Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa
Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa
Guidance for Use of CSM Recommendation - ERA - Europa
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
European Railway Agency<br />
Collection <strong>of</strong> examples <strong>of</strong> risk assessments and <strong>of</strong> some possible tools<br />
supporting the <strong>CSM</strong> Regulation<br />
<br />
As stated above, the hazards and their related safety measures were registered in a<br />
hazard record keeping track <strong>of</strong> all identified hazards and safety measures. Hazards<br />
related to risks that were acceptable without measures were however not included in the<br />
hazard record;<br />
(f) independent assessment [Article 6]:<br />
There was no mention <strong>of</strong> an independent assessment within the documents received<br />
related to this significant change.<br />
C.11.7.<br />
The risk assessment example is based on the CENELEC EN 50126 standard and thus<br />
corresponds well with the <strong>CSM</strong> process. The risk assessment in the example fulfils all the<br />
requirements from the <strong>CSM</strong>, with the exception <strong>of</strong> the requirement <strong>for</strong> independent<br />
assessment which was not explicitly clarified within the documents received. Explicit risk<br />
acceptance criteria were used and clearly indicated.<br />
C.12. Risk assessment example <strong>of</strong> an operational significant change –<br />
Driver only operation<br />
C.12.1.<br />
C.12.2.<br />
Remark: this example <strong>of</strong> risk assessment was not produced as a result <strong>of</strong> the application <strong>of</strong><br />
the <strong>CSM</strong> process; it was carried out be<strong>for</strong>e the existence <strong>of</strong> <strong>CSM</strong>. The purpose <strong>of</strong> the<br />
example is:<br />
(a) to identify the similarities between the existing risk assessment methods and the <strong>CSM</strong><br />
process;<br />
(b) to give traceability between the existing process and the one requested by the <strong>CSM</strong>;<br />
(c) to provide justification <strong>of</strong> the added value <strong>of</strong> per<strong>for</strong>ming the additional steps (if any)<br />
required by the <strong>CSM</strong>.<br />
It must be stressed that this example is given <strong>for</strong> in<strong>for</strong>mation only. Its purpose is to help the<br />
reader understanding the <strong>CSM</strong> process. But the example itself shall not be transposed to or<br />
used as a reference system <strong>for</strong> another significant change. The risk assessment shall be<br />
carried out <strong>for</strong> each significant change in compliance with the <strong>CSM</strong> Regulation.<br />
The example is an operational change where the railway undertaking decided that the train<br />
had to be operated by the driver alone (Driver Only Operated – DOO) on a route where<br />
previously there was an onboard guard to assist the driver with the train dispatching.<br />
C.12.3. In comparison to the <strong>CSM</strong> process, the following steps were applied (see also Figure 1):<br />
(a) significance <strong>of</strong> the change [Article 4]:<br />
The railway undertaking per<strong>for</strong>med a preliminary risk assessment which concluded that<br />
the operational change was significant. As the driver had to operate alone, without<br />
assistance, the potential that passengers could be caught between the doors or fall<br />
down on to the track (e.g. if doors are opened on the wrong side) could not be<br />
neglected.<br />
When comparing this preliminary risk assessment with the criteria in Article 4 <strong>of</strong> the<br />
<strong>CSM</strong> Regulation, the change could be also categorised as significant based on the<br />
following criteria:<br />
(1) safety relevance: the change is safety related as the impact <strong>of</strong> requiring a<br />
completely different way <strong>of</strong> managing the operation <strong>of</strong> the train service could be<br />
catastrophic;<br />
<br />
Reference: <strong>ERA</strong>/GUI/02-2008/SAF Version: 1.1 Page 91 <strong>of</strong> 105<br />
File Name: Collection_<strong>of</strong>_RA_Ex_and_some_tools_<strong>for</strong>_<strong>CSM</strong>_V1.1.doc<br />
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