Rail Safety & the Railway Safety Directive

1. Rail Safety & the Railway Safety Directive Frank JostSingle European Rail Area EU Commission

2. Outline: • Directive 2004/49/EC • Monitoring safety • Why amend the Safety Directive?

3. Where is rail safety? Interoperability > Dir. 2004/49/EC A common approach to management of safety  C S M C S I C S T (Common safety objectives) < Railway safety Dir. 2008/57/EC Safety is an essential requirement  T S I (design, parameters, construction, maintenance, monitoring, etc.)

4. rule based > < risk assessment 1435 mm, 1668 mm, 1520/1524 mm, 1000 mm 1,5 kV DC, 3 kV DC, 15 kV AC / 16,7 Hz, 25 kV AC / 50 Hz

5. The Railway safety directive: legal framework A common approach to safety:

6. 2. Monitoring safety : The main actors: • Infrastructure managers (IM) and Railway undertakings (RU) are responsible for assessing the risks related to the safe operation of the trains and establishing a safety management system (SMS) • National safety authorities are responsible for Safety autorisation of IM and safety certification of RUs, authorisations of placing in service (under the interoperability directives), and developing/enforcing safety rules • National investigation bodies (investigations on serious accidents) • Entities in charge of the maintenance of vehicles (article 14a) • ERA: monitor safety performance; conducts an annual assessment of the achievement of CSTs and ‘national reference values’ in line with the common safety method in Commission Decision 2009/460/EC

7. Risk is the likelihood of harm resulting from a hazard. It is the combination of the likelihood of an occurrence of a hazardous event and the severity of injury, damage to environment or damage to property that may be caused by the event. Risk can be managed by: - Building knowledge looking at the past (reactively); - Using competences and analysis techniques for foreseen consequences of changes, actions, etc. and for managing the interfaces (proactively) In the railway sector the risk control is integrated into the SMS, supported by risk analysis based on knowledge of the nature of the system for which we must assess the risk. What Is a Risk?

8. 2. Monitoring safety : ERA reporting

9. Long-time trend Fatal train collisions and derailments per billion train-kilometres in 1990‑2013 for the EU-27, Switzerland and Norway

10. Intermodal comparison • Travel by train relatively safe, but comparatively not necessarily as safe as commonly believed • Passenger risk per distance travelled double compared to air travel Fatality risk of passengers using different modes of transport (EU-27 in 2008‑2012)

11. International comparison • Railway safety in the EU relatively high, yet room for improvement exists – when comparing with other jurisdictions • The same applies for the improvements in time Railway fatality risk and passenger fatality risk for the EU-27, USA, Canada, South Korea and Australia in 2007-2012 

12. 2. Monitoring safety : Railway safety remains high, but … • improvement continues to slow. For past three years, stagnating number of collisions, derailments and level-crossing accidents • Limited or no improvements for external casualties (trespassers, level-crossing users, suicides) and no progress in reducing the number of certain accident types • Variation in safety for MSs persist

13. 2. Monitoring safety : Number of fatalities per victim category (2006–2013)

14. 2. Monitoring safety : Relative share of fatalities per victim category among railway and all fatalities (2009–2013)

15. 2. Monitoring safety : Suicide fatalities and unauthorized persons fatalities on EU-28 railways (EU-28)

16. Risk levels in Member States Railway fatalities and weighted serious injuries per million train-km (2007-2012)

17. Why amend the Safety Directive?

18. 3. Why amend the safety Directive? Migration towards a single safety certificate • At present: • Part A (granted in the Member State where the RU first established) • Part B (granted in each Member State where the RU intends to operate) • Future: • a single EU safety certificate valid in the area of operation

19. 3. Why amend the safety Directive?: Safety certificates for railway undertakings: • ERA will grant the Single Safety Certificate to the undertakings operating in more than one Member State. Undertakings operating in only one MS may choose to apply for the safety certificate where they are established or at ERA. • ERA and NSAs shall cooperate for the supervision after the safety certificate is issued. • ERA will be the system authority for ERTMS. It will authorise on –board equipment. • Safety autorisation of the track side equipment will stay with national safety authorities.

20. 3. Why amend the safety Directive?: A central role for the European Railway Agency for vehicle authorisations … • ERA issues vehicle authorisations. Safety authorities may issue if the vehicle is intended for operations in only one Member State. • ERA will be the system authority for ERTMS. It will authorise on –board equipment. • Safety autorisation of the track side equipment will stay with national safety authorities.

21. 3. Why amend the safety Directive? Overview of the current common accident reporting in the EU

22. 3. Why amend the safety Directive? Occurrence reporting • Alert function: ERA will provide an IT application. In case of doubt about safe performance of a part or a component, other experts are alerted. At present: no obligation to collect information on all railway accidents, but on significant accidents and certain events. Moreover, the information about less serious accidents and incidents are not systematically collected at the EU level. This absence may represent an obstacle to efficient learning and early identification of recurring safety issues in the EU railway system.

23. Thank you for your attention ! The long way of the 4th Railway Package …