Workshop BeWag UIP

Implementation of certification of entities in charge of maintenance

Jean-Marie DECHAMPS-SAFETY Unit

Brussels 28/04/2014

9.1

Implementation of ECM certification

› Railway Safety Directive 2004/49 (article 14a)› EU regulation 445/2011 (= COTIF ATMF annex A)

› Accreditation scheme including 2 certification schemes for ECMs and maintenance workshops

Legal documents

Timescale for implementation

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Reg 445/2011 art 12(3)31 May 2015End of validity of any MoU ECM certificate

Reg 445/201131 May 2013End of validity of any self-declaration of ECM.Obligation of ECM certification against 445/2011

Reg 445/2011 art 10(1)30 October 2011Notification byMember States(Accreditation, Recognition and/or NSA)

Reg 445/2011 art 12(2) 31 May 2012, • Start of ECM certification

against 445/2011• ECM Certification according

to MoU no longer granted

Entry into force ofMoU ECMcertification

Reg 445/2011Entry into force on 31 May 2011

32 certification bodies

› ECM certificates: 274› 248 certificates against EU Regulation 455/2011› 26 certificates against MoU ECM certification

Still several ECM certificates included in Safety certificates of Railway Undertakings. Still under estimation.No ECM certificate revoked for insufficient competences of ECM but surveillance activities of certification bodies start in 2014.

› Freight wagons maintained by certified ECMs› Evaluation in 2013: Around 70% of registered freight wagons. New

evaluation by ERA in progress.› Fleet of UIP members: More than 90%.

› Certificates of maintenance workshops: 169

Certificates: State end-March 2014

248 ECM certificates – REG 445/2011 – End-March 2013

› April 2012 to end-2013: 16 dissemination workshops in EU, Serbia and Turkey. 60-120 participants per workshop.

› Guidelines published on Agency website. Latest version: September 2013› Organisation of cooperation of certification bodies.› Public database of certificates: ERADIS available on Agency website.› Cooperation with OTIF as EU Regulation 445/2011 = COTIF ATMF annex A

› Agency involved in revision of ATMF and CUV

Agency activities

The implementation of the ECM certification is a success

But there are needs of improvements:› Monitoring of the implementation: Quality of data collected by the

Agency to have a clear and complete image.› Exchange of information between RUs, Keepers and ECMs should be

improved. › Clean-up of national rules addressing maintenance of freight wagons

that might adversely impact the value of ECM certification

Further steps

› Change from certification of ECMs to surveillance of certified ECMs.› Monitoring of the implementation.

› Implementation report by October 2014 according to art 14 of Safety Directive 2004/49.

› Start of the revision process of EU regulation 445/2011 including the extension of scope. › Development of tools for monitoring of implementation based on:

› Surveys of ECMs and partners (keepers, RUs,…). › Regular reporting from NSAs, certification bodies,

accreditation and recognition bodies.› Revision activities

› 2015: Revision of accreditation scheme and certification schemes. New standards ISO 17065 replace EN 45011.

Further steps in 2014 and 2015

Freight Focus Group

• Legal reference: Agency working plan • Initial problems to solve:

1. Insufficient coordination of ERA activities impacting the freight transport considered by stakeholders and NSAse.g. ECM Certification, harmonisation in maintenance, Safety Certification of RUs and IMs, CSM risk assessment and CSM on monitoring, safe integration of wagons (Interoperability), adoption of ETCS, …

2. Management system approach and risk based approach still not adopted.

• Solution: Coordination led by Agency involving Representative Bodies and National Safety authorities.

• Initial area: Harmonisation in maintenance including ECM certification.• Gradual extension to all aspects related to Railway Freight Transport.

Introduction

• Basic assumption: railway is safe today. Change in business structure may impair safety.

• Developments/initiatives in FFG based on a safety assessment AND economic assessment.

• Requests for development addressed by railway actors or public authorities must include justifying factual evidences

• Safety assessment based on› Analysis of accidents and incidents. › Existing reports and publications.› Risk assessments based on a common risk description (FMEA

approach) based on UIP preliminary developments.› Safety aspects already addressed in (inter)national rules or industry

good practises? Do we need to do more or differently?• Economic assessment based on

› Cost Benefit Analysis› SWOT analysis (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat)

Work principles

Making the railway system work better for society.

era.europa.eu