Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

European Railway Agency Collection of examples of risk assessments and of some possible tools supporting the CSM Regulation then that emergency evacuation from the wagons through windows is much more difficult, which may result in safety requirements that certain windows need to be specially designed to enable evacuation. [G 2] Example of an operational change: it is required that all transports of dangerous goods are banned from running on a line through densely populated areas. Instead, it should therefore run through an alternative route with tunnels, therefore creating different types of hazards. [G 3] Other examples of new hazards that could be identified during the demonstration of the system compliance with the safety requirements can be found in Appendix A.4.3 of the EN 50 129 standard. Reference: ERA/GUI/02-2008/SAF Version: 1.1 Page 50 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
European Railway Agency Collection of examples of risk assessments and of some possible tools supporting the CSM Regulation 4. HAZARD MANAGEMENT 4.1. Hazard management process 4.1.1. Hazard record(s) shall be created or updated (where they already exist) by the proposer during the design and the implementation and till the acceptance of the change or the delivery of the safety assessment report. The hazard record shall track the progress in monitoring risks associated with the identified hazards. In accordance with point 2(g) of Annex III to Directive 2004/49/EC, once the system has been accepted and is operated, the hazard record shall be further maintained by the infrastructure manager or the railway undertaking in charge with the operation of the system under assessment as an integrated part of its safety management system. [G 1] The use of a hazard record for registering, managing and controlling safety relevant information is also recommended by the CENELEC 50 126-1 {Ref. 8} and 50 129 {Ref. 7} standards. [G 2] For example, depending on the complexity of the system, an actor could have one or more hazard records. In both cases, the hazard record(s) is(/are) subject to independent assessment by the assessment body (-ies). For example, one possible solution could be to have: (a) one "internal hazard record" for the management of all the internal safety requirements applicable to the sub-system the actor is responsible for. Its size and amount of management work depends on its structure and of course on the complexity of the subsystem. However, as it is used for internal management purposes, the hazard record does not need to be communicated to other actors. The internal hazard record contains all the identified hazards that are controlled, as well as the associated safety measures that are validated; (b) one "external hazard record" for transferring to other actors hazards and the associated safety measures (that the actor cannot implement fully himself) in compliance with the section 1.2.2. Usually, this second hazard record is smaller and requires less management work (see example in section C.16.4. of Appendix C). [G 3] If it seems complicated to manage several hazard records, another possible solution is to manage all hazards and the associated safety measures covered by the points (a) and (b) above in a single hazard record but with the possibility of two hazard record reports (see example in section C.16.3. of Appendix C): (a) one internal hazard record report, which could even be not necessary if the hazard record is well structured in order to enable independent assessment; (b) one external hazard record report for transferring hazards and the associated safety measures to other actors. [G 4] As explained in section 4.2, at the end of the project when the system is accepted: (a) all hazards that are transferred to other actors are controlled in the external hazard record of the actor who transfers them. As they are imported and managed in the internal hazard records of the other actors, they need not be managed further by the considered actor during the (sub-)system life-cycle; (b) however all the associated safety measures should not be validated in the hazard record for the reasons that are explained in point [G 9] in section 4.2. Indeed, it is useful that the organisation exporting the restrictions of use clearly points out in its hazard record that the associated safety measures were not validated. Reference: ERA/GUI/02-2008/SAF Version: 1.1 Page 51 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
Page 1 and 2: European Railway Agency Collection
Page 23 and 24: INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT System Defin
Page 33 and 34: BOX 1 BOX 2 European Railway Agency
Page 49: European Railway Agency Collection
Page 101 and 102:
European Railway Agency Collection
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105:
show all

Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa

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

Delete template?

Save as template?