WRITTEN QUESTION E-0584/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Danger to passengers escaping from fires represented by the power supply running alongside underground railway tracks in narrow tunnels without footpaths.
Date: 2003-02-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: accident prevention, common transport policy, technical regulations, transport safety, transport user, underground railway

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/151

system (1), then with Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March
2001 on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (2). These Directives introduced
a procedure for adopting technical specifications for interoperability (TSIs). The first generation of TSIs for
the high-speed system was adopted by the Commission on 30 May 2002 and has applied to all new
projects since 1 December 2002.

Given that the railways have, throughout their history, been developed on a purely national basis,
harmonisation of the rail system is a major undertaking. That is why the Community has chosen a gradual,
step-by-step approach, tackling the top priority issues: loading gauge, track gauge, power supply voltage,
line safety, and operating and maintenance rules.

Achieving interoperability involves a complex migration strategy for each of the technical aspects involved.
The more rapidly the TSIs are available the shorter the transition period will be, especially if the TSIs are
accompanied by appropriate action at Community level.

(1) OJ L 235, 17.9.1996.
(2) OJ L 110, 20.4.2001.

(2003/C 242 E/157)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0584/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Danger to passengers escaping from fires represented by the power supply running alongside

underground railway tracks in narrow tunnels without footpaths

1.
Is the Commission aware that most metro systems for underground public transport in cities work
on an electricity supply carried by a third rail running alongside the rails on which the trains travel, and
that some of these raised electricity rails, although partially covered by wood (Hamburg) or synthetic
material (most cities), nevertheless represent a contact risk which would be fatal to human beings?

2.
Is the Commission also aware that although in the event of fire in metro tunnels caused either by
technical faults or deliberate attempts to cause disasters, passengers must be able to escape quickly, inter
alia because of the rapid burning up of the already scarce oxygen supply in tunnels, no underground
railway tunnels built before 1980 have a special raised footpath for escaping passengers?

Does the Commission recognise that passengers who have to make their escape through old, narrow
3.
tunnels over rails running alongside the live current rail run an unacceptably high risk because they not
only have to escape quickly from the fire, but also have to avoid any contact with the power rail that acts
as a low fence?

4.
Does the Commission agree with me that this is not a purely local problem, but a Community safety
problem of growing importance, which is present in many European cities, and that we cannot wait for
local solutions, which are usually only sought after a disaster has occurred in any given city?

5.
Is the Commission prepared to ensure that before a date to be decided all underground railway
tunnels in the EU must have a safe escape path that is not identical with the railway, and that where
tunnels are too narrow or cannot be widened, the power supply may only come via an overhead cable (as
in the case of a tram or electric train) or through an overhead power rail (like the one in Madrid)?

C 242 E/152

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 2003)

the national and local authorities. Without doubt,

The design of subway systems, to which the Honourable Member refers, remains under the direct
responsibility of
the Commission attributes high
importance to passenger safety. To this end, increased public concern regarding the risks to which the
public is potentially exposed has been addressed by the Commission in the recent ‘second railway package’.
Within the package, the Commission has presented a draft Directive (1) promoting common safety targets
and common safety methods for community railway systems in the Member States, (currently examined by
the Council). The proposed Directive clearly provides a certain margin for Member States in the adoption
of implementation measures for subways, tramways and other light rail infrastructures. It also leaves the
possibility to Member States to extend such safety requirements, to urban rail infrastructures in order to
enforce higher levels of protection.

Furthermore, following the recommendations of a recent study commissioned by the Commission on
‘Obstacles to the Internal Market on Rail Mass Transit’
(RMT) (2), the Commission is evaluating the
possibility of launching a consultation with all the concerned parties on the harmonisation of safety
requirements for RMT installations. This is to ensure that all views are heard before considering whether to
embark on a legislative proposal covering the issue.

(1) OJ C 126 E, 28.5.2002.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/rail_guided_transport/rail_mass_transit.pdf.

(2003/C 242 E/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0585/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Progress towards standardisation and interchangeability of high-speed trains in Europe

How can the Commission be certain that the French LGV-Est, which in 2006 will

1.
link Paris to
Nancy, Metz and Strasbourg, can, as planned, be used in cross-border services not only with modernised
French TGV PDSE, but also with German ICE, equipment?

2.
How can the Commission be certain that the cross-border Perpignan-Figueres route via the Pertuis
tunnel, which is due to be opened in 2006, can be used both by variants of the French TGV and the
Spanish Velaro/AVE S 103 and Talgo 350?

3.
How are the technical specifications of body-tilt coaches, axle drives, couplings, platform height and
maximum speed of high-speed trains geared to each other in such a way that, provided they are equipped
for use with different voltages, they can run on all the high-speed lines in Europe?

4.
Are the recently designed Spanish Talgo 350 and French Elisa/Automotrice à Grande Vitesse the first
trains to meet the standards of complete interchangeability and the highest safety standards, or is this only
true of trains of the next, or a still later, generation?

5.
How is it to be achieved that tracks and rolling stock throughout Europe will in the short term meet
the highest safety standards and be fully interchangeable and accessible? What is the role in this context of
the SNCF, DB and Trenitalia High Speed Europe project, which claims to be working towards one single
type of high-speed train? Why are other European countries with high-speed trains (Spain, Sweden) not
involved in it?

By what date does the Commission expect the results of the project referred to in point 5 to be

6.
available as regards existing equipment, and by what date as regards new equipment?