Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa

European Railway Agency
Collection of examples of risk assessments and of some possible tools
supporting the CSM Regulation
[G 1] The hazards are expressed as far as possible at the same level of detail. It can happen
during preliminary hazard analyses that hazards of different levels of detail are identified
(e.g. because during HAZOP's people with different experience are gathered).
The level of detail depends also on the risk acceptance principle that is selected to control
the identified hazard(s). For example, if a hazard is controlled completely by a code of
practice or a similar reference system, more detailed hazard identification will not be
necessary.
[G 2] All the hazards identified during the risk assessment process (including the ones associated
with broadly acceptable risks), the associated safety measures and the associated risks,
need to be registered in the hazard record.
[G 3] Depending on the nature of the system to be analysed, different methods can be used for the
hazard identification:
(a) empirical hazard identification can be used exploiting the past experience (e.g. use of
checklists or generic hazard lists);
(b) creative hazard identification can be used for new areas of concern (proactive
forecasting, e.g. structured "WHAT-IF" studies like FMEA or HAZOP).
[G 4] The empirical and creative methods for hazard identification can be used together to
complement each other ensuring that the list of potential hazards and safety measures when
applicable are comprehensive.
[G 5] As a preliminary step, the hazard identification could start with a brainstorming team where
experts with different competence, covering all relevant aspects of the significant change,
are present. When judged necessary by the experts' panel, empirical methods can be used
to analyse a specific function or operational mode.
[G 6] The methods used for the hazard identification depend on the system definition. Some
examples are given in Appendix B.
[G 7] More information on the hazard identification techniques and methods can be found in Annex
A.2 & E of the EN 50 126-2 Guideline {Ref. 9}.
[G 8] An example of a generic hazard list is given in section C.17. of Appendix C.
2.2.2. To focus the risk assessment efforts upon the most important risks, the hazards shall
be classified according to the estimated risk arising from them. Based on expert
judgement, hazards associated with a broadly acceptable risk need not be analysed
further but shall be registered in the hazard record. Their classification shall be justified
in order to allow independent assessment by an assessment body.
[G 1] In order to help the risk assessment process, the significant hazards can be grouped further
into different categories. For example, the significant hazards can be classified or ranked in
function of their expected severity of risk, and frequency of occurrence. Guidance for such
an exercise is given in CENELEC standards: see section A.2. in Appendix A.
[G 2] The risk analysis and evaluation described in section 2.1.4 are applied on a prioritised basis
beginning with the highest-ranked hazards.
Reference: ERA/GUI/02-2008/SAF Version: 1.1 Page 39 of 105
File Name: Collection_of_RA_Ex_and_some_tools_for_CSM_V1.1.doc
European Railway Agency ● Boulevard Harpignies, 160 ● BP 20392 ● F-59307 Valenciennes Cedex ● France ● Tel. +33 (0)3 27 09 65 00 ● Fax +33 (0)3 27 33 40 65 ● http://www.era.europa.eu