Publishable Final Activity Report
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Project no. TSA-CT-2006-044658
Project acronym: Da.Go.T. Project title: “European Reference Framework on Dangerous Goods Transport”
Instrument: SPECIFIC SUPPORT ACTION Thematic Priority: 6.2 SUSTAINABLE SURFACE TRANSPORT
Publishable final activity report
Period covered: from 01/12/2006 to 29/02/2008 Date of preparation: 04/04/2008
Start date of project: 01/12/2006 Duration:15 months
Project coordinator name: Arch. Maria Nives Riggio
Project coordinator organisation name: Finanziaria Ligure per lo Sviluppo Economico - FI.L.S.E. S.p.A.
Revision [0]
1 CONTENTS
1.1. Summary description of project DaGoT objectives...... 3 1.2. Contractors involved and their role and activities...... 5 1.2.1. FILSE role in DaGoT...... 8 1.2.2. Liguria Region role in DaGoT...... 9 1.2.3. DIST role in DaGoT...... 10 1.2.4. ARMINES role in DaGoT...... 11 1.2.5. REC role in DaGoT...... 11 1.3. Work performed – Description of activities- End result...... 12 1.3.1. WP1 Preparation of dissemination elements and discussing documents for working groups...... 12 1.3.2. WP2 Researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups ...... 12 1.3.3. WP3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshop...... 13 1.3.4. WP4: Evaluating European data, Revising and increasing dissemination elements ...... 14 1.3.5. WP5: Setting up draft report on the activities (White Paper’s rough version).....15 Stakeholders involved – Mapping...... 16 DaGoT started in December 2006 focusing on these main categories of stakeholders:....16 French workshop...... 17 Hungary...... 17 1.3.6. WP6: Final Conference and results evaluation...... 20 1.3.7. WP7:White Paper Final Version...... 27 1.4. Comparison of planned activities and actual work accomplished...... 28 1.5 Conclusion and Recommendation...... 31 1.5.1. Methodology and Approach...... 31 1.5.2. Achievements of DaGoT versus the State of the Art...... 32 1.5.3. Impact of the projects to research, regulation and planning activities and industry...... 32 Appendix 1...... 34 Governance of Dangerous Goods Transport: the need for solution sharing...... 34 A pragmatic approach to cutting DGT risks: the ReLaMP system...... 34 Land transport and the feasibility of non stop monitoring...... 35 Regional scale governance difficulties and the DaGoT project...... 35 Feasibility and governance of DG transport monitoring...... 36 Complex and necessary governance...... 38 European Union and European Regions: indispensable partnership...... 39 Regional, national and European governance...... 39 Some key points to be put into effect as soon as possible...... 40
2 1. Project execution
1.1. Summary description of project DaGoT objectives
Dangerous Good Transport (DGT) represents a risk for people, property and environment in the neighbourhood of Dangerous Good (DG) flows. A lack of environmental regulation to save human life and to protect environment is in place in front of other branches of human activities. Of course it must be recognized that the modal regulations represents a good safety legislation but for their own nature they can’t regulate territorial risks: for modal legislation there is no difference between a truck crossing an high population density city and a desert land. DaGoT project recognized that practical problems which are currently faced by DGT stakeholders are the following. To define the technology and the methodology to track, to monitor and to control in real-time DGT under a safety and security shared perspective. To use common, shared criteria and methodologies to manage and to plan DGT, under a sustainable development and risk-based perspective, taking into account the characteristics of the territory To use common strategies and criteria to prevent accidents, and to manage interventions after an accident. To identify normative requirements in order to harmonize EU legislation on DGT To set up a safe and economically feasible strategy for shifting DGT from roads toward rail and sea, accordingly to European politic on Sustainability Development in Transport. In this context establishing a concrete policy on DGT is a hard work: due to several reasons (environmental, orographic, territorial social etc…), Liguria represents a crucial and interesting case study from a sustainable development and risk-based context, but it is not unique: so it is convenient to face these problem within a shared EU vision. Liguria Region has developed ReLaMP Project to define an ICT Platform System for planning and monitoring DGT, and for communication inside Different Authorities during accidents, achieving results through a Demonstration System. Also starting from this Demonstration System the operational full scale solution, taking into account the problems that heavily impact on the effectiveness and smartness, will recognize that DGT management, which can not only be faced at regional scale, is an international matter. Similar project have also been developed in Italian territory: the SIMAGE project tested on the district of Venice, Bari, Brindisi and TMD-NIS Interreg- Alcotra Project tested on Liguria and PACA Region. Unfortunately, as discovered during previous projects realized by some partners, FILSE, Liguria Region, Dist and Armines, practical and operative solutions for the practical problems seen above finalized to minimize risk for people and environment can be taken only inside a clear regulatory frame and into a shared knowledge, at least into the European contest. Without a shared knowledge, operative solutions are too much expensive and don’t have a good results and, over all, there is the real risk to have a great number of particular rules, defined at regional or municipal level. The single travel by land will became a difficult puzzle in which one must combine too much different aspect. These topics are deeply described in documents of kick off meeting, in and in the document Governance of Dangerous Goods Transport: the need for solution sharing, (appendix 1) presented for the Final Conference and in the White book. The goal of the DaGoT project is "to stimulate international cooperation as regards sustainable development and risk management in DGT, among players (decision makers, local public authorities, transport companies, infrastructure owners) and stakeholders,/ researchers, control authorities, like Police or Fire Brigade, providers of technology and training institutions”) to improve DGT management. The “fil rouge” of DaGoT is “sharing knowledge, sharing criteria, sharing safety, sharing security.”
3 This goal was viewed under a two-folded perspective: To stimulate international cooperation as regards sustainable development and risk management in DGT, by the exchange of experiences and by the production of a comprehensive European Reference Framework (DGT-ERF) to support decisions. To identify shared strategies, based on the integration of common knowledge, coming from different actors related to DGT to control, manage and plan DGT. A DGT European Working Group (DGT-EWG) appeared a good idea to exchange idea, experiences and to construct shared operative strategies At the moment, there is a deep lack of knowledge of DGT flows on the European regions, and there is not a shared strategy to control, manage and plan DGT flows in the different modalities. In addition, in many cases, there is not an integrated coordination among the different public and private actors which should work at a sustainable definition of DGT flows and at the related risk management both in a pre-event and post-event accident scenario. Moreover, there is a large number of users that are interested in DGT information under a control, management and planning perspective. These users can be grouped in three wide categories: public authorities, (also include Police for traffic and security control and institutions related to civil and environmental protection - such as for example Fire Brigades, Environmental Agencies and Health Authorities) transport infrastructure owners, and private transport operators.
There is an obvious need of technologies, policies, researches in this field. But more concretely the immediate needing is: to start from the practical knowledge of DGT flows in the different modes throughout European regions,, strictly connected to every high traffic street and/or every high density or fragile area to define regulation requirements and operational actions to minimize risk between different countries So the DaGoT project gives particular attention to specific objectives: methodological and technologic objectives; operational objectives; participatory and policies objectives, including legal requirement.
So the project pursues dissemination and exploitation of results already achieved in other projects and collecting best practises. The experiences will be compared and discussed.
In DaGoT project, the terms methodologies/ methodological are used as referred to: General criteria to approach, to model and hopefully to solve DGT problems such as shared safety, shared security, DGT risk definition risk assessment risk evaluation , continue monitoring, discontinue monitoring, Decision Support System, Data and Concept sharing, Inter-modal Good Freight Planning; participatory and policies objectives, normative requirement Application criteria derived from general criteria listed above and operational indicator to assess: risk, security, safety, DGT flows, etc. while industrial and environmental risks have well-assessed, standardized definitions, models, and SW, for DGT we have a more difficult task for additional probabilistic components.
In DaGoT project, the terms technologies/technological are used as referred to hardware and software systems allowing the effective exploitation of the methodologies quoted above, such as: technologies for DGT real-time tracking, monitoring and control, with special reference to transport on road. For instance: active tracking/monitoring systems (each truck is equipped with specific ICT); passive tracking/monitoring systems (specific ICT is on the infrastructure), sensor data fusion for payload monitoring, the revolution scenario that will be introduced by the Galileo system, image/video analysis for traffic monitoring and for DG identification.
4 Software platform for DGT risk analyses and assessment. Current and future ICT can and must, sensibly contribute to reduce the uncertainty aspect in risk analyses and assessment. Software platform for Decision Support Systems (DSS) in DGT planning and management in long time horizon - for example for the definition of production, depot, and distribution facility locations - and for manage DGT in medium-short time horizon - for example daily deliveries and related routing computation of transportation on road. Standardisation and harmonisation is required in EU specially on: real-time GIS and database technology; optimization techniques, generally formalized as multi-objective problems, where one of the most relevant objective is risk minimization. E-learning techniques and training by simulation: pervasive and mobile technology for continuous training of drivers and pilots, simulators for testing driver skills and efficiency. Simulators to investigate risk scenarios and to train planners to risk-based rather than cost-based delivery.
DaGoT project supports a bottom-up approach, starting from user need definition acquired directly on the territory. It has been done by the organisation of three local workshops and by a final conference. To reach the goal and the objectives, DaGoT Partners acts as: a study group (task force) working on preparing information, data , strategies, methodologies, best practises and so on to be discussed in the Workshop a contact group identifying stakeholders and inviting them to the Workshop and inside EWG collectors of data, information, operational actions, and so on by the exchange and integration of experiences inside EWG writers of the White Paper describing ERF The progress of the project work can be measured against: number of person and organisations that will be involved in the project the amount of knowledge reached at the end of the project versus the initial knowledge
1.2. Contractors involved and their role and activities
Participants list: Partic. Partic. Participant Participant Country Date Date exit Role No. organisation name short name enter project project CO 1 Finanziaria Ligure per Lo FILSE ITALY 1/12/2006 29/2/2008 sviluppo Economico SpA CR 2 Regione Liguria REGLIG ITALY 1/12/2006 29/2/2008 CR 3 Dipartimento di DIST ITALY 1/12/2006 29/2/2008 Informatica Sistemistica e Telematica – Università di Genova CR 4 The Regional REC HUNGARY 1/12/2006 29/2/2008 Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe CR 5 Ecole des Mines de Paris ARMINES FRANCE 1/12/2006 29/2/2008 – Pole Cindyniques
5 The project have had a group of partners able to guarantee the territorial contact with the project areas and to construct the core of the EWG unit, having different knowledge and experiences inside themselves. So it had been possible to have different capability and every partner could help the others in acquiring a more complete vision. It has been decided to choose an interlocutor partner in specific areas, in order to be able to perform in that area the complete analysis of the context, guaranteed by the plurality of the entities which will be involved during the elaboration workshop. FILSE and Liguria Region took the duty to organize workshop in Brussels, because Liguria has an office here, just devoted to international contact. The work of analysis and study about the main themes had been jointly performed to guarantee the effectiveness. In Liguria Region, 3 entities able to perform such analysis and consequently construct the ERF to spread are singled out: FI.L.S.E., Regional Agency for Economic Development, the project leader, in charge of the management activities, DIST, the University department, dealing with dangerous goods freight, able to guarantee the right technological skills the Ente Regione Liguria, providing the expertnesses about the transport and territory policy, and legal and operative planning skills.
Finanziaria Ligure per lo Sviluppo Economico - FI.L.S.E. S.p.A., is a special purpose firm of Liguria Region for the implementation of its strategies and operative objectives. Its experience both in the financial activity fields, marketing of the territory and complex project management, is, vocationally, able to dialogue with every element in the cycle of goods, through a financial and territory view. FI.L.S.E., is the usual connection place of the different territory and financial requests, and, because it developed the ability to interact with several entities - with a particular attention to industrial entities and municipalities - and to manage complex projects connecting different entities and different matters. FI.L.S.E. did also manage the ReLaMP project the results of which are one of the strongholds of diffusion, jointly to other projects.
Regione Liguria is a regions of the Italian Republic , that is divided into Regions, Provinces and Cities. (Constitution of the Italian Republic, Section V, Art. 114). Each Region has a statute which, in harmony with the Constitution and with the laws of the Republic, establishes regulations relating to the internal organisation of the Region. The statute regulates the exercise of the right to initiative and referendum on laws and administrative measures of the Region and the publication of regional laws and regulations (Constitution of the Italian Republic, Section V, Art. 123).The Statute of the Liguria Region was approved on 5th May 2005 by a law of the Republic, recites: Liguria Region makes the fundamental choices for its Community development , has legislative, administrative, planning and coordination functions The involved “Environment” and “Transport” Regional Departments had addressed the activities according to the government and governance needs of the territory, and giving special support in legal question (because they are skill not only in law application but also in preparing Regional laws) and in planning problems. A special mention must be done on “Casa Liguria”, the place for relations with EU institutions, for promotion of economic and cultural resources of Liguria, for international meetings and for the development of cooperation projects. The Brussels office of the Regional Authority (Regione Liguria – sede di Bruxelles) is the coordinator of Casa Liguria. Casa Liguria plays a key role in enhancing relationship between Regione Liguria and European Union and developing Ligurian policy on internationalisation. Casa Liguria staff organized the Brussels meeting and helped the project about contact with EU strictures, and others representative in Brussels.
The DIST (Department of Computer science, Systemic and Telematic) of the University of Genoa is a research centre that works at Information Engineering frontier: new methodologies are
6 increased using integration between control and transmission systems, in multimedia environments at different levels of interaction with human operator. The DIST has developed researches on the monitoring of Dangerous Good transportation trucks in Italy with Intermode company and in the INTERREG III A ALCOTRA program in collaboration with the Pôle Cindyniques/ARMINES . In this context, the partners of this project have developed a SDSS for the management of HAZMAT road transportation and for the risk assessment. DIST had supported the project about the technical and scientific main themes.
The two Partners out of Liguria Region are:
The Pôle Cindyniques of Ecole des Mines de Paris / ARMINES was created in 1998. The Pôle Cindyniques aims to formalise and unify the knowledge in the field of risk prevention and crisis management. The laboratory conducts research in close partnership with industrialists, public authorities and the European Union. In the context of Dangerous Good transport, the Pôle Cindyniques has developed a prototype of identification and recognition of HAZMAT transport orange plate in collaboration with the highway company ESCOTA. This prototype aims to provide data for ESCOTA and for the public authorities.
The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) is a non-partisan, non- advocacy, not-for-profit international organisation with a mission to assist in solving environmental problems in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The center fulfils this mission by promoting cooperation among non-governmental organisations, governments, businesses and other environmental stakeholders, and by supporting the free exchange of information and public participation in environmental decision making. The REC was established in 1990 by the United States, the European Commission and Hungary. Today, the REC is legally based on a charter signed by the governments of 29 countries and the European Commission, and on an international agreement with the government of Hungary. The REC has its head office in Szentendre, Hungary, and country offices and field offices in 17 beneficiary countries, which are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey. Main mission of REC is to facilitate environmental dialogue, networking and regional cooperation.
In the initial steps, every involved entity of the Italian partnership, FI.L.S.E., Dist and Regione Liguria, had built up communication materials for sharing experiences. At the same time, with the support of the foreign partners the list of the possible interlocutors in the chosen areas had been studied in depth. With the support of the foreign partners, FI.L.S.E. played the role of promoter and connector of the various requests from the territory. The workshops organized by the local partners, are a link and coordination moment, by which the project starts a relationship with other Entities and Organizations. Also in this case, the project structure foresees the studies in depth and analysis following every territorial workshop. The most part of such work is performed by the three Italian partners, under the coordination of FI.L.S.E. in order to guarantee a joint view. It is then evaluated jointly with the other partners and workshop participants in order to assess the sharing of the performed analysis. A more detailed description of partners jobs is presented in the following paragraphs and hereafter is presented the synoptic table for the presence of the partner in the WP. Generally there was a good collaboration and opinion exchange happened all along the WPs.
7 Work- Workpackage title Lead Scheduled More Collaboration package contrac Participants encountered during the No tor project
1 Preparation of dissemination elements FILSE FILSE, Liguria REC, ARMINES and discussing documents for working Region, DIST groups
2 Researching and choosing target FILSE FILSE, Liguria operators/players to set up working Region, DIST, REC, groups ARMINES
3 Analysing European area and Liguria FILSE, Liguria implementing Workshop Region Region, DIST, REC, ARMINES Armines was the leader for Workshop in France, REC for Budapest Workshop, Liguria Region for Brussels
4 Evaluating European data. Revising and FILSE FILSE, Liguria REC, ARMINES increasing dissemination elements Region, DIST
5 Setting up draft report on the activities DIST FILSE, Liguria (White Paper’s rough version) Region, DIST
6 Final Conference and results evaluation Liguria FILSE, Liguria REC Region Region, DIST
7 White Paper Final Version DIST FILSE, Liguria Region, DIST
8 Results dissemination FILSE FILSE, Liguria REC, ARMINES Region, DIST
1.2.1. FILSE role in DaGoT
FI.L.S.E. managed the entire project and developed its own documents using firstly the results of its own project (ReLaMP) and the experiences of the Italian Partners and then the results gained in every WP activity, to increase knowlwdge on the matters of the project. Knowledge was used also as a check of performances and thus granting the possibility to reconsider the operational tools which have been adopted, and over all to increase the common knowledge of the project. In this way, with a centralized management availing itself of competent specific supports, the project can allow the inclusion of external Entities and Organizations even during the Final Conference, in order to increase the EWG group ant the areas involved in the project. In order to guarantee an efficient flow of project resources, FI.L.S.E. managed the financial part of project cover the operational and functional costs done by involved subjects (partners and experts invited to the meetings). In particular FILSE role consisted on: coordinating the all of activities of the entire project organizing mission to participate to workshops organizing Brussels workshop and Final Conference
8 Regarding the activities carried out, it can be said in a general manner that Regione Liguria, DIST, REC and ARMINES, coordinated by FI.L.S.E., contributed with their technical skills to reach the project objective and REC and ARMINES worked up the local workshops to allow meetings between players of different areas, and at the same time supported the project with their particular experiences: for instance REC used its special experiences into the international cooperation and Armines its good knowledge of the French experiences in regulatory matter on Dangerous Good.
The role of FILSE was also to assure that the DaGOT vision would be the more complete as possible, forwarding operative, concrete action: so during all the project FILSE continued its contact at Italian and regional Level with very different stakeholder, over all in Industrial field, making also a dissemination work of the reached Knowledge. FILSE has been involved in the following WPs and tasks: WP 1: Preparation of dissemination elements and discussing documents for working groups. The objective of this WP is to identify and organize the activities to be performed in order to re- cognize the main issues related to Dangerous Goods Transport (DGT). A kick off meeting was or- ganized for Partners and a special report was done for this meeting, hold in Genoa. WP 2: Researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups. WP 3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshops WP 4: Evaluating European data. Revising and increasing dissemination elements WP 5- Setting up draft report on the activities WP 6: (Final Conference and results evaluation WP 7: White Paper Final Version WP8 results dissemination During the 7th WP, DIST has complete the White Paper "European Reference Framework for Dangerous Goods Transport". It contains the following sections:
1.2.2. Liguria Region role in DaGoT
Liguria Region was involved in all the Wps with a special role in WP 3 (Analysing European area and implementing Workshop) as a leader, helping to identify the most useful matter and particularly Liguria was responsible for identifying and organising the DaGoT – Northern workshop was organised on 2007 in the Casa Liguria and in WP6 Final Conference and results evaluation. To briefly highlight its role a very special contribution of Liguria in every task was: Law and rules expertise inside environmental, and logistic and also on general jurisprudence when DaGoT encountered needing of a deep comprehension in other legal and general fields, like State and Regional competences, international legislation on transport, real possibility of making a regional law…. practical knowledge needing by a Public Entities for Governance of the DGT question on a regional and local scale relationship with other Regions Office for informations and ideas exchange making the “governance conclusion” of the project and envisaging the real possibilities of new activities
9 1.2.3. DIST role in DaGoT
DIST is the Scientific and technological Italian Partner of DaGoT. Its role is presented for every WPs
WP 1: Preparation of dissemination elements and discussing documents for working groups.
The objective of this WP is to identify and organize the activities to be performed in order to recognize the main issues related to Dangerous Goods Transport (DGT). DIST contributed to set up adequate documents in order to promote the development of the project’s goals and the widest dissemination of knowledge from the project involving different kinds of public and private subjects.
WP 2: Researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups.
The plan is expanded in the identification of the main users involved in a sustainable development and risk management and in the decision making processes in DGT. DIST identified relevant decision-making situations and objectives for the assessment of DGT strategies. Finally, the partners have classified the basic elements of the projected content they have to disseminate to each of the potential user groups identified.
WP 3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshops
Main objective of this Workpackage was to show possibilities for an comparison and integration of available knowledge related to DGT from a political, technological and normative viewpoint in the three main area of the project (East, West and South Europe). DIST have participated to the different workshops which have been organized in order to compare the planning and decision making processes related to DGT in the different States and to gather recommendations that are best to use in different situations.
WP 4: Evaluating European data. Revising and increasing dissemination elements
The data and information presented by the partners during the Workshop are collected in order to maximize the most effective dissemination efforts to equally reach all the designated target audiences through the three workshop events. DIST have implemented, realized and maintained the www.dagot.eu website in order to disseminate project results and to stimulate international cooperation. The presentations performed during the workshops and the Memorandum of Understanding can be downloaded at the website www.dagot.eu.
WP 5-6: Setting up draft report on the activities (White Paper’s rough version) and Final Conference and results evaluation
DIST, during the final meeting, has presented the rough version of the White Paper "European Reference Framework for Dangerous Goods Transport" and has encouraged invited persons and lecturers to provide contributions related to significant case studies to insert in the final version of White Paper in order to present and complete the current scenario related to DGT. This White Paper’s rough version can be downloaded at the website www.dagot.eu.
WP 7: White Paper Final Version
During the 7th WP, DIST has complete the White Paper "European Reference Framework for Dangerous Goods Transport". It contains the following sections: 10 Section I: Introduction This section presents the general objectives and goals of DaGoT project and DGT related problems. Governance and legal aspects on DGT are deeply explored with particular attention to DGT legislation, institutional framework, DG flows in the different territories. Section II: Methodological And Technological Aspect In this section methodological and technological approaches are described and implemented to detect, to track, to monitor and to control in real-time DGT under a safety and security shared perspective. Emphasis was given to risk based methods and technologies to manage DGT on road, with special reference to petrol products. Section III: Case Studies This section provided a collection of case studies related to DGT in the different European States that characterize international transportation project in DGT describing their institutional challenges, and identify strategies in successful DGT project implementation. Information regarding these projects was developed directly by representatives of public and private project partners.
WP 8: Results dissemination
DIST contributed to disseminate DaGoT results via a number of channels: - the website www.dagot.eu - It has participate to the four workshops in 1) French Europe Workshop at the Ecole des Mines des Paris, Pole Cindynique, 19-20 march 2007, Sophia Antipolis 2) Eastern Europe Workshop at REC, 31 May- 1 June, Budapest 3) West Europe workshop at Casa Liguria, 4 October 2007, Brussel 4) Final Meeting at Regione Liguria, Genoa. - DIST has realized the final version of The White Paper "European Reference Framework for Dangerous Goods Transport". In particular it will be distributed in hard copies to the widest possible area, among all participants in the Dangerous Goods process. The final version will be sent to the European Commission and it will be available at the www.dagot.eu website and finally it will be published by a Lavoisier editor.
1.2.4. ARMINES role in DaGoT
ARMINES was involved in the following WPs and tasks: WP2: researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups WP3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshop WP4: Evaluating European data, Revising and increasing dissemination elements
ARMINES was responsible for indentifying and organising the western DaGoT workshop and the ARMINE project team focused expecially in particular project developed on DGT monitoring and on Institutional aspect, as to say the operative actions taken by Municipalities, Department and Region in France to manage DGT risks.
1.2.5. REC role in DaGoT The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern of Europe as a partner in DaGoT project was involved in the following WPs and tasks: WP2: researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups WP3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshop WP4: Evaluating European data, Revising and increasing dissemination elements
11 The REC was responsible for indentifying and organising the eastern DaGoT workshop and the REC’s project team focused on cities located along the corridor 5th1 in the two countries (Koper - Ljubljana - Maribor - Budapest). The DaGoT - Eastern Europe workshop was organised on 31st May-1st June 2007in the REC Head Office premises, Szentendre, Hungary. 1.3. Work performed – Description of activities- End result
1.3.1. WP1 Preparation of dissemination elements and discussing documents for working groups The objective was to facilitate the communication by preparing an information dossier of the experiences performed by the check and monitoring of the dangerous goods transportation. Basing on this data the dossier illustrate the needs for planning technologies and programs and possible regulatory interventions. The dossier facilitates dialogue and transfer of experiences in the area in which the workshop is performed through the preparation of tools to support comparison (check list of themes to be faced). FILSE, DIST and Regione Liguria worked out this document, according to the experiences performed in the ReLaMP project, the SIMAGE project and the TMD-NIS Interreg IIIA Alcotra Project. Particular attention was given to the technological and regulatory aspects, and in particular to the relationship with the themes of the environmental risk for the territory. The “check lists” to lead the discussion was prepared, also considering the various aspects connected to the different transport subjects, and a list of this subject was prepared. Report “Main problems of Dangerous Good Freight and strategy and technology to face them in Liguria Region” contains the results of the projects, the main focused problems in form of list. Useful for communication was the table presented the “possible” stakeholders. A Kick off meeting of all the partners was done in 18/12/2006: it was not in the scheduled activities, but the partners agreed that it was better to meet each others to facilitate communications.
1.3.2. WP2 Researching and choosing target operators/players to set up working groups Of course to identify the “right” interlocutors to be called for the workshops was one of the most important moment of the project. Criteria for invitations were their relevance because of their position and activity, their capability to offer a representative scenario about the envisaged solutions and strategies of their area or the relevance of their experience. In the first two meetings special attention was kept to the regulatory and technological aspects. Through the " interface partner" the organizations involved in the dangerous goods freight, territorial bodies, financial payers, manager networks etc…. had been identified. A complete “panel” of the tasks and the themes of the workshop was structured and be introduced with the purpose to obtain the greatest effectiveness about the exchange of experiences.
As expected, when a re examination of the results was performed, the plans of the workshop topic and of its purposes had been reformulated. The sharing the knowledge and enrichment of experiences led to a reformulation of matters to be faced. For the third meeting Liguria Region and Filse, basing on the very interesting results of Budapest and Sophia Antipolis, the contact with DaGoB project decided to shift the attention on governance themes, and tried to have institutional figure of Public Administration.
1 5th transport corridor (East-West) goes through Venice - Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana - Maribor - Budapest - Uzhhorod - Lviv - Kiev. 12 During this work it emerged that a lot of solutions and experiences had been done on DGT and the real possibility to obtain a complete mapping of Organization involved was impossible. The fields under study were much more larger than the initial analysis. At the same time governance and legal question became to appear as the main questions. Two face approach to safety emerged: the control approach, based on strengthening of modal regulation application and emphasis on environmental laws connecting transport to environmental characteristics of land and population density. Contacts that Filse was having inside public and private operator inside the “industrial stakeholder” , - Port Authority, Industrial Associations, Researchers, and firms operating on the side of transport and on electronic System and furniture for monitoring - the study of experiences of other pro- jects (studying DaGoB documents and a large report about DGT in French PACA Region confirmed it), a deep analysis of Liguria Region participants on the legal framework, confirmed that gov- ernance was the most important problem.
1.3.3. WP3: Analysing European area and implementing Workshop The Objectives of this WP were: Acquiring reciprocal knowledge about the strategic themes of the dangerous substances freight, by sharing knowledge and action strategies producing a mapping draft of Organizations and Arguments finding best or good practices of different typologies butr finalized to manage DGT risks.
Of course every workshop had been useful to focus the topics of the next workshopm, or the final conference by enriching them with the emerged contents. It had been organized three workshops in different European areas to allow the meeting between the main local operators/responsible/experts invoved in dangerous good transport. Armine organized the French meeting in Sophia Antipolis, REC the Budapest Meeting and Casa Liguria (Brussels Office of Liguria Region) supported by Filse the brussels Meeting In every workshops Partners presented of the results of the ReLaMP project, and The TMD-NIS Interreg IIIA Alcotra Project, and also the “state of the art” of their knowledge, highlighting problems and the most critical questions. At the same time Every workshop analysed the problems of general nature connected with dangerous good transport and of the possible/actual strategies prospected in each area. The themes were analyzed in depth both from the “policy and territory” point of view and the technological one. Data about possible projects and/or strategies of every area were acquired. WEST EUROPE: The workshop was organized by ARMINES in Sophia Antipolis ESTERN EUROPE: The workshop was be organized by REC in Szentendre NORTH EUROPE The workshop was organized at “Casa Liguria”, the Liguria Region Center in Brussels Looking back one can see that the greatness of arguments appeared in a very strong way till the France meeting and it toock the Partners to diminish the spreading of the area interested by the metting: a deep approach was preferred to a large approach. In fact it emerged that technological problems were less problematic than governance and legal ones, and in Brussels and in the Final Conference this fact was confirmed by almost all reports. Particularly for the Brussels workshop it was tried to have the state of the art in the matter of legal instance versus technological problem and from DG TREN was invited Mr Laakso of DG TREN. When he confirmed its participation, FILSE and Liguria Region prepared one intervention devoted to the opinions emerging on governance and legal problems on DGT. So we had at the same time
13 our opinions full confirmed and we learnt the name of experts that inside National Governments (particularly French and Germany, but also Italy, are working out on the legal question). We discovered also that technological problems for monitoring travels are today completely solved because the monitoring of alive animals transport are yet regularized by law and the problem posed from monitoring point of view are the same. In a certain sense Brussels was a comparison meeting: the regional scale vision and the EU scale vision were put on the table. DaGoT project was based on the fact that DGT is a “glocal” problem: the most significant and influencing decisions are taken at a global scale, while the risks are local: so the needing to have also a bottom up approach was confirmed. By the end of every workshop the effectiveness of its structure was discussed, and possible suggestions to ameliorate the introduced documentation structure and the future workshops was collected. The best methods to stay in touch and to send each other the respective considerations before and after the final Conference was the discussion of the result for preparing the next events. We are very proud that now a discussion about the most significant topic for a new operative project is now under discussion and new relevant participants are now present in this discussion, thanks to the good works of contact and discussion made all along the project.
1.3.4. WP4: Evaluating European data, Revising and increasing dissemination elements
The Objectives of this WP was structuring the collected information for the final Conference and for the preparation of the White Paper and reviewing the materials for the final Conference according to the new information. At the end of each workshop, a back office work was done in which the mapping activities and best/good practice analysis will be performed by organizing the collected material inside the main project themes. New investigation and data acquisition was performed both at national level and in the interested area, after the drawing up of the workshop report. For the Final Conference Brussels meeting was very important because it was understood that Governance of DGT was the principal matters, and also we individuated themes we didn’t touch before. Thanks to the help of Mr. Laakso and Mr. De Bock, we entered in touch with international experts, and thanks to the fact that the Partners, particularly FILSE and Liguria Region highlighted also themes different from monitoring, a good planning of the Conference arguments was done. Also new themes were presented: for instance the influence of new regulations on Dangerous Substance as Mrs. Paola Di Prospero exlained in her speech about the new GHS classification of chemicals . For every arguments were chosen the experts to be invited. A very small exposition space was re- served for the Partners because it was decided to reserve the greatest time to learn from the Guests. By the way it must be noticed that a Draft of the White Book was distributed in the Con- ference, and on the web site were already at disposal the most interesting documents of the pro- ject. It was a wonderful surprise when the experts declared their interest and the Conference showed a very complete panel of arguments and experience. Sometimes the Conference became a workshop because some experts made real lessons: it were the case of Mr. Rein of German Min- istry of Transport about Dangerous Goods international legislation and of Mrs. Paola Di Prospero Fanghella of Istituto Superiore di Sanità about chemical substances and the the new classification UE/ONU GHS It must be noticed that an important part of this activity was the implementation of a Memor - andum of Understanding – appendix 1 - as a trace for future work and project into EWG. FILSE as project leader prepared a first trace, starting from the initial hypothesis of “Terms of Reference”. Then the document was given t the Partners and deeply discussed. The actual MoU is the result of the work of all the participants: the necessity to put “light” engagements was well enlightened by DIST and REC: in reality there are no Organizations entirely devoted to DGT, competence, capab- ilities and knowledge are on behalf of sector of large Organizations (for instance Regions, but all the Public Institutions , have people devoted to this study but often there’s no an Office or a
14 Structure with particular roles, Research Centres and Firms present the same problem.) So it’s dif- ficult that a few Organization officers (or only one) can engage a great Organizations in signing duties. Particularly REC with its skills (this theme is very near to its mission) helped in construct- ing the MoU. So actually MoU constitutes the base a possibly regulation of constructing next oper- ative projects and in this sense were appreciated till the Budapest meeting.
1.3.5. WP5: Setting up draft report on the activities (White Paper’s rough version)
Objectives of this work was the creation of a comparison place in which it is possible to put in common data and possible strategies emerged by the activities with subject outside the territorial areas. This activity was done at the end of the workshop and was together with the preparation of the final conference. Identifying the more suitable interlocutors for distributing the draft version was done together with the searching of Final Conference speakers: it was the same problem. A contents was elaborated starting from the beginning of the project: in this phase it was reviewed by adherence to the result gained and duties to write particular arguments was divided into Italian Partners. The White Paper draft was predispose for the Final the conference and, due to the planning of the Conference and the Draft, it was possible to verify the most of its contents and ask for contribute during the Final Conference itself. The Mapping of stakeholders directly involved in the project is a good representation of a multidisciplinary approach and of the bottom up and top down methodology of the project: it is presented hereunder.
15 Stakeholders involved – Mapping DaGoT started in December 2006 focusing on these main categories of stakeholders:
Local Transport Infrastructure Brokers/ Final users Member of Control Provider of Training Researcher non governamental Decision Local Transport Infrastructure Brokers/ Final users Member of Control Provider of Training Researcher non governamental Public Company owner of dangerous good Platforms Authority Technology Institution and University normation body or third part maker Authority certification body Transport Road Industries European of motor Cities transport Rail EIRAC Police University University ISO Regions operators vehicle
Rail Duties or Producer of Private Research Transport Others transport Motorways ERRAC Fiscal electronic professional RINA Ministries operator Authorities control device training Centre
Sea Public Fire Civil transport professional Port Authority ERTRAC Brigade Protection operators training
WATER Regional Ministries Road BORNE agencies
Network Coast Ministries junction owners guard
16 French workshop Five main types of participants, public and private one, have been invited to the first DaGoT meeting: Research and development organizations Territorial entities Public authorities and administrations Highway company Information structure
Giorgio Ambrosino – MEMEX - Risk Management System for Dangerous Goods Transport in the INTERREG IIIB MEDOCC MADAMA Project William Martin - Préfecture 06 - Presentation about Specialized Rescue Plan Transportation of hazardous Matters Alpes-Maritimes (PSS TMD) Commandant Erick Calatayud - SDIS 06 - Hazmat transportation risk in the department of the Alpes- Maritimes, France Jean-Pierre Nordvik – JRC - Activities related to the transport of dangerous goods carried out in the context of the JRC Institutional Action VATDIS - Vulnerability Assessment in Transport and Distribution Systems Robert Karayan – ESCOTA - Tracking experimentation of the dangerous goods transport in the Nice tunnels – ESCOTA Jean-Michel Poux - CETE Sud-Ouest - Experimentation study of a management system for tracking dangerous goods vehicles by satellite positioning Jérôme Tixier- EMA - Monitoring and Intervention for the TRAnsportation of Dangerous Goods Yannick Ferrand - Ville de Nice - Hazmat Transportation risk management in the city of Nice Johan Tatin - Ville de Grasse - Hazmat transportation: risk assessment in the city of Grasse Yves Delacretaz - Grand Lyon - Ten years experience in Hazardous Material Transportation in Lyon and the suburban areas Angela Tomasoni – CIMA - Definition of risk in the transport of dangerous goods on road Yoann Martin – CYPRES - Dangerous good transportation in Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur region : from the data collection to the risk management on the territories Giancarlo Gaudino – ELSAG - The ReLaMP Project
Hungarian workshop Geographical coverage of this meeting – participants were chosen according to the geographical position of the 5th transport corridor, thus participants from Hungary and Slovenia were invited. Italian issues were represented by the DaGoT partners. Ukraine was not included in the list of participants (out of EU and out of the operational scope of REC). List of the stakeholders contacted by the REC in Hungary and Slovenia: Hungary National Transport Authority, Dept of Road Transport, Controlling Unit - Control of DG transportation on national level MÁV Cargo - National railway company dealing with transportation of goods KTI – Institute for Transport Sciences National Directorate General for Disaster Management, Department for Industrial Accident Prevention and Supervision - National authority dealing with accident prevention and disaster management BTE, Biztonsagi Tanacsadok Nemzetkozi Egyesulete - DG transport safety advisors association Rendőrezredes Főosztályvezető Közrendvédelmi Főosztály ORFK (police) - Police authority
17 Hungarian DG Engineering Office ADR - Private company, consultancy on DGT, sale of services and products Slovenia Luka Koper, d.d. - Koper Port Authority Slovenian Railways, Freight Transport department - National railway company dealing with transportation of goods Dangerous Goods Safety Advisors Association - DG transport safety advisors association Ministry of Transport, Rail Department - National railway authority dealing with transportation of goods City of Ljubljana, department responsible for goods transport in the city - City authority responsible for goods transport Ministry of Defence - Emergency planning, accidents, civil protection Ministry of the Interior /Police - Competent Authority for ADR in Slovenia Association of Chemical Industries - Organisation providing information and training about chemical legislation to the member companies and advocating to member’s interests with the competent authorities
Stakeholders-participants to the workshop: Tomi Solakivi - Turku School of Economics, Lead partner of DaGoB project, Finland János Schronk - National Transport Authority, Hungary Eszter Szilágyi - Department for Industrial Accident Prevention and Supervision, National Directorate General for Disaster Management, Hungary Barnabás Kérészy - National Transport Authority, Hungary Mrs. Árpádné Hudák - MÁV CARGO Plc - safety advisor Mr. Zsolt Nagy - BTE, Biztonsagi Tanacsadok Nemzetkozi Egyesulete, Hungary Igor Princic - Ministry of Transport, Directorate for Railways and Cableways, Slovenia Elvis Belac - Luka Koper, port authority, Slovenia Tomaz Martin Jamnik - representative of the LUKA Koper officie in Hungary
Bruxelles workshop The stakeholder screening pointed to stimulate international cooperation as regards sustainable development and risk management in DGT, among players (decision makers, local public authorities, transport companies, infrastructure owners) and stakeholders, researchers, control authorities, like Police or Fire Brigade, providers of technology and training institutions to improve DGT management. Stakeholders contacted: ERRIN network Royal Dutch Police - TDS project Port of Rotterdam European Technology Platform WATERBORNE European Road Transport Research Advisory Council ERTRAC Turku School of Economics- DaGoB Project Leader Italian Regions . Piemonte . Valle d’Aosta . Lombardia 18 . Emilia Romagna . Friuli Venezia Giulia . Toscana Euroregione italo-francese 'Alpi-Mediterraneo' (Liguria, Piemonte, Valle d’Aosta, Rhône-Alpes, PACA - Provence Alpes Côte d'Azur) Italian Ministry of Environment European Commission stakeholders: DG Research; DG TREN; DG Regio
Stakeholders-participants to the workshop: Mario Dogliani - RINA S.p.A. / WATERBORNE EU research platform Paris Sansoglou - CESA Community of European Shipyards' Associations Ana Rodriguez - Region Cantabria John Jansen – KLPO Erkki Laakso - European Commission – DG TREN Daniela Leveratto - European Commission – DG TREN - road safety
Genoa Conference Stakeholders involved in the work-arising topics on DGT
Chamber of Commerce of Genoa – Mr. Paolo Odone, President City of Genoa - Mrs. Marta Vincenzi, Major Italian Civil Protection Department – Mr. Guido Bertolaso, Head of the Italian Civil Protection Department Ville de Marseille, Direction générale de la prévention et de la protection –Mr. Gabriel Berron JRC ISPRA – Mr. Carmelo Di Mauro Regione Liguria, Infrastructures, Transports and Harbours Councillor – Mr. Luigi Merlo APRE - Agency for the Promotion of European Research – Mr. Vincenzo Angrisani Federal Ministry of Transport, Buildings and Urban of Germany* - Mr. Helmut Rein Ministère de l'Ecologie du Développement et de l'Aménagement durables Direction générale de la mer et des transports Mission matières dangereuses* - Mr. Claude Pfauvadel Institut des Risques Majeurs de Grenoble – Mrs. Marion Hebert European commission energy and transport DG, Unit J3 Security of land transport & Protection of critical infrastructures – Mr. Erkki Laakso Savona Port Authority – Mr. Rino Canavese Istituto superiore di Sanità* - Mrs. Paola Di Prospero Fanghella Alps Maritime Prefecture Autostrade per l’Italia S.p.A – Mr. Antonino Galatà Ferrovie dello Stato - Port of Rotterdam – Mr. Gerard Van Hasselt Coast Guard – Amm. Lolli Turku school of Economics , DA.GO.B. Project leader- Prof. Lauri Ojala 19 Elsag Datamat S.p.A. – Mr. Giancarlo Gaudino Arpal -Regional Agency for the Protection of the Environment in Liguria – Mrs. Rossella D’Acqui, Scientific Director Hungarian Safety Advisors – Nagy Zsolt Genoa Port Authority – Mr. Cabona Genoa’s Industrial Association – Mrs. Roberta Recchi Fire Department, Regional Commandant – Mr. Fabrizio Ceccherini Slovenian Security Association – Mrs. Sandra Sencic Italian Ministry of Transport Italian ministry of Environment
* these subjects were identified by the recognition of SUB-COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE GLOBALLY HARMONIZED SYSTEM OF CLASSIFICATION AND LABELLING OF CHEMICALS
1.3.6. WP6: Final Conference and results evaluation
Objectives of this WP were: Sharing the results of the analyzed activities among the subjects in the two interested trans- European corridors. Extending the area for discussion and analysis of the evidenced strategies. Producing an action scheme among the interested subjects, aimed to the preparation of a common project, and structuring an area of subject keeping continuous contact. Identify the themes and strategies of the common planning Suggesting an integration of the best/good practices evidenced both from the policy and territory point of view, and the technological one.
To describe the achieving of this objectives two documents are presented in the appendixes: they are the calendar of the Final Conference and the relations presented as a paper (and briefly exposed at the beginning of the Conference) on the Governance of DGT. The first one exposed briefly the arguments that was retained the principle ones needing attention and study and at the same time the main components of the DGT operative matters. In other terms Conference was really a performance of a first public phase in which the main problems of the DG transport will be explained. The second ones describes the evolution of the project ideas and over all proposed the conclusion of the project and possible (and on our opinion necessary) objectives and contents of ext projects, choosing the most interesting experiences and suggesting a way to integrated them. It was recognized that analysis and evaluation of the flows in particular area, by operative monitoring it’s the most pressing action.
Between the consequences of the Conference there was the constitution (by Liguria Region) of working groups, each one working on a main theme of concern, starting from the evidenced best practices, to evaluate future projects. Some meetings was already done, including players not already present in the partners.
20 Final Conference. The Conference was helded under the Patronage of the Italian Ministry of Transport (Ministero dei Trasporti) and Italian Ministry of Environment and Protection of Land and Sea (Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare) The fundamental theme of the Conference was Governance, so every fundamental matter was seen under the Governance point of view. In other terms, it was asked to the experts to speak about their technical arguments, making particular attention to the state of art and enlightening the feasibility of the possible solutions. It was asked, as usually in all the DagoT workshop to give a clear vision of the difficulties and problems, if are any. It must be noticed that all the experts explain their matters in very clear and realistic relations. The chosen matters were very different, and can be viewed from different perspectives. Here under is presented the Conference Program: in bold characters are the titles of subsections, representing the main matters on DGT.
The Political Point of view Intervention Arguments Paolo Odone, Chamber of Commerce of Welcome and Introduction to DGT Genoa, President
Logistic Policy and DGT in Liguria Region Claudio Burlando Regione Liguria Governor Marta Vincenzi City of Genoa, Major The transport situation in Genoa The Da.Go.T. Project Conclusions and Considerations
Edoardo Bozzo FI.L.S.E. S.p.A., Chairman The reason of the DaGot projet Simona Dindelli FI.L.S.E. S.p.A. Governance of Dangerous Goods Transport: Daniela Minetti Regione Liguria, Conclusion and Considerations from the Da.Go.T Environment Department Project Riccardo Mollo Regione Liguria, Infrastructures, Harbours and Transports Department
Emmanuel Garbolino Mines Paris, Armines Main result and best/good practices from the three Wioletta Szymanska REC Workshops. The importance of communications Dario Berta FI.L.S.E. S.p.A.
Roberto Sacile Genoa University, DIST The White Book on DGT
Research, technology and risk mitigation Research, Technology and Risk Mitigation: Improvements of (more) Intelligent On-board Platform C. Di Mauro & J.P. Nordvik JRC, Joint Research Centre for Safety and Security and implications for the
21 Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen transportation of dangerous goods
Fabrizio Ceccherini Fire Department, The Risk mitigation: problems and needing during the Regional Commandant immediate intervention.
Luigi Merlo Regione Liguria – Transport Councillor Matters and opportunities on DGT in the Liguria region Governance and DGT: Enlarging the vision Vincenzo Angrisani Agency for the Promotion of Explication of FP7 Sub-Theme 7.2. European Research Sustainable Surface Transport (SST) related to DGT
Paola di Prospero Istituto Italiano Superiore di Sanità Dangerous Substances the new UE/ONU classification GHS
Governance and DGT: Public Bodies’ point of view
Filippo Conni Regione Liguria Infrastructures, Legal and Governance Aspects On Dangerous Goods Harbours and Transports The new regional role Department Gabriel Berron Ville de Marseille, Direction générale de la prévention et de la protection Dangerous Goods Transport in Marseilles A french examples of local Governance (French best practises: the security plans for Dangerous Good in the City ) Governance and DGT Harbours and Roads network holders’ point of view
Antonino Galatà Operations Director Autostrade per Dangerous goods on the motorway l’Italia S.p.A The impact on traffic movement and safety Highways and DGT: working together to prevent Lauri Ojala, Turku School of Economics, DA.GO.B (DAngerous GOod Baltic sea ) Project: Key Results and Thoughts for the Future
Rino Canavese Savona Port Authority, The Port authority as the main peer between the President seaways and the land
Giovanni Gaudino Elsag Datamat S.p.A. Le capacità di Elsag Datamat nella realizzazione di sistemi complessi applicate al trasporto di merci pericolose” Gerard Van Hasselt Port of Rotterdam Dangerous Goods Transport (DGT) and Port Governance
Governance and laws: Rules for DGT, harmonising perspectives on environmental protection Erkki Laakso European Commission energy EU rules for Transport of Dangerous Goods and and transport DG, Unit J3 Security harmonising perspectives of land transport & Protection of critical infrastructures
22
Helmut Rein Federal Ministry of Transport, Dangerous Good Transport legislation Buildings and Urban of Germany The future for ADR ADN and RID in Europe
Governance and Public Awareness Communications between control bodies and information to population
Marion Hebert Institut des Risques Majeurs de Local actions in France to prevent DaGoT risk Grenoble Public Training and awareness to the risks knowledge
Rossella D’Acqui Regional Agency for the Protection From DGT emergencies management to risk of the Environment in Liguria, Governance Scientific Director Environmental protection actually made by the Agency Monitoring the radioactive transport Towards the Integrated prevention Controls and Governance Effectiveness of Controls by the modal laws on environment protection
Roberta Recchi Industrial Association of Genoa The vision of Industrial stakeholders
Nagy Zsolt Hungarian Safety Advisors Dangerous goods transport in Hungary The role played by the security advisors for the environmental safety : the operational controls
A brief contents of the Conference is presented hereunder.
17 th January - morning
The dissemination started with the welcome of Paolo Oddone, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Genoa.
The president of Regione Liguria, Claudio Burlando, greets the partecipants and speaks about the resources soon on hand also in order to decrease the number of emergencies on the dangerous goods transports.
The deputy mayor of Genoa, Paolo Pissarello, behalf of the Municipality, says that the creation of a net of info-mobility in the Northern Italy cities is on the way.
Edoardo Bozzo, the president of Filse, the consortium leader of Da.Go.T, has shown a short presentation of the project and its strategically importance in Liguria region .
Walter Bertini, from Filse, opened the proceedings and chaired all the sessions.
Dario Berta, from Filse, has shown a presentation of the project focusing on the activities, the partnership and the stakeholders. The activities involved as patnership: Public Administration; University; Research Institutions; International N.P.O. to solve environmental topics.
23 During the project, three thematic workshops took place: in Sophia Antipolis coordinated by ARMINES, in Szentendre coordinated by REC, in Bruxelles coordinated by Casa Liguria.
Emmanuel Garbolino, from Armines, presented the feedback experience of French DaGoT Meeting. He talked about the CRC (Crises and Risks research Centre) of Armines During the meeting it was pointed out that there is a lack of information on hazmat flows, nature, quantity, itinerary as well as the needs of information for public administrations, authorities, civil protection and infrastructures companies in order to improve security and safety.
Wioletta Szymanska, from Rec, presented the feedback experience of Hungary DaGoT Meeting. During the meeting , specific problems and experiences related to transport of dangerous goods in Hungary, Slovenia along the 5th transport corridor emerged. Discussions were carried out in two small working groups: how to use Information Communication Technology and how to share and exchange information.
Simona Dindelli, from Filse, also on behalf of Riccardo Mollo and Daniela Minetti (Liguria Region) has shown conclusions and considerations of Da.Go.T project, highlighting the importance of “governance” and legal aspects to lessen the risks on DGT. The aim of the Da.Go.T project was to learn from other experiences, to afford good performance in terms of safety of DGT on a large scale application (like Liguria Region) and to share knowledge.
Roberto Sacile, from the University of Genoa, showed a prototype of technology used to control DG traffic, highlighting that there are lots of systems in place (such as satellite) and probably there is no need of having additional new systems. There has been an agreement that technology is not a problem, but the aspects connected to organization are. Another important question in controlling DG traffic is using GIS (geographical information system).
Carmelo Di Mauro, from EC JRC (Joint Research Center - Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen), made a revew of technological and scientific matters on DGT monitoring and declared that the technologies are available, with relatively low costs, but it must make to apply them. He noticed that a few prototype systems was done but nothing arrived at full scale for governance and legal reasons. At the moment – he said – those who are exposed to the risks are not informed adequately and it is not convenient, for those who possess information (industries, conveyors) to diffuse them.
Fabrizio Ceccherini, from VV.FF (Regional Fire Department), has shown some examples of operations: during 2007 more than 30 trucks with DG had incidents on ligurian highways. Fire Departments take part in the aid operation chain: a better information, available in real time, on the tracks, transported cargos, positions of the accident and the neighbouring access and vulnerabilities, could increase safety and security.
17 th January - afternoon
Vincenzo Angrisani, from Apre (Agency for the Promotion of European Research), has illustrated the new activities and the financing procedure for the VII Framework Programme for Reserach.
Paola di Prospero Fanghella, from ISS (Istituto Superiore di Sanità), has illustrated the harmonised system of classification of the toxic and injurious substances, the "UE-ONU GHS" regulation.
24 Filippo Conni, from Liguria Region, talked about main legislative branches on DGT highliting the role and the actions that local agencies can carry out in the management of the DG. From the examination of the rules, the existence of a "negative" regulation system emerges. It is necessary to pass to a positive approach based on benefits, incentive pay and a “well-advised governance”.
Gabriel Berron, from Diréction générale de la prévention et de la protection de la Ville de Marseille, talked about the accumulation of experience after some accidents occurred in the city of Marseille in the ‘90s. The connection between institutions, operating and university in order to work together was crucial. A first result has been the separation of the traffics directed to the port from the urban ones.
Antonino Galatà, from Autostrade per l’Italia s.p.a., has shown the impact of DGT on traffic movement and safety defining priorities as: saving human lives and safeguarding the physical integrity of the persons in transit and the relief personnel; Maintaining the functionality of the structures. The proposed actions consist of the preparation of a super-national statute; an agency to manage the process and the data analysis and the development of technologies.
Lauri Ojala, from Turku School of Economics (DaGoB partner), presented the “twin project” DaGoB about DGT in Baltic region. Similary to Da.Go.T in the arguments and in the “sharing philosophy, the aim of DaGoB is to disseminate best practices across authorities and industries in line with EU transport policy, Safety and Security issues and Competitiveness of Transport Chains and strengthen the competence of dangerous goods professionals in the Baltic Sea Region, and improve the efficiency and safety of transport chains involving DG. DaGoB will produce a pragmatic Toolkit for public and private sector DG stakeholders in the Baltic Sea Region. It must be noticed that where DaGoTput its main attention on monitoring, DaGoB emphasized the area of Control: the two projects are complementary.
Rino Canavese, from Savona Port Authority, has illustrated the structures and facilities of the port of Savona, also on DG, and the plans of development. After that, he talked about the problem of the coal traffic, and the necessity to increase the amount of goods on railroad, above all. Savona is a port into the city: so it enlighten the need for strategic planning exchange between town and harbour.
Giovanni Gaudino , from ELSAG s.p.a., briefly presented its company and the Relamp project, which used technology created by ELSAG. Moreover, routes calculations resulting from the project have to be reasonable. Risk models can be chosen according to the priorities, parameters can be changed by giving more weight to certain parts, for instance giving more importance to population than landscape.
Gerard Van Hasselt, from Port of Rotterdam, after a brief illustration of the structures and facilities of the port of Rotterdam talked about DGT from a port perspective. The concepts on which the security and safety of the port is based consist in: prevention, preparation, control and repression. The port of Rotterdam seems a reliable port: in order to achieve this result it is necessary to create a good “port community”. the first day of proceedings was closed by:
Luigi Merlo, Regione Liguria, Infrastructures, Transports and Harbours Councillor and Incoming President of Genova Port authority he congratulated the consortium of Da.Go.T project.
25 He highlighted that Liguria Region is interested in DGT because of 3 international ports, 2 airports and 45 “Seveso industries”. Some topics emerged from the Dagot project, in particular: DGT is a very common problem: very different solutions are available but the best practices , as Da.Go.T must be integrated in a long term planning.
18 th January – morning
Walter Bertini, from Filse, opened the proceedings and chaired all the sessions.
The second day of proceedings was opened by:
Luca Dall’Orto, adviser of the Minister for the Environment, who carried the greetings of Minister Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio. Since some time on the government has given attention on this topic having collaborated to various researches. The situation of Genoa is very particular because of petrolchemical port. The Ministry for the Environment is available to support the continuation of this project, so Dall’Orto invited DaGoB project management to touch as soon as possible with the Ministry.
Erkki Laakso, from EC - DG Energy and Transport, has shown the EU rules for DGT and harmonising perspectives: a single new Eu-Directive will re-unite the former modal rules. Also harmonisation will be pursued as far as telematics systems in commercial transport are concerned. At the moment there are no sufficient standards for a technical solution, while techonology itself is available with no problem He quoted the “Navigation system for living animals transport (Regulation 2005/1/EC) - European technical implementation act under preparation as the mandatory basis for every other reasoning on continous monitoring
Helmut Rein, from the Section Dangerous Goods of the BMVBS2, focused its speech on some important issues about the Right on DG. Inside of the UE the possibility to create ulterior own dispositions was denied. As far as the Right on DG is concerned, it is clearly visible that under a the world-wide flow of goods point of view it has been developed a legislative system of supernational character. It is important to activate a virtuous mechanism: not just a law that imposes costs, but an economically convenient system promoting safety and security.
Marion Hebert, from IRMa (Institut des Risques Majeurs de Grenoble), presented some local actions to prevent DaGoT risks in France. These actions aim to raise awareness amongst the citizens, inform, educate, train, with particular attention given to helping municipalities to develop a real prevention policy based upon the PCS (Commune Safeguard plans). In order to achieve this it is necessary to create a synergy between municipalities and emergency services.
Rossella D’Acqui, from Arpal (Regional Agency for the Protection of the Environment), presented the activities of Arpal: although this agency is not taken care directly of DG of chemical type during travel, the Agency must make the monitoring in real time of certain radioactive transports, so it gains a good experience and it’s one of the main players during emergencies, acting as chemical laboratory, making predictive models, managing weather prevision. . So the Agency I must have the ability to see the vulnerability of the territory and the possible impacts of an incident involving DG.
2 Bundesministerium fur Verkehr, Bau und Stadtenwicklung, Deutschland 26 Roberta Recchi, from Industrial Association of Genoa, has shown the impact of DGT on ligurian economic framework: it must value and optimize the harbour traffics above all looking for safety and security. This can be achieved through a good planning and danger management.
Nagy Zsolt, Hungarian safety advisor, has shown the hungarian legislative framework on DGT. In Hungary safety advisors have many tasks and competences on DG: planning, execution, controlling, intervention,creation of provision of law, teaching.
Walter Bertini, from Filse, drew the conclusions of the two-day workshop, thanked the participants for their active participation and the Da.Go.T partners for their presentations and inputs and closed the meeting.
1.3.7. WP7:White Paper Final Version
It was Prepared the White Paper about the Dangerous Goods Freight, by introducing the state of the art, the best practices, the regulation and the needs in this field, the bottle necks and the strategies to overcome them. All the produced information material had been definitively edited also including the results and the contributions of the final conference. The White Paper contain all skills matured deriving from the activities, but as we already says we discover that matters are even largest than the Partners thought at the starting point: so we can consider it an open work, like a photo of the actual state of art, trying to define future needing.
The book will be distributed among the actors in this field in order to have a common basis of discussion and comparison. But over all the paper will be set in the site and it will be edited
1.4. Comparison of planned activities and actual work accomplished
Actual works and Planned activities present a substantial identities: WP, deliverables, and main objectives, were reached and/or accomplished. The DaGoT project has two main objectives: 1. To stimulate international cooperation as regards sustainable development and risk management in DGT, by the exchange of experiences and by the production of a comprehensive European Reference Framework (DGT-ERF) to support decisions. 2. To identify shared strategies, based on the integration of common knowledge, coming from different actors related to DGT to control, manage and plan DGT. A DGT European Working Group (DGT-EWG) appeared a good idea to exchange idea, experiences and to construct shared operative strategies As described above the two objectives were reached: a White Book contained an European Reference Frame had been done and an EWG group, as to say a group of Organization and experts was identified and opinion exchange and possible common activities are in course. As explained in paragraph 5.1 some change happened in the geographic approach. But perhaps it’s more interesting to compare briefly the initial schemes of topics furnished in the Kick off meeting versus the arguments of Final conference: there is a certain shift in the vision of the DGT matter. The Following Table is the kick off meeting representation of the main topics on DGT, in which we imagined a sort of four step approach. First step was the lesson learned by mainly the three Italian
27 Partners during their operative experience. Second step was useful to choose the workshop arguments and third step were the answers we are looking for. Forth steps was the initial prevision for a second operative project . Row 1: actually is less emphasized technology needs is not such a problem: of course we are not saying that there’s no need of technology but one can said “technology exists and is reliable”. Of course needs for harmonizing, sharing communication protocol and compatibility exists., but no dramatically lacks or difference of technology emerged. Row 2: Planning the path is now possible on municipals scale, using criteria of forbidden or preferred street. That’s a legal possibility existing in Italy , in France – where it’s applied. Different is a general DSS platform based on risk criteria. Anyway we consider now more realistic to have a planning based on the knowledge of what is written in row . Knowledge of DGT flows is the most important problem to be solved and the best way to solve it is monitoring and defining a dynamic centralized database. For Row 5 the project DaGoB made a real good work establishing methodologies and good practices, while for row 4, 6, 7 and 8 governance and regulation are the first problems to be solved. Also technologies are strongly influenced by governance and law: feasibility of continuous monitoring is a legal and governance matter, while technologies already demonstrated their feasibility. Looking at the topics of Final Conference emerged the relevance of Governance theme as a perspective to look every matters in the complex theme of DGT
28 1st Step 2nd Step 3rd Step 4th Step general criteria Dagot’s activities about Practical problems/ Operative solutions to be Strategic solutions under a safety and For Dangerous Good identified in Da.Go.T security shared perspective 1 Preventing risk by Methodologies & Technologies Identifying Methodologies & Technologies Defining Methodologies & Technologies monitoring and for monitoring and controlling for tracing, monitoring and controlling in real/ for tracing, monitoring and controlling controlling delayed time DGT in real/ delayed time DGT
2 Planning the tracks of criteria and methodologies to methodologies to choose the low risk route based How to use common shared criteria and DGT choosing the low risk manage and to plan DGT, on a on methodologies to manage and to plan territorial route risk based perspective and a. environmental aspects DGT in choosing the low risk route taking in account the b. risk aspects characteristics of the territory As to say: DSS platform . building up criteria to territorial risk analysis 3 Enhancing information and Analyse flow and accident to Specification of the main trans-national DGT flows Choosing strategies like: solving lack of data identify: and interested networks a) adapt infrastructure networks problems: a. bottle necks and hot Specification of logistic problem and structural and (physical structure) from the risk point Build up knowledge and spots legal bottle necks of view data on DGT flows and b. weakness Defining strategies like : b) using electronic device to prevent DGT accidents a) adapt infrastructure networks (physical structure) risks from the risk point of view c) economical feasibility of the strategies b) using electronic device to prevent risks by monitoring and controlling 4 Defining shared strategies Strategies to prevent accidents Exchanging knowledge and methodologies To use common strategies and criteria to prevent accident to prevent accident 5 Defining shared strategies Strategies to manage Information and Data exchange in real time To use common strategies to manage to manage interventions interventions after an accident interventions after an accident 6 Establishing a sustainable What policies does each List the possible shared policies To identify normative requirements in policy to implement low operator apply? Assuring economic feasibility of these policies order to harmonize EU legislation on risk transport DGT 7 Developing a sustainable What strategy does each To set up a safe economically feasible strategies for Legal, political and Financial and economically feasible operator (stake holder authority shifting DGT from Road towards rail, …. issues strategy for shifting DGT wish and want? from roads toward rail and sea accordingly to EU Freight Intermodal Scenario 8 Education and Training for Identify opportunities and Identify training and education arguments and their Experimental Training courses for all the players and needing main targets the main targets information and awareness Dissemination: The white book for the public
29 1.5 Conclusion and Recommendation
1.5.1. Methodology and Approach The frame of this project has been designed as a succession of analysis, check and study in depth moments, with subsequent possible re-modulation of the material and of the analytical techniques. It foresees an initial phase in which, according to the local wide and articulated experiences, a series of tools will be implemented (list of topics to be analyzed, synthesis of the experiences, elaboration documents). The fundamental methodology of the work was defined as “to share” knowledge, data, criteria and best practices, using something like a “geographical method” centered on particular area, the two ten corridor trespassing Genoa and Liguria. It must be remembered that Liguria Region were searching solution for practical problem of reducing risks, starting from the experience that problems can’t be solved at regional level without considering the international situation. Using a geographical criteria for searching knowledge (as to say trying to know what other Regions was making on the problem of environmental risks) revealed itself a very valuable approach. While technologies are costumed to have a dialogue so we find no great difference under this point of view, as to say the different technologies can have a good dialogue inside themselves, the situation is very different from legal and administrative point of view. An enormous differences was noticed between Liguria Region and the neighbour PACA Region. This is not the only “geographical” differences noted: studying DagoB project, and the approach of Middle European Region, opened our mind to a more complex vision of the problem. The vision acquired in Brussels about the international approach and the news acquired everywhere, gained to the Partners the possibility to continue the work, with an increased knowledge of the international situation and so giving the possibility to start operative works, avoiding the risk to give anachronistic and not efficient solutions. A very high numbers of stakeholders interested on or influenced by DGT was found, and, more noticeable, also decision makers are very numerous. That caused problems because the field study, seen under the perspective of our methodology, is enormous. So the solution given in the project was the “reduction” of geographical area. In other terms we preferred to have a more complete vision of stakeholders and approach on a smaller area than the initial ones, maintaining the geographical continuity. On our opinion one of the principal cause of complexity of the DGT risk mitigation is due to the enormous number of stakeholders: so the partners preferred to maintain high the number and the nature of stakeholder involved reducing geographical area for the workshops 1 and 2. At the same time for Brussels meeting and for the Final Conference we took also an approach to “general entities” for maintaining the general vision and also searching for important stakeholders in different geographic area (i.e. Port of Rotterdam). EU Commission, Ispra joint research center, UNO Commissions (Ms Paola di Prospero Fanghella, Mr Rein are members of UNO commissions on their matters) are examples of this approach. At the same time a strong efford was done by Filse in searching all the possible stakeholders in Liguria Region for having with them a very free opinion exchange: as we described Liguria is a very particular Region from this point of view, and often the “local” stakeholders, represent important entities both a national and international levels.
So a bottom- up approach and a top - down approach was maintained and the contemporary presence of the two caused a strong interest for the Final Conference: all the experts remained all the time in the hall of Conference hearing the others and a great exchange of opinions, addresses and idea happened. It must be noticed that is not common that field operators and high level decision makers can exchange experiences.
30 At the same time it was very important to put technologic and scientific research in front of legal and governance problems. There must be a strong connections between the two aspects; it was noticed a great proliferation of ICT projects and also of “pilot projects” constructing “pilot monitoring centers”, while no one of them succeeded in becoming a full scale project and the reason is always governance and legal problems. The arguments is discussed in the annex document “Governance of Dangerous Goods Transport: the need for solution sharing”. Briefly the DaGoT conclusion is that Public Entities must drive these type of projects, statrting from operative governance criteria and in strict connession to the international scenario. So it can be confirmed that Sharing data and sharing criteria is the most critical steps to cover at this moment, but this can’t be done in an abstract way but starting with common project. At the same time regional projects ( we intend the same project developed in different European regions) , devoted over all to obtain similar and shared traffic data and tools to increase safety, are necessary. In the Governance paper some ideas was described to obtain the regional participation on debate on DGT regulation and integration of environmental culture inside the modal regulation and vice versa for avoiding different and contrasting solution between the two.
1.5.2. Achievements of DaGoT versus the State of the Art Starting the project we were concerned with the needing for similar and compatible technologies in monitoring and about the needing of territorial regulations for DGT. A strong DaGoT interest was also risk analysis study and the consequent possibility to have well sounded Decision Support System “embedded” into the technological platform devoted to monitoring of DG Transportation. At the end from the technological point we are less concerned with technologies itself, (a lot of useful technologies were found) and much more concerned with practical application to define useful flow data for every traffic segment. In fact no rational planning and no practical regulation for mitigate risks could be possible without a good knowledge of this data. At the same time emerged that a strong Regional role, also from governance point of view, in this activity is necessary. Regions are the place where activities can look after the local problems without forgetting the international scenario. For instance different Regions working on the same project can produce a flexible model of accounting flows and a valuable models for data exchange. We retain that having put a strong attention on Regional Institutions, as a leading participants to DGT projects, also in technological projects, it’s a real contribution to the “state of art”. In fact starting DaGoT this relation was not stated clear in literature. From the risk analysis point of view we realized that model are growing but also that is possible to have a pragmatic approach to risk management, for instance like French cities. This pragmatic approach is able to gave a strong help in policy making and in planning. So waiting for a more complete theory for risk analysis of DGT it’s useful using the pragmatic model for decision making. Following French cities example for risk management it’s good but studying this case, the needs for use GIS and data base at centralized level to record the forbidden or the free roads for DGT paths is a strong needing. One can say that, while we are waiting the legislation change at international level (for transports) for continous monitoring of DGT and working for having a legislation with a strong environmental vision, actions on local levels are possible, but a centralized vision of these local actions, made possible by GIS using, it’s the necessary complements.
1.5.3. Impact of the projects to research, regulation and planning activities and industry DaGoT is a small budget project and one must be realistic about its impacts putting it on a super -regional area, but it would be unrealistic to imagine a large European impact. But anyway something in this sense happened and other thing could happened in the next future.
31 In fact publication of DaGoT results by an editor may reach a large area of specialist and a large representative of organizations and experts was reached in the geographic area of the project. And the meeting of different planning levels professionals (public, private, different territorial entities, EU Commission, State, Regional, Municipalities, Agency , Professionals Association) occurred. So new ideas are now circulating in different Organizations. Of course DaGoT are deeply influenced Liguria Region policy on DGT. Various projects are now at study, using knowledge and contact produced by DaGoT. Other partners were contacted for such actions and a collaborations on knowledge sharing and studying possible common actions are in place with the Baltic area, (project DagoB) because common interests exists and DagoB and DaGoT have complementary approaches, that can be put together. And in reality a large team of experts was identified and the possibility to continue in working togeth- er is quite realistic. So at the end impact may be larger than the initial provided one.
2. Dissemination and use The preparation of the White Paper and the other project deliverables have followed a bottom-up approach. Their production have been started from previous activities in which the DAGOT partners where involved, and then enlarged collecting experiences from other participants who participated to the DAGOT meetings and workshops. The current working papers are available in the DAGOT Web site to enlarge its discussion and availability to other interested users. The final version of the DAGOT paper is currently available for free on the DAGOT Web site. In addition, to improve its distribution, an international publisher has been contacted by the French partner and preliminary agreements have been signed to have it published in the beginning of 2009.
More details: Plan for using and disseminating the knowledge
32 Appendix 1 Governance of Dangerous Goods Transport: the need for solution sharing
1. A pragmatic approach to cutting DGT risks: the ReLaMP system...... 34 2. Land transport and the feasibility of non stop monitoring...... 35 3. Regional scale governance difficulties and the DaGoT project...... 35 4. Feasibility and governance of DG transport monitoring...... 36 5. Complex and necessary governance...... 38 6. European Union and European Regions: indispensable partnership...... 39 7. Regional, national and European governance...... 39 8. Some key points to be put into effect as soon as possible...... 40
A pragmatic approach to cutting DGT risks: the ReLaMP system
The DaGoT project arose from the recognition of the fact that, though an IT system called ReLaMP – acronym of Regione Liguria Merci Pericolose (Dangerous Goods Liguria Regional 0 thority) – able to afford good performance in terms of safety of dangerous goods transport, had been set up, its large scale application posed problems in terms of implementation which needed to be solved in a larger context than that of Liguria, especially concerning governance and legal issues.
In order to cut down territorial risk in the short term, the Regional Authority, and especially its Environmental Department, in a very pragmatic manner, thought that continuous monitoring of the position of the vehicle and the choice of the less risky itinerary would be a practical way to increase the safety of the territory. This is how the IT system called ReLaMP arose, funded by the Ministry for the Environment, made by Filse with the technological partners Elsag and Set, about whom more will be said by Mr Gaudinoin his speech.
The software (knowledge, data, decisions, coordinating the action) makes up for the hardware (the structures), and is a very concrete preventive strategy: among other things, it affords the possibility of gaining those precious minutes which often make the difference between an accident and a catastrophe. Of course, the modal regulations – such as ADR and RID – are very strict in terms of safety and also deal with security, but they have little to say about the kind of territory which the transport traverses. However, a lorry full of dangerous goods is intuitively a little travelling Seveso, a mobile hazard source. Once the technological hazard has been cut down through packaging, the vehicle, training of the driver, one can take into account the leftover hazard and decide not to let it go through triggering factors or to keep it far from fragile and vulnerable areas.
33 Systematic monitoring ensures, over the short and medium term, a knowledge of the flows of Dangerous Goods, permitting planning and programming policies agreed upon among the various actors. By flows, we mean knowledge of how many Dangerous goods, subdivided according to their quality, pass along a given road stretch, in a known time interval. Infrastructural interventions may therefore increase efficacy and efficiency and cut costs.
Transport of goods and logistics are complex economic activities where sustainability is important, and which tend towards intermodality : it appears quite reasonable therefore that, when choosing the best manner to transport goods, environmental issues will be one of the criteria of choice.
Land transport and the feasibility of non stop monitoring
Cutting down risks to the territory by monitoring and controls is not so difficult, and in fact ReLaMP, which is based on actual knowledge of the working mode of transports, is in terms of principle rather simple. Drivers generally use GPS positioning devices, plan the routes of their fleets of vehicles and control, up to a certain point, the paths taken. Ports can count on detection devices at the entrances identifying incoming and outgoing goods, databases and operating systems. Motorways have means for reading the positions of the vehicles.
With support from electronic and information technology and a good GIS, taking into account known data – such as the condition of the traffic, the weather conditions, the vulnerability of the territory – with the goods and the two ends of the trip being known, a multi-criteria analysis and computer algorithms can easily identify the least risk itinerary.
Qualifying the itineraries also has a “reduced” application, which is of great practical usefulness for the drivers: that is the approval of the route chosen by them, making certain that the stretches chosen are not forbidden to the passing DG, or highlighting the quickest and safest possible alternatives, should a “forbidden” stretch have been chosen. A further application – useful, this time, to the public sector and/or to managers of road and railroad networks – is the theoretical analysis of certain especially critical road stretches, in order to procure the necessary infrastructures and mitigation tools, the traffic of Dangerous goods on them being known.
Now, though ReLaMP presents points which can be improved from a technical and scientific point of view, under these profiles, very much of it can be applied at once, two years ago the pilot run was tested. The Alcotra project, which involved the territory of Liguria once again, can already present improvements compared to the base package of ReLaMP, which in its turn is able to support a great number of changes of this kind, technological and industrial, though it answers to environmental needs.
Now, the intelligent question is, why, during these two years, have we not gone over from pilot to non stop working? The answer is at once simple and complicated: like all other systems of this kind, this one too has problems of legal feasibility and/or of governance.
Regional scale governance difficulties and the DaGoT project
We realised that when cutting down DGT hazard, certain topics needed solutions going far beyond the territory of Liguria, and the possibility of solving such questions at home was limited, unless simplifications were made which risked turning into further complications.
34 Thinking globally and acting locally is usually a good method, and also knowledge acquiring actions must be of an ample nature.
It is therefore obvious that we referred to Europe in order to attempt to acquire the knowledge and experiences of others and to make our own available, in an attempt to make our solution concrete and working. An SSA is a wonderful networking tool, and thus DaGoT arose, with an initial partnership which, in our opinion, was very suitable. That is, the Regional authority, with the Transport Department and the Environmental Department, the friends from DIST as a University and Research Agency, the friends of Armine as a French research agency, and the friends of the REC an organisation which has, among others, the purpose of acting as a centre for disseminating environmental issues throughout Central and Eastern Europe, with the group leader Filse – already responsible for making ReLaMP - a space for implementing complex projects, where many points of view have to be taken into account. DaGoT has the express purpose of building a benchmark group, if possible extended, and of identifying a European context on which to base an operating solution for managing DGT risks, a feasible and sensible solution. DaGoT’s purpose is to “share security” among “neighbours” and the methodology consists of sharing knowledge, problems and experiences through a wide territory.
We still need some time to draw the working conclusions of DagoT, the Conference is actually a product and place for discussion, but we feel that the priority issue is the governance of DG transports, which must be thought over again in a pro-active way.
This goal may perhaps be achieved by shared rules, adopting shared criteria and tools, the goal of building up the necessary data in a uniform manner, and of building up a frame of reference where the various levels of governance of the territory, research, economic forces, control services, can deal pragmatically with immediate needs, without running the risk of making projects which do not then communicate with each other.
Feasibility and governance of DG transport monitoring
The applicational profile is the most effective one for communicating the problems of feasibility and governance which one meets when setting up the actions needed to manage the flows of DG. Let us start with the actions of ReLaMP, knowing as we do, thanks to DaGoT, that these are very widespread issues.
The choice of the least hazardous itinerary and/or validation of the feasible itinerary in case of prohibitions involving the circulation of DG. Non stop monitoring of the position of the dangerous load so as to know the position of the vehicle at any moment – on board, there must be a suitable device allowing “run time” hazard management, during the trip and in case of crisis, intervention can be planned immediately. Finally, an immediate alarm in case of accident, making available the forces which have to intervene, the position of the accident, which must be exact in terms of practical needs, the ways of access, the map of the hazardous elements and of risk-running elements in the immediate neighbourhood, and the substances and their quality and quantity making up the load, to provide quicker and more effective interventions.
The possibility that such actions can become a true governance needs further examination. For 1, the choice of the itinerary, which Public Agency/Institution would take responsibility for suggesting a
35 whole itinerary through its own territory, without a law giving it such a competence? One must not forget that human error is unpredictable. However, one must always remember that thinking out the least hazardous route is very useful for purposes of territorial planning.
Unlike the previous topic, topic 2 – non stop monitoring of the position – affords no significant methodological problems: it is true that there are tunnels, but the problem can be solved. There is however a problem of privacy: if, when driving a vehicle carrying DG, I want to stop to drink a coffee, maybe I don’t think this should be a public matter. There is also a security problem: the position of an especially dangerous DG may be of interest for purposes of terrorism. However, the data can be “sealed” from an IT point of view, qualified operators may be used, there can be trade union agreements and the fact that the vehicle is monitored may offer an advantage in terms of danger of robbery.
There is no obstacle of any kind in case of topic 3 – providing data to rescue agencies, to network managers and to experts. Feasibility in terms of governance is therefore in the order 3, 2, 1: topic 3 is fully and immediately feasible today. However 3 is feasible only if there is a working device on board the vehicle, communicating its position (i.e., it is carrying out action 2) and if the driver has notified the loading list, the points of departure and arrival, the date, the time of departure and the route, whether it has been produced by the system, validated by the system (action 1) or simply notified. This means that little is feasible if the driver has not notified the data. There are two solutions: either the driver has an advantage in notifying the trip, or else he is obliged to notify it. The first hypothesis is the more pleasant one, and also seems more realistic. Let us suppose that a law obliges lorries with DG on board in Liguria to let themselves be monitored (Italian bills on the relations between DaGoT and the territory have this content).
The command and control approach has turned out to be unsatisfactory in terms of the environment, but let us keep to practical matters: command is rather simply, it is the control which breaks down. Let us imagine systematic police controls at the motorway exits leading into the Region, on the docks of the ports, or on the main roads, in order to make sure that the vehicle really fulfills its obligations: this would lead to jams of Dangerous goods awaiting control, and frightening snarl ups. The scenario is one of increased and not lessened risks. Of course, one could carry out ex post controls for the traffic ending in Liguria, including real time controls, and ex ante controls for the traffic starting here, but through traffic would not even be seen. There are also practical problems in every country of the Union in sanctioning vehicles coming from other European countries. This means competitive damage to economic actors located in Liguria.
Let us go back to the more friendly prospect of offering an advantage to the carrier providing us with the information: at present, on ReLaMP, this takes no more than two minutes on Internet, and could go down to just a few seconds. The significant advantage could be the service of assessment and/or validation of the routes, ensuring that there is no forbidden stretch – knowing the route with certainty means saving time and money – and an advantage in terms of insurance.
This is where the necessary international vocation of this kind of activity comes up, since planning a route only through Liguria is of little interest to carriers. Let us take the case of a carrier whose headquarters are in Genoa: it is quite likely that the final destination of his transport is outside the Region. Obviously, it is the task of the Regional Authority to cut down risks on its own territory, which it knows well and the mapping of which is managed by it; once outside the territory of the Region, its task and knowledge cease. However a driver going, for example, from Genoa to Lyon – where there is
36 a well defined planning of Dangerous goods traffic, with forbidden roads, schedules, etc., needs help in Lyon. So he needs the road graph of Lyon and the data of Lyon, which we cannot manage from Genoa. If Lyon takes on a similar criterion exchanging data by Internet as well, then there is no problem. If Lyon makes a road map, as it does now, we would have to put it in ourselves, and if we think how many cities there are in Europe, this is not feasible. This is one of the practical reasons why looking at Europe is fundamental, because if we do different things, travelling turns into working out a jigsaw puzzle. And then, would we have to set up a portable dispenser of monitoring devices at the motorway entries into Liguria? But if there were already several regions monitoring with compatible systems, then all that would be needed would be to take over a signal, as soon as the driver crosses into the new territory.
There is also another problem in the matter of voluntary agreement: with which carriers can a regional authority easily make agreements? With those on its own territory. But here too, the problem diminishes in an international context.
It should be stressed that it is not very effective to set up a full scale monitoring system, which does not detect many vehicles – for example traffic crossing through the territory, which we believe to be very intense: accident hazard is on every vehicle, and we would not produce reliable flow data, something which is as important as monitoring for the purposes mentioned above.
Complex and necessary governance
Taking working decisions on DG, even only from the point of view of environmental protection, is by no means simple: first of all, very long round tables are required, because of course the Railways, the management of the network and of the transport, the motorways, the industries consuming and producing DG, the carriers, the shipping agencies, the Port Authorities, the managers of road networks, including the Provincial Authorities, the Municipalities – who also manage their own road systems -, the Fire Fighting Services, the Emergency Services, the Coast Guard, the port logistics companies, Safety and Security advisers, logistics experts, town planners, etc., certainly cannot stand by as mere onlookers, since they are directly affected and possess fundamental knowledge.
In all the cases described above, it appears that if several regions located along the same transport axes as ours had taken the same path, or a comparable path, the system would be applicable.
Now, what has been said does not only involve the monitoring criteria, but more or less all the approaches. This is the basic reason behind DaGoT: either there is a common European space of compatibility of policies, monitoring, mapping and flows of DG, or else whatever we may do loses a large part of its efficacy because of traffic of different origin and through traffic. Working at DaGoT, the more knowledge, opinions, experiences and best practise we put together, the more we realised that the topic of Dangerous Goods is first of all a matter of governance, before technology, data gathering, economy, suitable laws. To put it perhaps more clearly, technology, science, infrastructure planning and all the rest must take into account the governance of the phenomenon, both present and future, in order to give real answers. And the present day governance is definitely too complex, and round tables alone are not enough to solve this complexity, since we would be spending all our time just holding meetings. On the other hand, legislation on the relations between Dangerous Goods Transport and the territory – aimed at protecting the latter – must also move within a framework which does not only imply setting principles, criteria, equity and
37 harmonisation, but also build up a framework of governance, identifying the places and institutions where all the responsibilities, knowledge and competences may be set up together as a system, in order to share in the increase of safety which all feel to be necessary.
With a clear and unitary framework, lack of the reliable data on the DG flow, on which the capacity of planning infrastructures as well depends, would be problem which could be solved within a very few years and at perfectly reasonable costs. Also, everybody – starting with the European Union – complains of the lack of reliable data, and those who complain most of the lack of data suitable for planning such complex aspects are precisely those who have collected most data, having invested work and money in this.
European Union and European Regions: indispensable partnership
A Regional Authority, like any other Public Agency and like all the stakeholders present in or represented on its territory, affords an excellent territorial scale to manage thematic maps, read the risks on its own territory, take operating decisions, since everybody knows his own problems and/or knows how to have other people tell him theirs quickly. A Regional Authority can afford the Municipalities belonging to it a working framework to take decisions and technological and scientific support. Setting up round tables is possible, though not so easy, and it is perhaps the only scale o which it is possible, although as we have had the opportunity to see, very long tables are needed, considering the number of stakeholders.
It is however a far less excellent terrain, if one has to decide which dangerous goods should be monitored non stop and which need only to be spot checked, since very specialised yet quite general skills in terms of chemical substances are needed. It is by no means the best terrain to decide the optimal mathematical model for the release of a toxic cloud…, although of course it does have something to say if the land is mountainous and the suggested model has been tested in The Netherlands. But if there is a problem on the road network, and one needs to take the decision whether to stop certain loads or not, whether it is best to think of transport by sea, by road or by rail, then the region is the right scale.
However, apart from knowledge of the territory, certain long term decisions must in any case be taken in a wider framework, and transport is a classic example of globalisation. Let us suppose that one decides that the through traffic of Dangerous goods in the Liguria Region should take place by sea, this decision will affect the whole Latin arc… therefore, Tuscany, Paca and Catalunya should take such a decision together, at a European table and with shared rules.
It seems especially evident that, whatever the scale – municipality, province, neighbourhood, Europe or the world – the issue of transport is a “condiviso” “shared” or “partagée” problem : one can only calmly take note of the fact and come to the conclusion that both safety and security can only be such if they are “shared” , because if, to increase my safety, I create a problem for you, the consequences will also affect me sooner or later.
Regional, national and European governance
There is a problem of governance for the regions, for the states and for the European Union as well, because the Regions of the Union too have much to say about this topic.
38 A by no means secondary problem in effective governance of DG is that it must not be uselessly punishing towards Carriers, Mayors, Port Authorities, Motorway Companies and Environmental Agencies, with new and complex territorial obligations.
It is also important to decide whether the principles/criteria of environmental protection for DG transport must fall within modal regulation – currently in a phase of profound re-ordering – or not.
But whether or not they are included, the regulations on DG transport are already very complex on their own – whoever has to do with DG transport for any reason whatsoever is already inside compliance with regulations covering dangerous substances, while some, i.e. industrialists, also have to do with the Seveso directive, while the Mayors have to do with all the regulations – the environmental regulations concerning transport of DG must start from the existence of these regulations, including the Traffic Code, and must be born articulated with what already exists, ad not separate, in order to avoid the usual multiplication of efforts, of paperwork and of the need to close an eye on violations because of the difficulty of the tasks required.
Regional Authorities also have something to say about the more scientific criteria: for example, in Liguria the Provincial Authorities draw up Emergency Contingency Plans, with a systematic use of mapping to highlight every vulnerable area and spot. A model of territorial risk which starts from vulnerability would find that a great deal of work has already been done and that there is a shared language among the many sectors of competence which concur in defining an effective DG transport policy. And what about the Road Registries where one can check the conditions of intrinsic risk? These are large shares of work, and of public monies, saved in implementing a decision making and/or territorial monitoring system.
Now each Country, maybe each Regional Authority, will have its own consolidated customs in this matter, however that is exactly why a European round table is needed, in order to identify what must be common and what can stay different in the approach to risks and controls, where the systems must be able to speak to each other, where they must work in step, and where, on the other hand, each can use what he finds to be most suitable.
Some key points to be put into effect as soon as possible
Further clues for reflecting on governance come from comparing our results with what we have come across. The need to centralise and share data, while respecting the needs of the various actors, coincide with our “share safety, share security , share knowledge…” . What are needed, therefore, are places to discuss which data are needed and by whom. Among the states, Europe must not be missing, since it has every interest to have serious statistics about DG transport accidents, so much so that it even gave us a directive, but Europe is not alone. This is a topic about which the Regional Authorities have much to say, in order to have data useful for their governance and for the policy of their Municipalities. One must identify the most commonly used itineraries, to be investigated with analysis of the risks, the accidents which have taken place, the territorial vulnerabilities, possible best practises for mitigation. We do not believe that the Municipalities can be left alone to make out their own transport risk plans, choosing the best model for how a toxic cloud or a pressure wave spread. The Municipalities must be able to count on a kit of tools allowing them to assess what is necessary for them to know and to introduce the requirements imposed by dangerous goods transport into town planning issues.
39 The creation of safe parking areas, and more generally speaking a town planning approach to the issue of traffic and parking of DG is needed, especially on the level of the great transport networks and logistic nodes. One must reinforce the knowledge behind territorial collectives. And here too the principle of “ share safety” seems appropriate to us. We think that, as companies transporting DG are obliged to have a Safety advisor for DG transport, there must also be one on the side of the public administration the territory of which is really affected by such transport. We do not think this necessarily means one for each Municipality, indeed the Fire Fighting Service, the Emergency Services, industries, all have skills which can be set up as a system. It is necessary to create spaces dedicated to harmonising local regulations: identical sign systems for example, but also similar criteria. And especially one must avoid useless data duplication by closing the information arcs. It is extremely likely that the data which the Municipality of Genoa needs to know about DG transport is a clearly identifiable sub-set of what has to go to the Port Authority of Genoa.
We need a framework of governance on certain fixed points in the approach to the DG coming from a legislation of European origin aiming with determination at the relationship with the territory and to its protection, without forgetting other aspects of the problem.
And we believe that we have found the way to do it, of cours and necessarily within a European context.
40