Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

Europe is growing – and so too is the pressure on and from the roads. If Europe’s railways are not to fare second-best by an increasing margin in competition with HGVs, buses, private motorcars and aircraft in the face of the unimpeded further swelling of traffic flows, they need uniform approvals for locomotives, multiple units, railcars and power cars for train sets throughout the European Union – and they need them more urgently than ever before. The approvals procedure must not only satisfy practicability, and economic and uniform European standards of interoperability, but also generally binding and strict yardsticks as regards quality and safety.

digital train control and protection system, much as 700 billion tonne-kilometres per ETCS/ERTMS, and ensuring its year. The situation in Austria is not much compatibility with the pre-existing systems different from this either. There is, constitute crucial challenges for a properly- however, one difference: since 1999, the 1 Vision and reality: functioning, liberalized EU railway market. railway has succeeded in maintaining its Liberalization of the European The formal legal right of free network share in the freight market at 34 %. In Union’s railway market access, which has been the route so far other words, its growth has kept pace with favoured by the European Commission, the overall growth of the Austrian freight Despite the fact that this is going to mean does not, of itself, go far enough for market. that certain powers will be shifted to EU attaining this objective. bodies, the national approval authorities, Taking the European Union as a whole, who have enjoyed far-reaching autonomy to Since the European Union was enlarged experts reckon the growth in freight will be date, are still going to play a decisive role from 15 to 25 member states in the spring around 37 %. As far as European rail in the integration of their railway of 2004, Europe’s railways have been freight is concerned, not only the European infrastructures, each one with its technical facing even tougher competition from Commission’s white paper (in its option C) peculiarities, resulting from its own unique HGVs, buses and coaches, inland but also the “European Transport Report history, to form a pan-European set of shipping, private motorcars and aircraft 2002” submitted by the Swiss Prognos provisions for the approval of motive power than they ever did before. With a total Institute forecast what at first sight units. In this process, the real stumbling population that is now just short of 450 appears to be considerable growth of 30- blocks to a European-Union railway without million, the exchange of goods and the 40 % between 1998 and 2010 and 2015 frontiers (i.e. an interoperable one) are movement of people within the Union is respectively. This would mean an less the differing rail gauges and power- increasing very considerably. According to improvement in rail’s market share from supply systems and more the diversity of an expert report commissioned by the 13.5 % (1998) to 14.5 % (2015). conventional train-protection and German Federal Ministry of Transport, the Considering the longer timeframe of 1991 command-and-control systems. Alongside volume of freight transported in Germany to 2015, however, road haulage remains the approval of motive power units, the alone seems likely to grow by up to 65 % the clear winner in the fight for kilometres introduction of the uniform European by the year 2015, when it might be as and tonnage. It ought to have increased its

Dr. Karl-Johann Hartig Dipl.-Ing. Dr.-Ing. Edmund H. Schlummer Andreas Thomasch

Ministerialrat, Head of the Rail Group in the Austrian Head of Rail Vehicles and Federal Ministry of Transport, President Locomotives and Operations at the German Innovation and Technology Freight Federal Railway Agency (EBA) Address: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Address: Bombardier Transportation, Address: Eisenbahn-Bundesamt, Innovation & Technik, Sektion II, Holländische Strasse 195, D-34127 Vorgebirgsstr. 49, D-53119 Bonn Gruppenleitung Schiene, Radetzkistrasse Kassel 2, A-1030 Wien E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: edmund.schlummer E-mail: [email protected] @de.transport.bombardier.com

30 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3030 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:1212:21:12 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

volume of business by at least 100 % – also for those living in the major several underlying reasons for this concludes Prognos. conurbations. predicament. Firstly, the production side of transporting freight by rail is still The development trends are even more Up until the present, nothing has changed considered to be too expensive; secondly, divergent when it comes to the transport really radically in this scenario. Motorways the railways are still generally operating in of passengers. “It is as if the whole of Italy and other trunk and secondary roads are the red; and, thirdly, they still have to pay were to go off on holiday all over again”, is still prey to a veritable HGV invasion, while for their competitive drawbacks compared how Prognos’ CEO, Nikolai Lutzky, summed the railway has unused capacity. There are with transport by road or air (such as the up all the future scenarios for passenger transport back in 1990, in the middle of the foundation euphoria of the new borderless Europe. The figures, which he presented at the time, included the forecast that by 2010 passenger transport in Europe would swell by 74 % or 25 million “trips”. The much-feared wave of ordinary travellers and commuters, he warned at the time, would flood not only the centrally located Germany, Austria and Switzerland (who sometimes see themselves as stairways used by everyone in the European building) but also Yugoslavia, even with its reduced territory, as well as Poland and the Czech and Slovak Republics.

Reality has, long since turned out to exceed by far all the forecasts made at that time. That was quite clear when Germany (the most important transit country in the entire European Union) produced an interim balance five years ago. According to the figures in the “Transport Report 2000”, which were based on 1997 as the reference year, the total annual distance covered by passenger transport was 943 billion passenger-kilometres. Clearly number one in the modal split was transport by private motorcar, with 740 billion passenger- kilometres. Far behind it, came public transport by road with 83 billion Fig. 1: The various power systems on the railways of Western and Central Europe passenger-kilometres, whereas rail was only in third place with 74 billion passenger-kilometres. The least used mode was flying, with 36 billion passenger- kilometres. Reacting to this empirical finding, the German Minister of Transport arrived at the assumption that there would be further increases of at least 20 % in passenger transport in the years between then and 2015, when there would be an annual total of 1130 billion passenger- kilometres.

The volume of freight traffic flowing in the alpine republic of Austria swelled by nearly 50 %, especially in the east-west direction, following the opening of the “Iron Curtain” and the enlargement of the European Union. The most recent forecasts are saying that there will be an increase of an additional 25 % by 2015. It is easy to see what the consequences are going to be: east-west transit traffic is going to be superimposed on the already heavy north- Indusi, possibly also south flows. This is going to lead to an in RO, HR, YU intolerable situation not only for the inhabitants of the narrow alpine valleys but Fig. 2: The most important train-protection systems in Europe

31 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3131 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:1512:21:15 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

and, at best, no more than the initial Phase shift steps towards harmonized technical standards and guidelines for the railways.

2 Formalistic and overregulated: interoperability on Europe’s rails

What was it then that went awry on the Fig. 3: It is problematical trying to find underfloor space for installing the many antennae needed by European Union’s transport markets? Was the various train-protection systems it a lack of liberalization vision, a lack of political willpower? Or were there spanners taxation of fuels and infrastructure costs) and production provisions for motive power in the works of national and pan-European out of their own pockets. units handed to them by the central offices interests, making it impossible for of the old state railways, the governments to keep pace with the In addition to this, the railways also have manufacturers must now fight tooth-and- market? to pay too much for motive power units for nail for the award of contracts, for which hauling trains across borders. A modern no more than the requirements profile is In the beginning (hardly had the political electric locomotive costs on average three defined prior to the submission of bids. borders fallen) was the (written) word. It million euros, and around 33 % of this was the vision of borderless mobility for price tag is accounted for by factors “not This shift in paradigm and the emergence European freight and passenger transport related to traction” – according to a of competition, which began to bite on land, by water and in the air. The costing carried out by the railway-supply perceptibly halfway through the 1990s, led European Commission followed words with industry. This includes, in particular, the to a collapse in prices, problems with actions and proposed a directive on the costs of obtaining multiple approvals, quality, numerous half-baked ideas for development of European railways, which occasioned by the varying national trains and frequent inconsistencies in was adopted by the Council of the signalling and train-protection systems. procurement policies. This eventually European Communities on 29 July 1991 These mean 20-40% additional costs for resulted in the now-predominant (91/440/EEC). It was the first item of the capital employed (a far from negligible requirement in the new situation: what the legislation that introduced, albeit sketchily, figure!). Seen purely in engineering terms, railways expect above all else from the the idea of free access for all the coping with the five main power-supply industry supplying them are ready-to-run community’s railways to the networks of all systems that dominate European railways motive power units, which must satisfy the the other railways. The directive also (Fig. 1) and more than a dozen train- requirements for each individual country contained measures for the provision of protection systems in active use ceased a (which are sometimes extremely divergent) transport services and the operation of long while ago to constitute serious and must also have obtained all the infrastructure to be separately managed problems for the manufacturers of necessary official approvals. The market and to have separate accounts. Four years locomotives, multiple units, power cars, for railway vehicles is also demanding low- later, the European institutions adopted a and so on (Figs. 2 and 3). The other side cost motive power units, but ones that are set of deregulation aims by laying down of the coin is that the drawn-out national characterized by top values for both the framework for the use of the railway approval procedures and the extensive reliability and availability. Equally infrastructure and by describing technical equipment for operating with indispensable, claim the train operators, procedures such as safety certification, various train-protection systems inevitably are short delivery times, so that they can train-path assignments and access prices. push up the price for multi-system motive react quickly to any new market Not a single word, however, did they spare power units. requirements. In this environment, the at the time for the oh-so-urgent technical railways prefer to put their faith in harmonization. From the perspective of the railway-supply competitive, thoroughly tested and industry, there have been manifest economic package solutions for new Numerous member states, then still with contradictions in the development of the locomotives, multiple units, railcars and highly integrated former state railways, motive-power market, its general power cars. were showing little interest in further framework and its constraints since the deregulation steps and even found ways fall of the political borders in Europe, the Although fifteen years have gone by since of stopping them in the European Union’s attainment of the single European market the starting signal was given for the New machinery. To make matters worse, even and the beginning of the process of Europe, whose thoughts and actions were railways which had been divisionalized as opening up the market. On the one hand, to be unrestrained by national borders, its relatively autonomous undertakings in the the state railways have gradually lost their most apparent contradictions still course of their national railway reforms monopoly rights as sole users of the frequently come to the fore: performed U-turns towards the end of the network and have realigned themselves 1990s and started to move back under more and more as entrepreneurially- ġ rapidly growing transport volumes, but the umbrella of integrated groups. This thinking and acting train operators in rail denied a “level playing field” with development ran counter to the intentions public ownership. On the other hand, this the other transport modes, of the European Commission, which had whole situation has led to a recasting of ġ deregulation of the transport markets, clearly underscored its insistence on the roles of the railways and the but with inadequate competition rules, free-market principles once again in its manufacturers, whose relationships had and 1996 whitepaper. As the Commission been steady and perfectly understood by ġ advancing European integration, but put it, the only way of sustainably all for many decades. Instead of being the still no more than a fuzzy framework for strengthening the competitiveness of recipients of the mandatory development the European Union’s transport policy the railways compared with the roads

32 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3232 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:1912:21:19 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

and of finally contributing to revitalizing Commission demanded that four decisive considerable financial challenge. The dual- them was through train operating powers be removed from the individual system and four-system electric companies without state monopolies, railway companies and vested in a neutral locomotives, which are needed for the open and largely deregulated markets, the institution: smooth operation of both freight and complete separation of infrastructure and passenger trains on the most important operations and railway companies in ġ issuing franchises, north-south trunk lines cost 10-25 % more competition with outsiders. ġ establishing charges for use of the than the railways’ comparable single- infrastructure, system locomotives. Acting on the basis of political objectives ġ issuing safety certificates, and enshrined in the treaty establishing the ġ assigning train paths. In 2004, after numerous controversies, European Community, which include the European Union finally published a set interoperable trans-European railway While those in Brussels were still locked of measures known as the “second railway networks, the European Union went on to up in debate, the market created a package”. One of the items in it was the take further steps in charting a strategic situation of fait accompli. Shippers and long-overdue directive 04/49/EC, which course. It adopted the “Community providers of logistic services had already for the first time formulated the guidelines for the development of a trans- reacted to the Europeanization of requirements for a uniform safety level for European transport network” (the principal merchandise flows a long time previously. the railways undertakings and the axes of the European Union’s future In addressing Bombardier customers in infrastructure managers – initially just for infrastructure), decided for the first time 2004, Professor Uwe Clausen, Head of the the trans-European networks. Another on the components of a number of Fraunhofer Institute for Material Flow and important item in the package was the directives on the technical harmonization Logistics in Dortmund, presented the regulation setting up the European Rail of national provisions and, in 1999, analysis that, for companies like Agency (ERA), whose future responsibility adopted the first directive on railway DaimlerChrysler, and indeed for European is to be to coordinate the maintenance of interoperability, which, to begin with, only automotive suppliers as a whole, the old safety, technical compatibility and covered the high-speed segment. national borders had ceased long before to interoperability on railway tracks constitute barriers to the optimized throughout the European Union. Thirdly, it Initially, very little of this was actually distribution of goods. included another directive aimed at noticed on the ground, especially on the streamlining the previous mixed bag of European freight railways. Competition did No one ought thus to have been surprised interoperability standards. not really develop properly, and the that it was above all the freight railways of voluntary agreement to create so-called the United Europe that resorted to self- This package was followed, something “freight freeways” on a number of the help measures. With the backing of the over a year later, in June 2005, with the most important freight corridors UIC (International Union of Railways) and “Regulation on the interoperability of the crisscrossing Europe, which was arrived at its “Trans-European Rail Freight Network” conventional trans-European railway after endless haggling, did not result in (TERFN) project, they signed the Rail Net system”, which built further on a directive anything better than patchwork. The hope, Europe (RNE) framework agreement in of the European Parliament and the cherished in particular by the European 2002. Since then the “one-stop-shopping” European Council adopted in 2001 Commission, that the freeways would have principle has been applicable on Europe’s essentially on the same subject. a domino effect, triggering numerous freight tracks: no matter how many similar projects, remained a dead letter. national railway networks a given freight Meanwhile, the keystone to the whole The European Commission’s reaction was consignment has to use, international structure is formed by the third railway to “take the bull by the horns” and to freight customers have to deal with just package, which to date only exists in the create a package, into which it stuffed all one partner. form of a draft. This contains basic the ingredients it considered essential for principles concerning the uniform a liberalized railway market, defining the Nevertheless, there was once a time when European train driver’s licence and opening aspiration and the legal framework with the only promising way of surmounting up the market in passenger services by greater precision than ever before. these hurdles on the way to a European 2010. So all the important components for railway without frontiers appeared to be a legally binding set of rules for the In this package, the European Union multi-system electric locomotives and European Union’s interoperable railway summarizes the essential characteristics (more in the longer term) the uniform system (on matters such as system safely of the open railway market as: digital ETCS/ ERTMS (the European Train and the technical harmonization of rolling Control System/ European Rail Traffic stock and infrastructure) exist as drafts or ġ creating equality of opportunities and Management System), which was (and still adopted texts on the table of the European effective competition between the is) in the process of being built up (Fig. 4). house. railway companies, According to the UIC, it is going to take at ġ promoting market and network access least another 10-15 years for this system As far as the trans-European rail for new railway undertakings, to be introduced comprehensively networks are concerned, European-Union ġ dependable access to the railway throughout Europe and only then will it be law is replacing the approval procedures, infrastructure for all entitled operators, really operationally and economically which used to be based on purely ġ protection of railway undertakings in relevant. It is after all a significant agenda national legal provisions. What will competition with one another against item, with a total of 30 000 motive power then apply will be those interoperability abuse through market domination, and units and a good 165 000 kilometres of measures, which, in the view of the ġ two-way links between the network track needing to be equipped, as the EU member countries, guarantee not providers and the train operators to European Commission’s whitepaper on only the technical compatibility of motive create the greatest possible benefits for transport ascertains. The total capital power units, interfaces and infrastructures railway customers. requirement for ETCS, taking the throughout the entire railway system, infrastructure providers and train operators but also free access to networks In order to ensure implementation of these together, has been estimated at as much and markets, as means to this essential components, the European as EUR 15 billion, which represents a end.

33 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3333 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:2012:21:20 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

in line with the principles of the new European approach to technical Monitors harmonization and standardization. with built-in According to this, the guidelines only lay redundancy down what fundamental requirements rail vehicles must satisfy for entering service but not how these are to be achieved in technical terms. What this means (no more and no less) is that if technical standards are to be elevated to the status of statutes they must be limited to just what is strictly necessary.

National In order to attain the objective of TPSs interoperability on Europe’s railway lines, (without STM) however, it is necessary to replace the general principle that the use of standards is a voluntary matter with legislative acts that are binding. This is the case for all European standardization tasks resulting Further countries from the interoperability directives or their subordinate technical specifications (TSIs). Germany Netherlands including A whole edifice has been constructed on the Betuwe Route top of this foundation of laws and Fig. 4: Bombardier’s modular ETCS system for Angel Trains Cargo’s class-186 cross-border TRAXX guidelines – that of the European locomotives. This makes it possible to operate with both ETCS and the conventional train-protection procedures for testing, certifying and systems (TPSs) commissioning standard-gauge railway vehicles, including locomotives, multiple The unshakable fundamental requirements energy, infrastructure, maintenance and units, railcars and power cars for train also include safety, reliability, availability telematics for passenger trains. sets. Its cornerstones are the so-called health and environmental protection. The essential requirements and the procedures guidelines, in turn, are based on the A group of experts has been given the task for performing inspections, analyses and mandatory provisions of technical of defining catalogues of requirements for evaluations and for placing trains in harmonization, whose substantive each of the pending TSIs; its membership service: anyone wanting to place motive substructure is formed by the TSIs is made up of representatives of railways, power units on the market throughout the (technical specifications of railway manufacturers and suppliers. All European Union in future is going to have interoperability). These TSIs lay down key standardization work in the strict sense of to document their safety, reliability and harmonization values that are compatible the term is the exclusive preserve of the interoperability, to have them certified as with the trans-European networks in the European standardization bodies, CEN being in conformity with EU provisions form of technical specifications, norms (European Committee for Standardization) through certification offices known as and standards. In combination with the CENELEC (European Committee for notified bodies and to be in possession an railway-safety directive, they establish the Electrotechnical Standardization) and ETSI authorization for putting them into service standards that must be met by (European Telecommunications Standards issued by the railway safety authorities of interoperable railway technology as well as Institute). the member states (which, in the case of motive power units throughout Europe. Germany, for instance, is the Federal In their work, these organizations are Railway Authority, EBA). Currently, there is The TSIs for high-speed trains came into guided by four fundamental principles, one notified body in Germany, the force throughout the European Union on 1 which were adopted in a Council resolution independent Eisenbahn-Cert (EBC). It December 2002. Individual documents deal back in 1985 (OJ 85/C136/01): works together with other accredited with vehicles, command and control inspection bodies, product and quality systems, train protection, signalling, energy 1. limitation of harmonization to essential certifiers and inspection laboratories. and infrastructure. The first package of TSIs safety requirements for the European Union’s conventional 2. drawing up of technical specifications In Austria, several accredited notified railway system has also been adopted. The and standards bodies have been entrusted with individual documents here cover freight 3. voluntary nature of the basis for the inspection activities. They also work both wagons, train control, train protection, use of technical specifications and with one another, through an Austrian and signalling, operations, traffic control, noise standards a European network, and with accredited and telematics for freight trains. These are 4. conformity with the general guidelines inspection bodies and test laboratories. due to be published in all the appropriate in the application of specifications and languages in the Official Journal of the standards. In addition, the Austrian railway authority is European Communities, and the national currently working with the railways to approval authorities have been waiting for These guidelines have been of produce a set of specifications for EC them since the start of the year. fundamental significance insofar as testing of subsystems, in order to provide (technical) standards complying with these the notified bodies with a form of It is envisaged that the second, third and four fundamental principles are inspection manual. fourth railway packages could be adopted contributing decisively to deregulation and between 2007 and 2009. These contain are freeing governments, businesses and Even if the contours of the new situation the TSIs on tunnel safety, handicapped the people from superfluous detailed are now becoming clearer and clearer, it is transport, motive power, passenger stock, provisions impeding development. This is still likely to take many years until the

34 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3434 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:2112:21:21 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

Fig. 5: The class 185’s driver’s console for hauling trains between Fig. 6: Thanks to close cooperation between all the bodies involved, very Germany and France. Given the lack of interface uniformity, the little time was needed to obtain the approvals for the Swiss Federal Railways’ operating elements for the French train-protection system have class “Re 482” and BLS’s class “Re 485” for working between Germany and had to be placed on top of the regular monitors Switzerland. The two classes are identical

harmonization of railway technology and resulting in a large number of certifiers the transposition of the EU’s legal and testers. If those national bodies that framework for the railways have made their are responsible for safety are to be able to 3 Compromise and pragmatism: way into laws and ordinances throughout validate whole and part systems the European Union, causing a coexistence definitively, both the content of such cross-acceptance in the of old rules and new ones (Fig. 5). It is by certification bodies’ work and the German–Austrian–Swiss triangle no means least on account of the procedures they practise must thus be and beyond unexpectedly long migration phase for coordinated and harmonized at the pan- ETCS/ERTMS, with the renewal, refitting European level. Time is not on our side. Bombardier, for and retrofitting of rail vehicles and the instance, as the world-market leader in the subsystems, that, for the time being, the Yet another situation that seems to be at development and construction of electric core remains intact of those national least as problematic is the safety locomotives, knows what time and money provisions that cater for the technical, evaluation of certificates and test results has to be spent on obtaining approvals topographic and operational peculiarities issued by inspectors and certifiers in parts even for the most modern, interoperable of each individual country. Examples of of the world not subject to European Union TRAXX platform of electric locomotives with this are a switchable version of the Integra laws or the laws of its member states. their multi-system capability. In some permanent magnet needed for the Swiss Once again, there are large numbers of countries the approval procedure, ZUB train-protection system and the exceedingly different inspection bodies especially for locomotives for hauling requirement on steep alpine railway lines and certifiers. There may well be justified cross-border freight trains, can drag on for in Austria for it to be possible to reapply grounds for considering that there are months – even for years. In such cases, brakes without fully releasing them first as differences in the quality of their for instance in France, the additional costs well as particularly tough fire-prevention inspections. This state of affairs causes incurred run into millions of euros. It is precautions on motive power units. considerable difficulties for notified bodies generally the case that the national and safety authorities alike. In the final authorities exploit their decision-making At the same time, weaknesses and analysis, after all, the safety authorities, in latitude to the full in favour of the approval- shortcomings are showing up in the granting authorizations for vehicles or their granting body. process of technical harmonization. On the part systems to be placed in service, also one hand, they threaten to move away assume overall responsibility for the safety Bombardier is one positive example of a from the once pragmatic approach of evaluation of them. manufacturer that has succeeded in very “harmonization, homologation and considerably reducing the time needed for European approvals only where necessary” Despite all this, there is actually no viable its locomotives to complete the approval and to expand the approvals procedures alternative to the route embarked upon of procedure. It has achieved this by carefully into something much more bureaucratic, European “harmonization, homologation analyzing its experience in recent years, by taking up more time and costing more and approval” for motive power units too. maintaining a sustainable presence in money – on top of the problems already There is a broad measure of agreement on each of the countries concerned and also existing with ETCS. On the other hand, this point amongst manufacturers, train by practising a lively exchange of they evoke the danger of blunting the operators, infrastructure managers, the information with the particular authorities instruments of technical harmonization national and European authorities and and train operators (Fig. 6). It took an through overregulation and multiple governments. The question, however, is: exceptionally short period of time at the testing. That is precisely what has can goodwill alone suffice to cure the end of 2004 (faster even than scheduled) happened with the accreditation of harmonization process that is on the move to obtain approvals for Italy and inspection and certification bodies both for from its flaws and even to accelerate it, Switzerland for its TRAXX F140 MS multi- the railway as a whole and individual considering the complicated, longwinded system locomotive, known as Swiss class subsystems and specialized parts and participation of the 25 countries that are “Re 484” (Fig. 7). Another locomotive subassemblies within those subsystems, now EU members? belonging to the same platform, TRAXX

35 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3535 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:2212:21:22 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

F140 AC1, which has been running processes to be carried out, and its aim is minimum safety requirements in dependably for Railion in Germany as class their multilateral recognition. Since then, accordance with the latest recognized 185.1, obtained its approvals for operating Germany (D), Austria (A) and Switzerland state of the art. Equally clear definitions between Germany and Austria or in the (CH) (sometimes called the “DACH apply to the approval documents, test triangle comprising Germany, Austria and countries”) have been pursuing the reports and expert opinions which a Switzerland thanks to making the most out principle that, if a particular motive power manufacturer must submit for obtaining of this particular know-how. At the time of unit for cross-border operations has the necessary overall safety evaluation for writing, Bombardier is the only already been approved in one of the three a motive power unit from the authorization manufacturer with an AC locomotive in its countries, the others will fundamentally bodies. Of course, there has also been portfolio that is authorized for Germany, accept and recognize its essential safety homologation of the minimum Austria and Switzerland. Given that there evaluations and documentation for the documentation required for appraising is a fundamental and direct correlation other countries too. interfaces and evaluating the interplay between the duration of approval between a given motive power unit and the procedures and their costs, speeding up Given its success, on account of its other subsystems making up the railway. the procedures as just described also economic efficiency and lean organization, reduces the financial outlay incurred by the cross-acceptance procedure can The manufacturers, the railways and the them. actually trace its lineage back to the inter- approval authorities all conclude that the governmental regulations governing the cross-acceptance procedure for the An extremely valuable and advantageous international exchange of freight wagons, approval of locomotives, multiple units, step for bringing about close liaison and RIV and RIC, which were adopted many railcars and power cars for fixed train sets coordination between the manufacturers decades ago. What is immediately striking has been positive in each of the countries and the competent national authorities as is the practical focus of the technical concerned. One point they all stress, in regards approval activities came about safety requirements for the approval of particular, is that the processes that have with the setting up of “AG CH/D/I/A”, a motive power units as agreed by the DACH been specified and qualified in this way practical international consortium countries. They have adopted the same have led to a very considerable cost concerned with approvals. The competent clear demarcation lines as regards the optimization for all of the parties involved. authorities involved in it are those from responsibilities of the manufacturers, Germany (EBA), Austria (Federal Ministry of operators and national authorization This pragmatic, efficient minimum- Transport, Innovation and Technology, bodies in charge of safety. Thanks to the homologation approach, which achieves Switzerland (Federal Office of Transport, fact that these approvals provisions do not homologation and approval in a single BAV) and Italy (Cesifer), and they have go beyond harmonizing those matters that process thus has the best possible recently been joined by the Dutch IVN. are essential for free market access and credentials for being applied directly do not set out to harmonize everything throughout the European Union. More than “Cross-acceptance” (or “mutual that might possibly be harmonized, they that: the rail-vehicle manufacturers, those recognition”) is the term that has been ensure the technical compatibility and purchasing rail vehicles (be they train coined for the approval pragmatism, which interoperability of vehicles on the transport operators or leasing companies) and the has been expressly welcomed by the markets, but at the same time leave the approval authorities in both the European railways and the industry supplying them. manufacturers the necessary latitude for countries directly concerned and outside of The cooperation, which EBA, BMVIT and bringing innovative, low-cost designs of Europe could thus soon be handed a BAV launched towards the end of the vehicle onto the market. In doing this, both uniform approval formula that has been 1990s, has the effect of simplifying, the manufacturers and the approval/ proven to work in practice. Given the harmonizing and unifying the homologation authorization authorities know that their rapidly advancing industrialization of rail of all the test, validation and approval position is underpinned by clear-cut freight and the strong competitive pressure on it coming from the roads, it is urgently waiting for unbureaucratic, low-cost and dependable approval standards. So nothing could be more self-evident than to implement the technical harmonization objectives step-by-step and country-for- country along the European Union’s most important freight corridors on the basis of mutual recognition.

It is the view of the approval authorities involved that the substantive test and validation provisions for motive power units must be worked out in several stages in the context of a common homologation procedure for the EU countries still to be agreed upon. These stages might look like this:

ġ agreement on common safety requirements (uniform safety objectives) ġ agreement on compatibility requirements (essential minimum compatibility) Fig. 7: An SBB/CFF/FFS Cargo class-“Re 484” locomotive hauling a shuttle freight train between ġ harmonization of process design and Switzerland and Italy management (scale and substance

36 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3636 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:2512:21:25 UhrUhr Uniform EU approvals for motive power units – an absolute prerequisite for railways without frontiers

of the test processes, avoidance of This whole process, however, runs the risk German Transport Forum: Mobility for Germany. Facts unnecessary/redundant tests) of grinding to a standstill not only on and Demands, Berlin 2005. ġ UIC position paper on the effects of directive 91/440/ elimination of the obstacles caused by account of the complicated process of EEC and the provisions derived from it in the countries national legal provisions (reduction in arriving at agreements amongst the EU’s of Central and Eastern Europe, Paris, 1999. national administrative constraints and 25 member states but also due to Pan-European Corridors and Pan-European Network, avoidance of unnecessary ones) conflicting national and European UIC paper, Paris, 2000. ġ UIC + Deutsche Bahn AG (publishers): UIC ERTMS clear demarcation lines between the interests. The zealous overregulation by Conference 2003, Leipzig 2003. responsibility of the manufacturers the European Union’s regulatory VDB: internal newsletter, No. 1, Berlin, 2005, pp. 7 ff. (product liability), train operators authorities is turning out to be another Das Ziel einer gerechten Anlastung der (operator liability) and the approval obstacle of similar proportions. Infrastrukturkosten wird deutlich verfehlt. VDV position authorities’ in charge of safety paper, Cologne, 2003 Neue wirtschaftliche und administrative Hürden würden ġ clear-cut definition of the minimum It is the opinion of the authors that the die Integration des europäischen Eisenbahnmarktes safety requirements demanded by the process of cross-acceptance in the behindern, VDV position paper, Cologne, 2004 authorities granting authorizations and homologation and approval of motive Regelwerk auf Europakurs. Projektbericht. In: Brunel Newsletter 17, No 3, 2004, p. 4 for the approval documentation, test power units that is already being Vitins, Janis: Bombardier erweitert seine Lokomotiv- reports and expert opinions needing successfully practised by the approval and familie Traxx. In: Elektrische Bahnen, 3/2005. to be submitted for the overall safety authorization bodies in Germany, Austria, Honegger, Peter; Walther, Jörg: Wettbewerbsvorteil evaluation, and Switzerland, Italy and the Netherlands, in Länder-Zulassungen. In: Güterbahnen, 2/2005. ġ European Commission white paper: A Strategy For clear-cut definition of the minimum close coordination with big locomotive Revitalising The Community‘s Railways, COM (96) 421 documentation required for appraising manufacturers like Bombardier, constitutes of 30 July 1996. interfaces and for the evaluation of a genuine alternative to the current Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community‘s railways. Published the vehicle’s coherence with the other European homologation practice. Firstly, in the Official Journal of the European Communities 24 subsystems. cross-acceptance promises clear-cut and August 1991, L 237, p. 25. economically efficient rules. Secondly, it Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community Important as what has been presented avoids duplicate and even triplicate guidelines for the development of the trans-European above may be, however, the technical procedures. Thirdly, it is optimally suited transport network: Published in the Official Journal of harmonization on Europe’s railway tracks for practical use and has the further the European Communities of 09 September 1996, L depends at least to the same extent on advantage that it could be implemented 228, p. 1. Council Resolution of 7 May 1985 on a new approach whether or not the European Union and its speedily within the European Union. to technical harmonization and standards (85/C member states manage a radical 136/01): Published in the Official Journal of the acceleration in the rate at which ETCS is Notwithstanding all these benefits, such a European Communities of 04 June 1985, pp. 1-9. Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on the introduced on the most important long- step would still be impossible without the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed distance freight and passenger routes. goodwill of all concerned. Such a rail system: Published in the Official Journal of the European Communities of 17 September 1996, L 235, Since the conversion of numerous legacy procedure of short, direct communication p. 6. vehicles is by no means the smallest overcoming borders would make everybody Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and factor in pushing up the costs of migrating into winners: the train operators, the of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system: to ETCS, any targeted financial aid made infrastructure providers, the manufacturers Published in the Official Journal of the European available by the European Union will more of railway equipment, the approval and Communities of 20 April 2001, L 110, p. 1. than pay for itself in the medium term; authorization bodies, both European and Directive 2004/49/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the interoperability ought to be seen as national, and, by no means least, the Community‘s railways and amending Council Directive investing in the long-yearned-for railway’s customers. 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings competitiveness of the European railway and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for system. The long-cherished dream of the the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification locomotive that can work from Copenhagen (Railway Safety Directive): Published in the Official Journal of the European Communities of 30 April 2004, to Naples just as easily as its competitor L 164, p. 44. on the roads would finally come true. DIN EN 50126: Railway applications. The specification Recommended further reading and demonstration of reliability, availability, maintainability and safety (RAMS). Beuth Verlag, Berlin, SCI/Verkehr: Der Weltmarkt für Bahntechnik March 2000. (summary), Cologne 2003. Guide on drafting directives based on the new UIC: European Rail Research Integration, approach and the global approach. Publications Office Paris 1998. of the European Communities, Luxemburg, 2000. Haase, Dagmar: Rail Net Europe. Gateway to European Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 Rail Infrastructure, lecture held at “Transport 2003”, concerning the modules for the various phases of the 4 Concluding summary Munich 2003. conformity assessment procedures and the rules for Rail Liberalization Index 2004, including for the first the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, and prospects time the new member states of the European Union, which are intended to be used in the technical Deutsche Bahn press communiqué, 11 July 2004. harmonization directives: Published in the Official Up until the end of the 1990s the main Bahn frei für Europa. Allianz pro Schiene e.V., Berlin Journal of the European Communities 30 August 1993, reason that only sluggish progress was 2002. L 220, p. 23. Leenen, Maria; Neumann, Lars: Der deutsche Thomasch, Andreas: Sicherheitsanforderungen made in the liberalization of the European Bahnmarkt – Marktanalyse 2004 bis 2009. In: an Schienenfahrzeuge und europäischer railways was the absence of technical Internationales Verkehrswesen (56) 9/2004, Harmonisierungsprozess. In: ZEVrail Glasers Annalen harmonization of the rolling stock and pp. 395-398. 128 (2004), SFT proceedings, Graz, pp. 28-47. Clausen, Uwe: Verkehrsströme und infrastructure. Since then, the European Logistikanforderungen im Europa der Zukunft. Commission, confronted by massive Grenzenloser Schienengüterverkehr in Europa, lecture increases in traffic, especially on the manuscript, Deidesheim, 05 May 2004. German Concrete Information Centre (publisher): roads, has put an intensive effort into Prospects and Concepts for Mobility and Infrastructure, establishing a complete set of provisions Cologne 2001. to be applicable throughout the whole of German Concrete Information Centre (publisher): Statistical Compendium on Mobility, Mobility Congress, the European Union, especially for the Cologne, 2000. approval of interoperable motive power Prognos AG (publisher): Transport in the New Europe, units. Basel, 1990.

37 2 (2006)

330_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd0_37_Hartig_Schlummer_Thomasch.indd 3737 009.05.20069.05.2006 12:21:2812:21:28 UhrUhr