Eurasia has a major importance in the economic, political and commercial relationships worldwide, the transport system being the strong element that binds them. The region needs an integrated transport system that would efficiently meet mobility needs and railway connections involve many countries with different systems, policies and legal frameworks which are still fragmenting the integration process. At the beginning of the year, the ministries of transport interested in the railway connection on the Europe-Asia axis signed a joint declaration on intensifying transport activities and harmonizing the railway legislation. OTIF (Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail) negotiated for this agreement as well. The organisation believes that an important aspect of railway traffic between Europe and Asia is the concept concerning the terms and general transport conditions (GTC) representing a part of the group of experts in charge with the standardisation of railway legislation. The development of international traffic in this region has to rely on a pragmatic approach aimed to define the simple common norms that offer market players a certain freedom in the activity they carry out.
OTIF plays an important role in promoting the development and standardising the legislation of railway transport and implicitly in facilitating transport. The organisation is constantly expanding its activity in the countries of the region. Currently, the organisation has 49 member states (and an associate-member, Jordan) in Europe, Middle East and Africa, its railway network stretching on 250,000km. Over the past years, Georgia (2011) and Pakistan (2013) initiated procedures to become OTIF members, Pakistan’s accession representing for the organisation not just the increase of the number of its members, but also the opening of the entire region to OTIF policies.
For operators, creating commercial offers on the Europe-Asia axis is confronted with a series of challenges which could be efficiently approached by authorities in order to increase the attractiveness of railway transport. Here, the development of inte-roperability is a necessity. The obvious solution is to ensure continuity in the 1520mm network and in the European network, but the development of common norms and a clear understanding of responsibilities are strong and efficient instruments for reducing railway transport costs. In this context, the coordination of investments in infrastructure is vital and relies on a framework of common regulations which can make possible the reduction of the cost of the vehicles in operation and their acceptance by the different networks.
The implementation of the necessary le-gislative and financial criteria and measures for ensuring the increasing competitiveness of railway transport between the two regions, the harmonisation and compatibility of OTIF legislation to that of the EU, the review of the uniform technical specifications of OTIF in the context of ERA’s adoption of the TSI amendments for freight wagons are only few of the topics approached in our interview with OTIF Secretary General, Mr. François Davenne.
RailwayPRO: The Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF) has 49 member states in Europe, Middle East and Africa and expands its influence as more and more countries initiated access procedures and become members (Georgia, Pakistan). What are the main criteria that a state interested in becoming OTIF member should meet in the context of rail transport system integration and keeping in mind that countries have different railway systems?
François Davenne: It is very important for OTIF that it continues to broaden its geographical scope. Rail transport has to be able to offer seamless links over the widest possible area if it wishes to continue to occupy a major modal share. In this respect, the recent accession of Georgia in 2011 and of Pakistan in 2013 demonstrates OTIF’s attractiveness. This is because the Organisation offers its Member States a broad palette of instruments to develop their rail transport.
Pakistan’s accession is linked to the initiative by the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) to set up a rail link for trains carrying containers between Islamabad and Istanbul via Tehran, which might one day be extended to Western Europe and southern Asia. Applying the rules of COTIF will also therefore enable freight traffic between Turkey, Iran and Pakistan to be developed, thanks largely to the CIM (contrat de transport international ferroviaire des marchandises)consignment note, which makes border crossing much easier. In the long term, it would seem that Pakistan’s accession to COTIF will mean not just that OTIF has another Member State, but that an entire region will be opened up to OTIF.
In the form of RID, COTIF also offers the possibility of using a set of uniform and harmonised rules for the transport of dangerous goods. These rules also provide a guarantee of compatibility with ADR, which deals with these issues for road transport. States such as Azerbaijan, which are in the process of acceding to COTIF, have therefore joined ADR and will recognise the obvious advantages of ratifying the equivalent rail-related regulations.
For the Contracting States that apply its technical regulations, in terms of freight transport OTIF offers technical compatibility with the European rules on interoperability: specifically, it guarantees railway undertakings that they have the peace of mind to exchange their wagons with other Member States that apply the technical regulations, particularly with the EU Member States.
One of OTIF’s strengths is that the substance of an accession can be adapted to the needs of the rail sector. In Pakistan’s case, for example, interest was focused on the CIM consignment note, which will enable Pakistan to develop trade links with surrounding countries that apply OTIF law. However, as the tracks have different gauges, technical collaboration on Appendices F and G is not of great interest for Pakistan at the moment.
COTIF therefore allows the implementation of what I would call a “law interface”, which provides our Member States with the opportunity to make their various railway laws compatible so that international traffic can be developed. COTIF can embrace countries whose structures are very different in terms of technology and the degree of openness to competition. For example, our technical rules, as I said, provide real compatibility with the networks of the European Union. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the structural reforms underway in the European Union, such as the separation of infrastructure managers and railway undertakings, have to be adopted.
In other words, there is no specific profile for countries that are interested in acceding to COTIF. Candidates for accession must be guided by their economic interest in developing international rail transport. In particular, OTIF offers effective legal instruments to develop freight, and for those countries that are developing their networks with an international dimension, OTIF provides compatibility with the European technical regulations. This last point is one of the reasons that led the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) to initiate discussions with the Organisation.
RailwayPRO: At the beginning of the year, the transport ministers in the countries interested in the rail connections between Europe and Asia signed a common declaration on the intensification of transport activities and the harmonisation of railway legislation. How do the authorities manage to determine the development and consolidation of cooperation in the Eurasian region? How will they manage to set harmonised legal measures for rail transport operation given the different systems and structures in these countries?
François Davenne: OTIF, which took part in negotiating this agreement, obviously welcomes the signature of the joint declaration on the promotion of rail transport between Europe and Asia. In my view, the most important aspect is that the concept of General Terms and Conditions of Transport (GTC) forms part of the mandate of the group of experts on the unification of railway law. The development of international traffic in the Euro-Asian region must in fact be based on a pragmatic approach, which consists of defining simple common rules giving the actors in the market a certain amount of freedom. CIM, which OTIF developed in numerous working groups with help from the sector, particularly CIT, already encapsulates a comparable philosophy.
As far as OTIF is concerned, an approach must be favoured which is based on the real constraints in international traffic. In legal terms, we broadly share Russia’s position, which is that the issue of the facilitation of border crossing is an extremely important one. Extending the application of the new Annex 9 to the 1982 Convention on customs harmonisation should achieve tangible results and will be one of the priorities of the group of experts set up to monitor the agreement. In other areas, the task is obviously a complex one, but I believe that work based on a detailed analysis of the legal and technical constraints faced by rail traffic on several major existing corridors between Asia and Western Europe could be the way to provide concrete solutions.
I would like to use this question to underline the great flexibility of COTIF, which can integrate particular arrangements for these major corridors that are being developed, the purpose of which is to concentrate the transport of goods.
RailwayPRO: There are countries in Eurasia that implement agreements to facilitate mutual railway transport, but they do not manage to level the railway market which is still very fragmented. What are the methods and measures of OTIF to eliminate cross-border barriers in international transport?
François Davenne: OTIF has no competence for customs issues, although the CIM consignment note can be used as a customs document, nor for matters concerning the opening of the market, but it does offer a number of common rules that enable borders to be crossed more easily. The legal framework provided by the International Freight Contract thus enables customs checks to be carried out in the destination country and frees wagons from checks in transit countries. Similarly, the International Passenger Contract provides a common framework for the rights and obligations of railway undertakings and passengers, which is applied throughout the entire journey. Moreover, these regulations also form an annex to the European Regulation on rail passengers’ rights and obligations.
In addition to the legal uniformity OTIF can offer, it is important to note that at the technical level, there are two opposing models for international rail transport:
– The interoperability model, which assumes that trains will cross borders without having to be recomposed at a border station. This model presupposes a rail system that is more or less liberalised, in which more than one rail transport undertaking has access to the international lines.
– The vehicle exchange model, in which trains are recomposed at a border station and are then operated by the incumbent rail transport undertaking.
Although it is compatible with these two models, OTIF’s operations are currently based on a vehicle exchange model limited to goods wagons. Promoting a model aimed at interoperability might make it possible to develop the rail markets strongly. This model obviously implies a degree of openness of international lines, but it must also give States the freedom to choose the speed and extent of this opening up.
I therefore consider that the idea that interoperability is linked to opening up competition is wrong. This is the result of the fact that for historical reasons based on military considerations, the rail networks were designed not to be compatible. If you take the example of telecommunications, the networks were designed to be intero-perable from the outset, but this was never linked to the opening of the markets. Interoperability certainly helped to open up the markets once the political decision had been taken, but it engendered the same complex questions as in the rail sector.
RailwayPRO: Regarding the activity of operators, the development of commercial offers on the Europe-Asia axis has to face a series of challenges (from gauge to customs procedures, different requirements regarding the length of trains or tonnage). What is the answer of the authorities and infrastructure managers to these challenges and what do they do to increase the attractiveness of rail transport? What are the most frequent problems that operators face and which are difficult to tackle by authorities and infrastructure managers?
François Davenne: Your question complements the preceding one. The development of interoperability on the Euro-Asian axis is a necessity. The obvious solution is to ensure continuity between the 1520 mm network and the UIC lines, which are the rule in Western Europe, but the development of common rules and a clear understanding of responsibilities are a powerful tool to reduce the cost of rail transport. In this respect, it is vital that investment infrastructure is coordinated and is based on a body of shared regulations which make it possible to reduce as much as possible the costs of commissioning vehicles and of getting them accepted by the various networks.
At the moment, the European rules and those of OSJD offer a cohesive mo-
del that enables the application of uniform procedures for putting rolling stock into service. At European level, an infrastructure register would also make it possible to simplify procedures for entrant railway undertakings. Unfortunately, these two organisations’ regulations are not compatible at present. OTIF, which makes possible the construction of a “law interface”, must join in the efforts to unify the law by fully playing its role of gateway between its Member States.
As an example, the entry into force in the European Union of the so-called Technical Specifications for Interoperability LOC&PAS, which concern locomotives and passenger trains, will affect the commissioning of new vehicles not originating from the EU: this will no longer be automatically authorised in the EU Member States under the old RIC regime. OTIF will therefore be working on a new PAS UTP, which might help resolve this inconvenient situation. During the drafting process, we will analyse whether the 1520 mm gauge can be incorporated alongside the 1435 mm gauge in order to extend the application of common rules.
RailwayPRO: What do you think that the necessary juridical and financial steps that European and Central Asian countries have to take to increase the competitiveness of railway transport between the two regions?
François Davenne: It would be very ambitious for OTIF to claim to have an autonomous vision on this issue, about which a lot has already been said and written. Nevertheless, I think there are two points that should be noted.
At the financial level, there are some extremely important infrastructure projects, such as the Marmaray tunnel, which will link Europe and Asia in remarkable technical conditions. From the freight perspective, for the development of trade, this investment will only be fully worthwhile if all aspects of the carriage of goods are envisaged. For example, let us take the problem of track gauges; clearly, converging the gauges is not something that is going to happen (and what stan-dard would be used?). In order to move forward, every aspect of the issue will have to be taken into account, particularly the operational aspects: the exact state of the exchange points, the level of development of container transport, which speeds up operations and minimises costs, etc…. The funding of major infrastructure projects would therefore have to take these questions into account, and there would have to be an attempt to bear in mind an overall operational vision of goods transport, rather than just a rail-based vision.
At the legal level, I am very much in favour of a very pragmatic approach for the instruments we are developing. Both the EU and OSJD have a complete body of regulations that are fully operational. However, these two cases are underpinned by a really systematic mindset, which ensures that the application of all these rules is consistent with a general organisation of the rail sector that differs widely in the two geographical areas. If one is speaking of developing international traffic, legislation is needed which, to borrow an IT term, is “portable”, in other words, it should be able to function in widely differing environments and systems. I like to think that this is a characteristic of the law of COTIF which, in itself, is modern law that is adapted to the development of international traffic.
RailwayPRO: What can you tell us about the harmonisation and compatibi-lity of OTIF legislation to that of the EU on the validation of technical standards, adoption of uniform technical prescriptions (APTU) and the procedures for the Technical Admission of Railway Material in International Traffic (ATMF)?
François Davenne: The accession of the European Union to OTIF in July 2011 provides an important opportunity to develop OTIF’s technical legislation. Above all, it is important to have a clear strategy that is shared by our Member States. The UTP offer a greater degree of technical compatibility with the TSI, so my hope is that by acceding to the technical appendices prepared by OTIF, our Member States will have a real return on their investment in the assurance that their access to the European rail market will be made easier.
The ongoing development of the technical regulations must not obscure those that already exist: these have to be kept up to date and equivalence with their counterparts in the EU has to be maintained, thanks to regular revision and a process for the correction of errors. The increasing number of regulations also means that there has to be some work on disseminating them, particularly in order to help the States parties that are not members of the EU to apply OTIF regulations. We will also have to rely on the States themselves to implement the UTP correctly. OTIF therefore now has a new role, to exchange, collect and disseminate information on the Member States’ activities in the common interest.
In addition, OTIF has to support active partnership with the non Member States of the EU and the European Railway Agency. The development of European railway law might have the paradoxical effect of strengthening closure of the European market by the development of technical standards that end up being a barrier to entering the market. By focusing on the facilitation of international transport, OTIF has a role to play in ensuring that the regulations developed as TSI incorporate from the very beginning the constraints that States outside the EU have, in order to make it easier to adapt the corresponding UTP.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is being discussed with ERA and the Commission to formalise this new position, which will give our non-EU Member States a better level of information and the opportunity to be involved in European technical developments right from the word go.
RailwayPRO: What can you tell us about the harmonisation and transposition of TSIs into the Uniform Technical Prescriptions (UTP) and how can the conformity between the two legislations be preserved from the point of view of the technical criteria for rolling stock?
François Davenne: This is in fact the ambitious objective that I have set for the Organisation. It is based on a strategy which consists of moving towards developing the interoperability of our Member States’ railway networks. In this context, the TSI that can be transposed into OTIF’s legislation have to be chosen on the basis of a reasoned decision. We are therefore developing a three stage strategy that will allow us to move from what we have at present (the exchange of vehicles) to real interoperability for those Member States that choose this option.
At level 1, which was reached in 2012, OTIF ensures compatibility with the two models (interoperability and exchange of vehicles).
This will also be the case for level 2, which will see the approval of passenger vehicles in international traffic covered in the regulations. A PAS UTP – for passengers – will be drafted and will encompass all the elements for the international exchange of vehicles. To be compatible with the EU regulations – in the absence of requirements for the safety management system that exists at OTIF level – safety management provisions linked to the use of vehicles will have to be added. The PAS UTP will be drafted on the basis of the revised TSI LOC&PAS, a draft of which OTIF sent for consultation to those of its Member States that are not members of the EU.
The subsequent levels will make important advances possible by extending interoperability to cover trains and infrastructure. This development assumes a greater degree of coordination between our Member States, but it must be possible to put this in place without imposing an organisational railway model the same as that of the European Union: OTIF’s ability to offer technical compatibility which does not compromise national models must be maintained.
RailwayPRO: Since ERA adopted the amendments to technical specification for interoperability relating to the subsystem ‘rolling stock-freight wagons’ (March 2013), will OTIF also review the UTPs for freight wagons?
François Davenne: The UTP Wagons is being revised and the Committee of Technical Experts on 12 June 2013 will be able to align both sets of regulations. This is an excellent achievement and an illustration of successful cooperation between OTIF and the EU.
RailwayPRO: UTP WAG has been in force since 1 December 2012 and takes precedence over RIV. What are the be-nefits of this process and what will be its impact on railway traffic and industry?
François Davenne: The forecast end of RIV is certainly a major change, which has to be seen not just in connection with the new UTP WAG, but also with the transposition of the ECM regulations (Entity in Charge of Maintenance) into OTIF legislation. Tasks and responsibilities have now been allocated differently. For example, rules are now defined and adopted at government level, instead of being agreed between railways. An independent entity must assess whether the rules have been complied with. There are now three actors in the operation of freight wagons:
– the railway undertaking operates trains,
– the keeper owns or operates vehicles with the aim of making a profit, and
– the Entity in Charge of Maintenance (ECM) takes responsibility for the maintenance of the vehicle.
These responsibilities may each be borne by separate entities or by a single entity. In international operations, it must be clear at all times and for each wagon who is the keeper, the ECM and the railway undertaking. Any organisation meeting the ECM requirements may be certified as an ECM. Therefore, a keeper or railway undertaking may also be certified as an ECM.
This reinforces one of the key principles underpinning APTU and ATMF, which is that the States parties must trust each other mutually to approve only vehicles that meet all the requirements for use in international transport. Not only must vehicles meet all the technical requirements, but the conformity assessment must also be carried out by an assessment body that meets all the conditions concerning independence set out in Article 5 of ATMF. If a State party were to issue certificates without correctly applying the relevant OTIF regulations, this mutual trust would be jeopardised, to the detriment of international rail transport. One of my priorities is therefore to create a better overview of the implementation of ATMF in the States parties. As far as possible, the Secretariat of OTIF is available to assist the States parties and will give priority to maintaining close contacts with the people responsible in each of these States.
To come back to the question of wagons and their utilisation, I intend to cooperate closely with the sector, particularly UIP, in order to modernise CUV (Contract of Use of Vehicles), which serves as a basis for the GCU (General Conditions of Use). This is in fact a particularly useful instrument for clarifying the liability regime in the new framework of the UTP Wagons and the ECM regulations.
[ by Pamela Luică ]Share on:
