment to Chapter 4 was to change the
name of the national safety authority from its former Railway Inspectorate to
Technical Surveillance Authority.
5.4.7 In Chapter 4, Article 34(2) states that Technical requirements and operatingrules for railway infrastructure and rail vehicles, railway traffic rules and
requirements for railway maintenance, and requirements for rail transport shall
be provided for in the rules for technical use of railways established by the
Minister of Economic Affairs and Communications. The ministry drafts
legislation; in some cases it delegates the drafting of some legal acts (those
that need more technical knowledge) to the national safety authority. Interested
parties are consulted; the principal interested parties are the Technical
Surveillance Authority (the national safety authority), AS Eesti Raudtee (the
main integrated railway), AS Edelaraudtee (the second integrated railway),
Eesti AS Plevkivi Raudtee, and AS Elektriraudtee. These four are the mostsignificant railway companies in Estonia.
5.4.8 Article 34(2) therefore provides the legal basis for the Rules for Technical Use
of Railways (RTL 1999, 127, 1773), Regulation No 39 of the Minister of
Transport and Communications of 9 July 1999. This Regulation was in turn last
amended by Regulation No 15 of the Minister of Economic Affairs and
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
44/123
44
Communications on 13 February 2006. All seven types of national safety rules
are established in this regulation.
5.4.9 The safety authoritys main tasks are surveillance and control. It participates in
monitoring, promoting and developing the rules. It monitors all aspects of the
railway sector, railway traffic, safety, infrastructure, etc.
The management of the rules system
5.4.10 Article 34(5) of the Railways Act requires infrastructure managers and vehicle
keepers to make an annual report to the NSA on compliance with therequirements.
5.4.11 Article 34(6) of the 2003 Railways Act gives the national safety authority the
powers to audit stakeholders. The way this is to be done is not specified. The
national safety authority said the monitoring work is carried out in accordance
with the ministrys plan; the ministry was more specific and said that the
national safety authority reviews the operating rules once a year each April. In
addition to this formal review, the national safety authority said that it monitors
the rules through everyday work. Nevertheless both the Ministry of Economic
Affairs and the Technical Surveillance Authority said that it is the ministry which
is responsible for the national safety rules. However, the ministry did say that
most of the feedback comes via the national safety authority. For feedback
there are formal systems, for example, Eesti Raudtee gives feedback to the
safety authority (by phone) and the safety authority passes this forward to the
ministry.
5.4.12 The safety authority said that events are the main trigger of updates: one
railway undertaking specifically mentioned reports of incidents as a feedback
mechanism. Updating national safety rules in national legislation is the
responsibility of the ministry. Updating is done in accordance with the
ministrys working plan.
5.4.13 Draft rules are sent out to different interested parties (including port authorities),
normally by e-mail, for comments, questions, opinions, etc, and for approval,
before they can be established as binding legislation. It is also possible for
anyone to comment on draft law since it is publicly available and accessible via
Comment [ERA8]: Estonian NSAcommented that railway undertakings or
infrastructure managers give the feedbackabout safety rules through official proposal
(announcements by phone are less
common).
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
45/123
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
46/123
46
The means of publication
5.4.19 Legislation is published online in the State Gazette and legislation since 1997 is
shown on line. All national safety rules are shown on this database. Whilst
legislation is in the process of approval by the various institutions involved, it is
possible to see the drafts in an electronic database: e-igus. Once again this is
managed by the State Chancellery. State institutions (ministry, national safety
authority) put links to the State Gazette on their web sites. Statutes may be
freely downloaded without charge.
The management of publication
5.4.20 Legislation is published in Estonian only, and the responsibility for its accuracy
also rests with the Chancellery. The website suggests that a help function is
available by e-mail in English.
5.4.21 The national safety authority has no official role in publishing rules. However, it
informs undertakings about safety rules, when asked or when it is considered
necessary. Links to legislation (including safety rules) are listed on the
authoritys homepage18. It is also working on guidelines for a regulation on the
safety management system, to make it easier for companies to implement the
system, given that the railway industry needs to know exactly what is required
to be documented.
The way in which the rules are made available
5.4.22 There is a presumption that access to the Internet is the normal and accepted
means of obtaining information on legislation (see paragraph 6.5.4).
Means to support access
5.4.23 There is no formal mechanism to support access to the rules, although the
national safety authority has organised seminars and training. The ministry hasnot organised any such meetings. Railway undertakings, the infrastructure
manager, and the national safety authority are reported to work closely
together.
18http://www.tja.ee/
http://www.tja.ee/http://www.tja.ee/http://www.tja.ee/http://www.tja.ee/ -
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
47/123
47
Control mechanisms to oversee access
5.4.24 In respect of company operating and transport rules (outside scope), the
Technical Surveillance Authority as the institution responsible for monitoring
has a responsibility to check if the rules have been made public and accessible
in accordance with the requirements of the Railway Act.
Stakeholders views on the ease of access
5.4.25 All the respondent railway undertakings said that access to the rules is easy.
Stakeholders views on access to specific rules
5.4.26 There appear to be no infrastructure specific rules and stakeholders made no
comment on the ease of access to specific rules.
The availability of rules
5.4.27 The consultants looked at the Estonian Ministry of Economic Affairs and
Communications and the Estonian Technical Surveillance Authority websites,
their findings are shown in Appendix E. There is no evidence of dissatisfaction
with the way the rules are published. The consultants concluded that the rules
are all available on electronic data media. Hard copies of the national safety
rules shown in the notification are available from the Riigi Teataja (Official
Journal) Office and on the Internet19.
5.4.28 Railway undertakings were satisfied with the access to published rules and
generally found the national safety authority very helpful and co-operative
although Eesti Raudtee said that it depended who you talk to.
Ease of understanding the rules
5.4.29 Subject to the reservations expressed on linguistic issues below, stakeholders
found it easy to get information and believed the information to be up to date
and accurate. The rules were considered to be user friendly.
19 https://www.riigiteataja.ee/ert/ert.jsp
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
48/123
48
Languages
5.4.30 Information published on the Internet is available in Estonian only. A number of
parties specifically referred to difficulties arising from the transition from using
Russian as part of Soviet Railways to using Estonian. Soviet era documents in
Russian have not been entirely supplanted; the Estonian language does not yet
have adequate terminology; and staff sometimes have a better grasp of
Russian than Estonian. The national safety authority said that in addition to
Estonian, support in Russian is also provided.
5.4.31 Smaller railway undertakings have a higher proportion of staff whose first
language is Russian, which can give rise to language problems. Elektriraudtee
therefore asked for all the documentation to be available in Russian.
Support material and technical advice
5.4.32 Guidelines as such are not available. Whilst the ministry said that the state
does not offer special help to new applicants it said that it would help any
applicant if asked. The national safety authority said that there is a commitment
to provide any new applicant with all the help he requires from both the ministry
and the national safety authority. This assistance is provided free of charge,
and links to the contact details of staff members are provided on the homepage
of the Estonian Technical Surveillance Authority. The national safety authority
said that no dedicated helpdesk had been set up because the Estonian railway
industry is too small to support one. The Technical Surveillance Authority also
gives technical advice (also on safety rules) and also conducts seminars on
new legislation.
Comprehensibility of the rules for applying for safety certificates and
authorisation
5.4.33 Respondents said that it is easy to access the rules on the various websites butstakeholders did express some concern about their clarity. The rules were
found to be relevant, accurate and up-to-date. Elektriraudtee said that the
national safety authority is working at making it more easily understandable.
Comprehensiveness of the content of the notifications in relation to the national
safety rules which are published and made available in the selected countries:
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
49/123
49
5.4.34 There are two issues here:
Are all the documents listed in the notification freely available?
and,
Are there in fact safety rules which have not been made listed in
the notification?
The ministry and the national safety authority were clear in their opinion that
Article 8(1) had been fulfilled in Estonia. A further notification was sent in
January 2008. The consultants are satisfied that, all the documents listed in the
notification are freely available. Neither the consultants nor any of therespondents were able to identify material which had not been properly notified
at the time of the notification.
5.4.35 The ministry/NSA said that all the national safety rules are published in
accordance with Article 8(1) of the Railway Safety Directive.
Estonia conclusions
5.4.36 Estonia has first class electronic publication of national law and the comment on
the official journal website (see paragraph 6.4.3) that the Internet is presumed
to be the principal means of making law available, is significant. Stakeholdershowever, were concerned about more fundamental issues such as appropriate
terminology. It can be expected that this will be resolved in due course.
5.5 France
France introduction
5.5.1 France has set up all the bodies required by European legislation but the
processes are still in a state of flux. French railway undertakings did not
provide comprehensive replies, three reasons were evident: SNCF distanced
themselves from any involvement with safety regulation, Thalys declared it hadno safety certificate and was not a proper railway undertaking and Euro Cargo
Rail was too busy to answer anything but a few questions.
5.5.2 The national notification dated 10 May 2005 was taken as the basis for the
work.
-
8/9/2019 Report on Publication and Availability of National Safety Rules
50/123
50
5.5.3 The national safety rules are to be found from links to the statutes on the
national safety authority website20 in French only.
How national safety rules are established in the national legislation:
5.5.4 France has direct and indirect national safety rules. The direct rules go through
the normal legislative process. Under Article 10 of Decree 2006 1279 of 19
October 2006, RFF (the French infrastructure manager) also has powers to
make rules which apply to the national rail network. The indirect rules are
made by the infras