Cableways Impact Assessment Study - Final Report - saferail.nl

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table of Contents 4. OPTIONS FOR REVISION OF THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK (IMPACT ASSESSMENT STEPS 1 AND 2) ...................................................................... 65 4.1 Problems with the Current Directive .................................................................... 65 4.1.1 Defining the Specific Problems ............................................................................ 65 4.1.2 Significance of Each Problem Area ...................................................................... 69 4.1.3 Aim of the Intervention ......................................................................................... 72 4.1.4 Defining the Policy Options .................................................................................. 72 4.2 Alignment of the Cableways Directive with the NLF .......................................... 74 4.2.1 Defining the Specific Problems ............................................................................ 74 4.2.2 Significance of the Problem Area ......................................................................... 75 4.2.3 Aim of the Intervention ......................................................................................... 78 4.2.4 Defining the Policy Options .................................................................................. 78 4.3 Summary of Policy Options .................................................................................. 78 5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS FOR REVISION OF THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK (IA STEPS 3 TO 6) ................................................................ 80 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 80 5.2 IA Step 3: Identification of Relevant Impacts and Key Stakeholders .................. 80 5.3 Assessment of Most Significant Impacts (IA Steps 4 to 6) .................................. 83 5.3.1 Problem Area A: Changing the Definition of Cableways Installations ............... 84 5.3.2 Problem Area B: Addressing Confusion over Inclined Lifts and Small Funiculars …………………................................................................................................... 92 5.3.3 Problem Area C: Clarifying/amending the Definition of Safety Components, Subsystems and Infrastructure ............................................................................................... 100 5.3.4 Problem Area D: Changing Conformity Assessment of Subsystems ................. 106 5.3.5 Problem Area E: Alignment with the NLF: Obligations of Economic Operators ………………………......................................................................................... 110 5.3.6 Problem Area F: Alignment with the NLF: Criteria for Notified Bodies .......... 114 5.3.7 Problem Area G: Alignment with the NLF: Safeguard Procedure .................... 119 6. CONCLUSIONS (SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND COMPARISON OF POLICY OPTIONS: IA STEPS 6 AND 7) ...................................................... 122 6.1 Problem Area A: Definition of Cableway Installations ..................................... 122 6.2 Problem Area B: Confusion over Inclined Lifts and Small Funiculars .............. 123 6.3 Problem Area C: Definition of Safety Components, Subsystems and Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................... 123 6.4 Problem Area D: Conformity Assessment of Subsystems.................................. 124 6.5 Problem Area E: Alignment with the NLF (Obligations of Economic Operators)………………………… ..............………………………………………………124 6.6 Problem Area F: Alignment with the NLF (Criteria for Notified Bodies) ......... 125 6.7 Problem Area G: Alignment with the NLF (Safeguard Procedure) .................... 125 7. REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 126 A1. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT FOR MODULE 1 ....................................... 135 A2. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT FOR MODULE 2 ....................................... 137 Page vi
Risk & Policy Analysts B2. REVIEW OF NLF PROVISIONS .................................................................. 141 B2.1 Stage 1: Identification of Relevant Provisions ................................................... 141 B2.2 Stage 2: Initial Assessment of the NLF’s Potential for Improving the Current Directive ................................................................................................................... 142 B2.3 Stage 3: Summary of Provisions Identified under Steps 1 and 2 and their Practical Implications............................................................................................................. 156 Page vii
Page 1: Ref. Ares(2012)1245393 - 22/10/2012
Page 4 and 5: DISCLAIMER While RPA considers that
Page 6 and 7: Executive Summary market. In additi
Page 8 and 9: Executive Summary Page iv
Page 13 and 14: Risk & Policy Analysts 1. INTRODUCT
Page 15 and 16: Risk & Policy Analysts 2. MARKET SI
Page 17 and 18: Risk & Policy Analysts Figure 2.1:
Page 19 and 20: Risk & Policy Analysts Austria Acco
Page 21 and 22: Risk & Policy Analysts It is of not
Page 23 and 24: Risk & Policy Analysts Western Euro
Page 25 and 26: Risk & Policy Analysts Japan The sk
Page 27 and 28: Risk & Policy Analysts Table 2.12:
Page 33 and 34: Risk & Policy Analysts SME). Taken
Page 35 and 36: Risk & Policy Analysts The industry
Page 37 and 38: Risk & Policy Analysts From the dat
Page 39 and 40: Risk & Policy Analysts SMEs In gene
Page 41 and 42: Risk & Policy Analysts of ski equip
Page 43 and 44: Risk & Policy Analysts Figure 2.6:
Page 47 and 48: Risk & Policy Analysts noted that u
Page 49 and 50: Risk & Policy Analysts cableways ma
Page 55 and 56: Risk & Policy Analysts There are al
Page 57 and 58: Risk & Policy Analysts operation of
Page 59 and 60: Risk & Policy Analysts Other factor
Page 61 and 62:
Risk & Policy Analysts Changes in P
Page 63 and 64:
Risk & Policy Analysts Table 2.34:
Page 65 and 66:
Risk & Policy Analysts From Table 2
Page 67 and 68:
Risk & Policy Analysts Price Change
Page 69 and 70:
Risk & Policy Analysts 2.6.4 Summar
Page 71 and 72:
Risk & Policy Analysts Table 3.1: C
Page 73 and 74:
Risk & Policy Analysts 3.3 Impacts
Page 75 and 76:
Risk & Policy Analysts 3.3.4 Impact
Page 77 and 78:
Risk & Policy Analysts 4. OPTIONS F
Page 79 and 80:
Risk & Policy Analysts Box 4.1: The
Page 81 and 82:
Risk & Policy Analysts The details
Page 83 and 84:
Risk & Policy Analysts Overall, sta
Page 85 and 86:
Risk & Policy Analysts Option 2 (
Page 87 and 88:
Risk & Policy Analysts subject to E
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Risk & Policy Analysts out in Table
Page 95 and 96:
Risk & Policy Analysts Table 5.2: K
Page 97 and 98:
Risk & Policy Analysts One example
Page 99 and 100:
Risk & Policy Analysts At least two
Page 101 and 102:
Risk & Policy Analysts Option A3 (R
Page 103 and 104:
Risk & Policy Analysts The cost of
Page 105 and 106:
Risk & Policy Analysts requirements
Page 107 and 108:
Risk & Policy Analysts may come to
Page 109 and 110:
Risk & Policy Analysts Operating Co
Page 111 and 112:
Risk & Policy Analysts Innovation a
Page 113 and 114:
Risk & Policy Analysts To this end,
Page 115 and 116:
Risk & Policy Analysts respondents
Page 117 and 118:
Risk & Policy Analysts Innovation a
Page 119 and 120:
Risk & Policy Analysts Summary of S
Page 121 and 122:
Risk & Policy Analysts Public Autho
Page 123 and 124:
Risk & Policy Analysts Is the cab
Page 125 and 126:
Risk & Policy Analysts Impact on Co
Page 127 and 128:
Risk & Policy Analysts Option F3:
Page 129 and 130:
Risk & Policy Analysts However, the
Page 131 and 132:
Risk & Policy Analysts 5.3.7 Proble
Page 133 and 134:
Risk & Policy Analysts Public Healt
Page 135 and 136:
Risk & Policy Analysts 6.2 Problem
Page 137 and 138:
Risk & Policy Analysts 6.6 Problem
Page 139 and 140:
Risk & Policy Analysts Commision de
Page 141 and 142:
Risk & Policy Analysts Kaiser (nd):
Page 143 and 144:
Risk & Policy Analysts STRMTG (2012
Page 145 and 146:
Risk & Policy Analysts ANNEX 1 Over
Page 147 and 148:
Risk & Policy Analysts A1. CONSULTA
Page 149 and 150:
Risk & Policy Analysts feedback was
Page 151 and 152:
Risk & Policy Analysts ANNEX 2 Revi
Page 153 and 154:
Risk & Policy Analysts B2. REVIEW O
Page 155 and 156:
Risk & Policy Analysts Table B2.2:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169:
Risk & Policy Analysts the NLF, imp
show all

Cableways Impact Assessment Study - Final Report - saferail.nl

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?