Commission Decision of 5 June 2009 on the adoption of a common safety method for assessment of achievement of safety targets, as referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document number C(2009) 4246) (Text with EEA relevance) (2009/460/EC) (revoked)
EU Decision 2009/460 · Adopted 5 June 2009 · Extends to United Kingdom
Commission Decision
of 5 June 2009
on the adoption of a common safety method for assessment of achievement of safety targets, as referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
(notified under document number C(2009) 4246)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2009/460/EC) (revoked)
F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Annotations to the whole text
Textual amendments
- F1
Decision revoked (31.12.2020) by The Rail Safety (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (S.I. 2019/837), regs. 1, 6; 2020 c. 1, Sch. 5 para. 1(1)
Contents
- 1Subject matter Repealed
- 2Scope Repealed
- 3Definitions Repealed
- 4Methodologies to calculate NRVs and CSTs and to assess their achievement Repealed
- 5Enforcement actions Repealed
- 6Addressees Repealed
- Signature
- Annex Repealed
- 1Statistical sources and measurement units for calculating NRVs and CSTs Repealed
- 1.1Statistical sources Repealed
- 1.1.1Division 1.1.1 Repealed
- 1.1.2Division 1.1.2 Repealed
- 1.1.3Division 1.1.3 Repealed
- 1.2Measurement units for NRVs Repealed
- 1.2.1Division 1.2.1 Repealed
- 1.2.2Division 1.2.2 Repealed
- 1.2.3Division 1.2.3 Repealed
- 1.3Measurement units for CSTs Repealed
- 1.3.1Division 1.3.1 Repealed
- 2Methodology for calculating NRVs and for deriving CSTs Repealed
- 2.1Methodology for calculating NRVs Repealed
- 2.1.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories the NRV shall be calculated by applying in sequential order the following process: Repealed
- 2.2Methodology for deriving CSTs from NRVs Repealed
- 2.2.1For each of the risk categories, once the NRV has been calculated for each Member State according to the procedure laid down by section 2.1, the corresponding CST shall be assigned a value equal to the lower of: Repealed
- 2.2.2Division 2.2.2 Repealed
- 2.3Weighted averaging process for the calculation of NRVs Repealed
- 2.3.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories to which the weighted averaging can be applied according to point 2.1.1(c), the following steps shall be applied for calculating, during year Y (where Y = 2009 and 2011), the NRVY: Repealed
- 3Framework model for the assessment of achievement of NRVs and CSTs Repealed
- 3.1Methodology for assessing achievement of NRVs and CSTs Repealed
- 3.1.1The following principles shall apply for assessing achievement of NRVs and CSTs: Repealed
- 3.1.2Division 3.1.2 Repealed
- 3.1.3Division 3.1.3 Repealed
- 3.1.4Division 3.1.4 Repealed
- 3.1.5The outcome of the assessment of achievement referred to in point 3.1.1 shall be classified as follows: Repealed
- 3.2Stepwise description of the procedure referred to in point 3.1.1(a) Repealed
- 3.2.1Division 3.2.1 Repealed
- 3.2.2The first assessment step shall verify whether the observed safety performance is complying with the NRV or not. The observed safety performance shall be measured by using the measurement units listed in Appendix 1 and the data referred to in section 1.1, with time series which shall include the most recent years of observations as specified in section 3.1. The observed safety performance shall be expressed in terms of: Repealed
- 3.2.3The second assessment step shall consider the safety performance as acceptable if the MWA does not exceed the NRV plus a 20 % range of tolerance. If this condition is not satisfied, the Agency shall ask the safety authority of the Member State concerned to provide the specifics of the single highest-consequence accident (in terms of FWSIs) in the most recent years of observation as referred to in section 3.1, excluding the years used to set the NRV. Repealed
- 3.2.4Division 3.2.4 Repealed
- 3.2.5The fourth assessment step shall verify whether the number of significant accidents per train-km, with respect to the previous years, remained stable (or decreased). The criteria for this appraisal shall be whether there has been a statistically significant increase in the number of relevant significant accidents per train-km. This shall be evaluated by using an upper Poisson tolerance bound which will determine the acceptable variability based on the number of accidents that occurred in the different Member States. Repealed
- 3.3Moving weighted averaging process for the annual assessment of achievement of NRVs Repealed
- 3.3.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories to which the Moving Weighted Averaging (MWA) is applied for carrying out, in each year Y (starting from Y = 2010 onwards), the assessment steps described in section 3.2, the following phases shall be applied for calculating the MWAY: Repealed
- 1Appendix 1 Repealed
- 2Decision flowchart for the procedure referred to in point 3.1.1(a) of the Annex Repealed
1Subject matterF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2ScopeF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3DefinitionsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4Methodologies to calculate NRVs and CSTs and to assess their achievementF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5Enforcement actionsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6AddresseesF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Signature
F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1Statistical sources and measurement units for calculating NRVs and CSTsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1Statistical sourcesF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.1F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.2F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.3F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2Measurement units for NRVsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.1F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.2F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.3F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3Measurement units for CSTsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3.1F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2Methodology for calculating NRVs and for deriving CSTsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1Methodology for calculating NRVsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories the NRV shall be calculated by applying in sequential order the following process:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2Methodology for deriving CSTs from NRVsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1For each of the risk categories, once the NRV has been calculated for each Member State according to the procedure laid down by section 2.1, the corresponding CST shall be assigned a value equal to the lower of:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.2F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3Weighted averaging process for the calculation of NRVsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories to which the weighted averaging can be applied according to point 2.1.1(c), the following steps shall be applied for calculating, during year Y (where Y = 2009 and 2011), the NRVY:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3Framework model for the assessment of achievement of NRVs and CSTsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1Methodology for assessing achievement of NRVs and CSTsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.1The following principles shall apply for assessing achievement of NRVs and CSTs:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.2F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.3F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.4F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.5The outcome of the assessment of achievement referred to in point 3.1.1 shall be classified as follows:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2Stepwise description of the procedure referred to in point 3.1.1(a)F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.2The first assessment step shall verify whether the observed safety performance is complying with the NRV or not. The observed safety performance shall be measured by using the measurement units listed in Appendix 1 and the data referred to in section 1.1, with time series which shall include the most recent years of observations as specified in section 3.1. The observed safety performance shall be expressed in terms of:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.3The second assessment step shall consider the safety performance as acceptable if the MWA does not exceed the NRV plus a 20 % range of tolerance. If this condition is not satisfied, the Agency shall ask the safety authority of the Member State concerned to provide the specifics of the single highest-consequence accident (in terms of FWSIs) in the most recent years of observation as referred to in section 3.1, excluding the years used to set the NRV.F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.4F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.5The fourth assessment step shall verify whether the number of significant accidents per train-km, with respect to the previous years, remained stable (or decreased). The criteria for this appraisal shall be whether there has been a statistically significant increase in the number of relevant significant accidents per train-km. This shall be evaluated by using an upper Poisson tolerance bound which will determine the acceptable variability based on the number of accidents that occurred in the different Member States.F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3Moving weighted averaging process for the annual assessment of achievement of NRVsF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1For each Member State and for each of the risk categories to which the Moving Weighted Averaging (MWA) is applied for carrying out, in each year Y (starting from Y = 2010 onwards), the assessment steps described in section 3.2, the following phases shall be applied for calculating the MWAY:F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1F1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2Decision flowchart for the procedure referred to in point 3.1.1(a) of the AnnexF1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .