Cableways Impact Assessment Study - Final Report - saferail.nl

Cableways Impact Assessment Study - Final Report - saferail.nl Cableways Impact Assessment Study - Final Report - saferail.nl

04.07.2015 Views

IA Study Concerning the Revision of the Cableways Directive Summary Based on responses to the questionnaire and information obtained from discussions with stakeholders, it is clear that although some of the generic issues which necessitated the NLF may not be applicable to the cableways sector, there is some recognition and acceptance that some of the NLF provisions could be used to improve the functioning of the Cableways Directive. 4.2.3 Aim of the Intervention The aim of any intervention is to: 1. clarify the obligations of the economic operators (manufacturers, importers, distributors, etc.); 2. update the criteria for notified bodies; and 3. align the safeguard procedure with that given in the NLF. Overall, the intervention is aimed at ensuring the optimal functioning of the internal market and that all consumers can be effectively protected from risks arising from cableways. 4.2.4 Defining the Policy Options Three policy options have been put forward: Option 1 (Baseline): Do nothing; Option 2 (Soft Law): Clarify these issues in the Application Guide to the Directive; and Option 3 (Legislative): Amend the Directive. A comparative review identifying the main differences between the current framework on cableways and the NLF is provided in Annex II to this report. 4.3 Summary of Policy Options A summary of policy options for revision of the Directive or its application guide is provided in Table 4.14. Page 78

Risk & Policy Analysts Table 4.14: Summary of Policy Options Problem area/Issue Problem Area A: Change in the definition of cableways installations/scope of the Directive Problem Area B: Addressing confusion over inclined lifts and small funiculars Problem Area C: Clarifying/amending the definition of safety components, subsystems and infrastructure Problem Area D: Changing conformity assessment of subsystems Problem Area E: Alignment with the NLF: Obligations of Economic Operators Problem Area F: Alignment with the NLF: Criteria for Notified Bodies Problem Area G: Alignment with the NLF: Safeguard Procedure Description of problem to be addressed There may be new kinds of installations which are designed for leisure purposes but may also serve a transport function, i.e. the Directive may be unsuited to market developments or there may be grey zones with regard to its scope The legal distinction between inclined lifts and small funiculars is clearly set out in the Cableways and Lifts Directive but there may be problems with practical application of these provisions The distinction between safety components, subsystems and infrastructure is not always very clear. The absence of a specific conformity assessment module for subsystems has led to divergent practices The Cableways Directive is to be aligned with the NLF, in particular with the NLF Decision (Decision No 768/2008/EC) Option 1 (No change) No change No alignment with the NLF Option 2 (Soft law, i.e. clarification in the Application Guide) Option A2: Amending the Application Guide to: clarify that a broader definition of cableways is available in Recital 1 of the Directive; and further highlight that cableway installations “designed for leisure purposes but also used as a means for transporting people” are in the Directive’s scope Option B2: Providing more extensive guidance in the Application Guide to the Cableways Directive and amending the Application Guide to the Lifts Directive to underscore the importance of companies formally collaborating with the authorities at an early stage of planning and design Option C2: Clarifying the distinction between these terms in the Application Guide, for example, by introducing a non-exhaustive list of safety components Option D2: Amending the Application Guide to recommend using specific conformity assessment modules for the assessment of subsystems Option E2: Including a description of requirements on economic operators as given in Articles R2 to R7 of the NLF Decision into the Application Guide Option F2: Including a description of requirements on notified bodies as given in the NLF Decision into the Application Guide, e.g. reinforcing information and other obligations on notified bodies and the procedure for their notification (Articles R23, R26 and R28) Option G2: Including a description of safeguard measures as given in Articles R31 to R32 of the NLF Decision into the Application Guide, including the two-stage safeguard procedure Option 3 (Legislative change, i.e. amending the Directive) Option A3: Amending the Directive to: adopt Recital 1 into the legally binding text of the Directive; explicitly state that cableway installations “which are designed for leisure purposes, but could also be used as a means for transporting people” are within the Directive’s scope Option B3: Amending the Cableways Directive to explicitly exempt inclined lifts from its scope. Article 1(6) of the Cableways Directive would read: “This Directive shall not apply to: lifts within the meaning of Directive 95/16/EC, including inclined lifts” Option C3: More explicitly exclude series-produced components from the definition of infrastructure and either: Sub-option C3A: introduce a non-exhaustive list of safety components; or Sub-option C3B: define sub-systems Option D3: Amending Annex VII to the Cableways Directive to allow the use of specific conformity assessment modules for the assessment of subsystems Option E3: Amending the Cableways Directive in accordance with Articles R2 to R7 of the NLF Decision Option F3: Amending Article 16 of the Cableways Directive as well as Annex VIII in accordance the NLF Decision, including revising the procedure for notification of notified bodies and reinforcing information and other obligations on notified bodies Option G3: Amending the Cableways Directive in accordance with Articles R31 to R32 of the NLF Decision, including a two-stage safeguard procedure, where noncompliance is initially dealt with at the national level Page 79

IA <strong>Study</strong> Concerning the Revision of the <strong>Cableways</strong> Directive<br />

Summary<br />

Based on responses to the questionnaire and information obtained from discussions<br />

with stakeholders, it is clear that although some of the generic issues which<br />

necessitated the NLF may not be applicable to the cableways sector, there is some<br />

recognition and acceptance that some of the NLF provisions could be used to improve<br />

the functioning of the <strong>Cableways</strong> Directive.<br />

4.2.3 Aim of the Intervention<br />

The aim of any intervention is to:<br />

1. clarify the obligations of the economic operators (manufacturers, importers,<br />

distributors, etc.);<br />

2. update the criteria for notified bodies; and<br />

3. align the safeguard procedure with that given in the NLF.<br />

Overall, the intervention is aimed at ensuring the optimal functioning of the internal<br />

market and that all consumers can be effectively protected from risks arising from<br />

cableways.<br />

4.2.4 Defining the Policy Options<br />

Three policy options have been put forward:<br />

Option 1 (Baseline): Do nothing;<br />

Option 2 (Soft Law): Clarify these issues in the Application Guide to the<br />

Directive; and<br />

Option 3 (Legislative): Amend the Directive.<br />

A comparative review identifying the main differences between the current<br />

framework on cableways and the NLF is provided in Annex II to this report.<br />

4.3 Summary of Policy Options<br />

A summary of policy options for revision of the Directive or its application guide is<br />

provided in Table 4.14.<br />

Page 78

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!