[4] Directive 2012/34/EU establishing a single European railway area L343, 14.12.2012 [5] Directive 2008/68/EC (inland transport of dangerous goods) L260, 30.09.2008 Decision 2012/188/EU [6] Regulation (EU) 2016/796 on the European Agency for Railways L138, 26.05.2016 [7] Commission delegated Decision (EU) 2017/1474 on specific objectives for the drafting, adoption and review of technical specifications for interoperability L210, 15.08.2017 Abbreviations Abbreviation Definition ATP Automatic Train Protection CCS Control Command and Signalling COR Common Operational CSI Common Safety Indicator The Agency European Agency for Railways ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System ETCS European Train Control System FOP Fundamental Operational Principles IM Infrastructure Manager MS Member State NIP National Implementation Plan NSA National Safety Authority NSR National Safety Rule OH Operational Harmonisation RFC Rail Freight Corridor RSSB Rail Safety and Standartds Board RU Railway Undertaking SMS Safety Management System SPAD Signal Passed At Danger TSI Technical Specification for Interoperability WG Working Group
The analysis of the NIPs together with the bilateral meetings, on one hand, and the impact assessment on the other hand has made it possible to: Define more clearly the areas for national rules in Appendix I of TSI OPE; Refine the list of open points in Appendix I of TSI OPE; and Establish migration requirements and the timing needed to ensure compliance in chapter 7 of TSI OPE. Finally, the most important conclusion is that the level of implementation of TSI OPE is high. However, in some Member States, there are some inconsistencies in the implementation e.g. some requirements are considered voluntary and are not planned to be implemented and some requirements are implemented through National Rules. These findings have made it clear that stricter migration requirements are needed in order to reach the objective of operational interoperability. In addition, some Member States have still not notified their NIP, which makes it impossible to have an exhaustive view of the general level of implementation of TSI OPE. The NIPs of the following Member States are still missing; Austria; Czech Republic; Greece; Hungary; Luxembourg; Netherlands. National rules Member States through the National Implementation plan had the opportunity to reflect national rules in relation to requirements of TSI OPE. This work is linked to the cleaning-up of national rules. Indeed, in order to facilitate the implementation of TSI OPE, the Agency has developed a strategy to review their national rules in relation to operation. The final objectives of this review were to: Propose the topics for which harmonization would be possible and beneficial for interoperability and/or safety; and the unnecessary rules and to get an idea of the topics for which national rules were still necessary. During a series of bilaterals with Member States held between February 2016 and June 2017, the implementation of TSI OPE, the NIP and the clean-up of national rules linked to operation have been discussed. These meetings were an opportunity to discuss the first inputs in order to revise Appendix I of TSI OPE. Currently, the Appendix I of TSI OPE contains one open point linked to point 4.4 and Appendix B on Common operational principles and rules. Although the fact that TSI OPE contains only one point provides flexibility, this open point is so broad that it could lead to operational barriers due to a large number of very diverse national rules existing in relation to it. The aim of the revision of Appendix I
For communication between signallers and drivers it is the signallers' responsibility to ensure that they are talking to the driver within their control area. This is critical when communication is taking place in areas where communications boundaries overlap. This principle shall apply even after an interruption during transmission. 2.3 Communication content The following messages be used for identification by the different parties. by the signaller: Train ……………… [running number] this is …......…….[control area/location of the signal box] by the driver: this is train …......……. [running number] at ……….[location] Terminology be used in the communication procedure by all the parties: Situation Terminology Term transferring the opportunity to speak to the opposite party ‘Over’ Term confirming that the sent message has been received ‘Received’ Term used to have the message repeated in the event of poor reception or misunderstanding ‘Say again’ Term used to ascertain whether a read-back message exactly matches the sent message ‘Correct’ Term used to indicate that a read-back message does not the sent message ‘Error (+ I say again)’ Term used to keep the other party waiting when there is a temporary break in the communication and the connection is not broken ‘Wait’ Term used to tell the other party that the communication might be broken but should be resumed later on ‘I call again’ Term used to indicate that the message has ended ‘Out’ Standard terminology be used in the communication procedure by all the parties without translation:
Topic for analysis – Principles for checks and tests before departure Name of organisation: TSI OPE in 4.2.3.3.1 specifies that “the RU must define the checks and tests to ensure that any departure is undertaken safely”. Are there any national rules in your Member State related to the checks and tests before departure a RU must perform? (YES/NO) If yes, can you indicate in the second column the name of the test and/or check and a brief explanation of its purpose? N° Name of checks and / or tests Is this check and/or test related to passenger or freight traffic? (Passenger/freight) Purpose and explanation of the check and/or test Comments 1 2 3 4 5 6 Topic for analysis – Emergency evacuation Name of organisation :