RAIL FREIGHT CORRIDOR 9
CZECH-SLOVAK RAIL FREIGHT
C
ORRIDOR
C
ORRIDOR
I
NFORMATION
D
OCUMENT
B
OOK
IV
PROCEDURES FOR CAPACITY
AND
T
RAFFIC
M
ANAGEMENT
FOR TIMETABLE
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... 2
1. INTRODUCTION ... 4
2. CORRIDOR ONE STOP SHOP ... 4
3. CAPACITY ALLOCATION FOR FREIGHT TRAINS ... 5
3.1 FRAMEWORK FOR CAPACITY ALLOCATION ... 5
3.2 APPLICANTS ... 5
3.3 CORRIDOR RELATED PATH PRODUCTS ... 5
3.3.1 PaPs for the annual timetable ... 6
3.3.2 Late Path requests ... 6
3.3.3 Reserve Capacity ... 7
3.3.4 Feeder/Outflow/Connecting Paths ... 7
3.3.5 Multiple corridor paths ... 7
3.4 CONDITIONS FOR BOOKING CAPACITY THROUGH THE C-OSS ... 8
3.5 HANDLING OF CAPACITY REQUESTS ... 8
3.5.1 Leading tool for the handling of capacity requests ... 8
3.5.2 Path request phase (annual timetabling process) ... 8
3.5.3 Priority rules in capacity allocation ...10
3.5.3.1 Generalities... 10
3.5.3.2 Request with a higher priority value ... 12
3.5.3.3 Request with a lower priority value... 12
3.5.3.4 Late path request and reserve capacity ... 12
3.5.4 Handling of unused PaPs at X-7.5...12
3.5.5 Path elaboration phase (including f/o and tailor made), draft offer and acceptance phases ...12
3.5.6 Final offer phase ...13
3.5.7 Late path request phase ...13
3.5.8 Ad-hoc path request phase ...13
3.5.9 Exceptional transports and Dangerous Goods ...13
3.5.10 Overlapping sections ...13
3.6 REQUEST FOR CHANGES ...14
3.6.1 Modification ...14
3.6.2 Withdrawal ...14
3.6.3 Transfer of capacity ...15
3.6.4 Cancellation ...15
3.6.4.1 Addressing and form of a cancellation ... 15
3.6.4.2 Overview of cancellation fees and deadlines on RFC 9 ... 15
3.6.5 Non-usage ...16
3.7 RAIL-RELATED SERVICES...16
3.8 INVOICING ...16
3.9 APPEALING PROCEDURE ...16
4. COORDINATION OF PLANNED TEMPORARY CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS ...17
4.1 GOALS ...17
4.2 TCR CORRIDOR COORDINATOR ...17
4.3 PROCEDURES ...17
4.5 TOOLS ...18
4.6 PUBLICATION ...19
4.7 INVOLVEMENT OF TERMINALS ...19
4.8 LEGAL NOTICE / DISCLAIMER...19
5. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ...20
5.1 GENERALITIES ...20
5.2 BORDER CROSSING ...20
6. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT IN THE EVENT OF DISTURBANCE ...20
6.1 GENERALITIES ...20
6.2 PRIORITY RULES IN TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ...20
6.3 COMMUNICATION ...20
6.4 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ...21
6.5 ASSISTANCE TO DEFECTIVE OR DAMAGED TRAINS ...21
6.6 ITINERARY MODIFICATIONS ...21
ANNEX 4.A: CORRIDOR MAP ...22
1. Introduction
This document describes the procedures for Capacity Allocation by the Corridor One-Stop-Shop (C-OSS), for Traffic Management and for the Coordination of Temporary Capacity Restrictions (TCR).
All rules concerning applicants, the usage of the Corridor One-Stop-Shop and its products - Reserve Capacity (RC), Pre-arranged Paths (PaP) and how to order them - are explained here. The processes, provisions and steps related to Pre-Arranged Paths and Reserve Capacity refer to the Regulation (EU) 913/2010 and are applicable to all applicants. For all other issues, the relevant conditions presented in the Network Statements of the corridor IMs are binding where stated.
2. Corridor One Stop Shop
The C-OSS is the only body for applicants to request and to receive answers, in a single place and in a single operation, regarding infrastructure capacity on CS Corridor. The publication of PaPs and RC is done by the C-OSS. The C-OSS is exclusively responsible for the allocation decision with regard to requests for PaPs and RC on behalf of the concerned IM(s).
The address and contact details of the C-OSS are as follows: Správa železniční dopravní cesty, státní
organizace
Křižíkova 552/2, 186 00 Praha 8 Czech Republic
Phone: + 420 972 244 556 (head of office) + 420 972 244 606
Železnice Slovenskej republiky Klemensova 8, 813 61 Bratislava Slovenská republika
Phone: + 421 2 2029 3024 (head of office) + 421 2 2029 2552
+ 421 2 2029 3025
E-mail:
oss@rfc9.eu
Web:
www.rfc9.eu
,
www.cskorridor.eu
; www.cskoridor.eu, www.rfc-czech-slovak.eu The C-OSS tasks are to: give information regarding access to the Corridor infrastructure;
publish the PAP Catalogue and Reserve Capacity, provided by IMs, into PCS; collect all the applications for PAPs or RC;
create and update a register containing the date of the applications, the name of the
applicants, the documents supplied by these applicants and the incidents that occurred in the allocation phase;
solve conflicting applications by coordination process or applying the priority rules set in the
corridor framework for capacity allocation, defined by the Executive Board in accordance with article 14.1 of Regulation 913/2010;
propose alternative PAPs, if available, to the applicants whose applications have a lower
priority or forward them to IMs for an alternative tailor made solution;
transmit the path requests that can’t be treated to the concerned IM, who shall take
a decision on these requests;
monitor the construction of feeder or outflow paths by sending these requests to the
concerned IMs;
allocate requested capacity;
send the responses/offers to the applicants on behalf of the concerned IMs about the
keep the PAP catalogue updated during the late phase; provide draft and final offer to the applicants;
allocate capacity for late PAP requests; allocate the reserve capacity;
keep the reserve capacity path catalogue updated.
3. Capacity Allocation for Freight Trains
The decision on the allocation of PaPs and RC on the corridor is taken by the C-OSS on behalf of the IMs. For the feeder and outflow paths, the allocation decision is made by the relevant IMs and communicated to the applicant by the C-OSS.
All necessary contractual relations regarding network access have to be dealt with between the applicant and each individual IM.
3.1 Framework for Capacity Allocation
Referring to Article 14.1 of the Regulation (EU) 913/2010, the Ministers of transport adopted a decision related to capacity allocation by the C-OSS on RFC 9. The detailed text of framework for Capacity Allocation (FCA) can be found in annex 1 and on the web site.
The FCA constitutes the legal basis for capacity allocation via the C-OSS.
3.2 Applicants
According to article 15 of the Regulation (EU) N° 913/2010, an applicant means a railway undertaking (RU) or an international grouping of RU’s or other persons or legal entities, such as shippers, freight forwarders and combined transport operators, with a commercial interest in procuring infrastructure capacity.
If the applicant is not a RU, it shall assign the responsible RU for execution of the traffic as early as possible, but at the latest 30 days before the first running day. The appointment of the executing RU(s) is only valid if at 30 days before the first circulation of the train, the appointed RU(s) possesses all the necessary authorisations, including licences, certificates and contracts with the involved IM(s). If the necessary authorisations are not provided at this date, the PaP will be treated as cancelled by the applicant, and national rules for the cancellation of a path will be applied, including its financial consequences.
The C-OSS will forward the name of the RU(s) to the concerned IM(s), without prejudice of the conditions of the IMs.
If RFC 9 does not supply PaPs/RC on a line, the applicant can request a catalogue or tailor-made path for this segment only if it is authorised in the national legislation to do so. The deadline for the appointment of the executing RU(s) will also follow the national legislation in this case.
For the feeder and outflow sections national rules applies.
3.3 Corridor related Path Products
Based on Article 14 of Regulation 913/2010 the supply of capacity in a RFC 9 shall be in the form of Pre-arranged Paths covering the requests for the annual timetable, the late requests and ad-hoc requests.
Fixed PAP
Section with fixed time (data may not be adapted in the path request by an applicant)
Intermediate points (between two sections) are included in order to respect the amount
freight traffic entering and / or leaving the Corridor and to be used for stops (e.g. locomotive change), and feeder/outflow connection.
Operation points with fixed times within a section only to be used for stops (but not for
feeder / outflow connection). Flex PAP
Section with flexible time (data may be adapted in the path request by an applicant according to individual needs but not exceeding the given range of standard running time and stopping time:
Applicants have the possibility to include their own requirements in their PAP request within
the parameters mentioned in the PAP catalogue.
Indication of standard journey times for each corridor section has to be respected.
Times at handover points between IMs (usually a station near the network borders) are
fixed and harmonized between IMs and cannot be changed.
Intermediate point (optional) between two PAP sections without fixed times are proposed in
order to respect the amount of freight entering and / or leaving the Corridor and to be used for stops (e.g. loco changes). Other points may be requested or the given ones shifted.
Operation point (optional) without fixed times within a section be used for stops
(e.g. locomotive change) within the indicated range (but not for entering and / or leaving the corridor).
The maximum numbers of stops and total stopping time per sections has to be respected.
The Flex PAP gives to the Applicants the possibility to have the freedom to adjust the path to their own requirements, e.g. asking additional stops or the adjustments of timetable within the pre-defined time frame.
Henceforth unless it is not necessary to highlight the differences between Fixed and Flex PAP the expression ‘PAP’ refers to both types.
3.3.1 PaPs for the annual timetable
PaPs are a joint offer of the IMs of the countries involved in the RFC 9. The bodies coordinate cross-border paths for the annual timetable and hand them over to the C-OSS as a single point of contact for publication and capacity allocation.
The PaPs are an off-the-shelf product for international rail freight. In order to meet the applicants’ need for flexibility and market demand on the RFC 9 they are split up in several sections instead of PaPs crossing the entire RFC – respectively its terminals. Therefore the offer might also include purely national PaP sections – to be requested in the context of international path applications to the C-OSS (to include at least one border of a Rail Freight Corridor).
It is essential to know that published PaPs are protected in the IMs planning system/tool against major changes (dislocation, shifting, etc.) resulting from other capacity requests.
PaPs are published in PCS on the 2nd Monday in January (X-11) and can be requested until the 2nd Monday in April (X-8, path request deadline). Capacity requests for the annual timetable have to be placed until that date to the C-OSS.
A catalogue of PaPs will be published by the C-OSS in preparation of each timetable period.
3.3.2 Late Path requests
Late requests refer to capacity requests placed within the timeframe from May until middle of October (X-2) concerning the annual timetable, to the C-OSS.
The offer consists of a re-publication or an updating of the remaining – non-booked – PaPs for late path requests, that takes place approximately the first week of May. The period between X-8 and the end of April will be used for solving conflicting requests. Therefore, the C-OSS needs all
remaining PaPs for this task until X-7.5 (end of April) and path requests during this timeframe are not permitted.
3.3.3 Reserve Capacity
Reserve Capacity consists in remaining capacity in the running timetable dedicated to international ad-hoc freight trains along the corridor.
The IMs have decided to create a reserve capacity (article 14 (5) of the regulation 913/2010/EU) based on PaPs to allow a quick and optimal answer to the requests. Reserve capacity on RFC 9 will be a collection of several sections along the corridor.
Reserve capacity may consist either of non-requested PaPs or PaP constructed out of remaining capacity by the IMs after the allocation of the overall capacity for the Annual Timetable.
RC will be published in form of PaPs in PCS and listed on the website from Mid-October (X-2) until 30 days before the running day of the train. After this deadline, requests will have to be addressed to the concerned IMs.
3.3.4 Feeder/Outflow/Connecting Paths
In case the available PaPs or RC do not cover the entire requested path, the applicant may include a feeder and/or outflow path to the connecting PaP segment(s) into the international request addressed to the C-OSS via PCS in a single dossier.
A feeder/outflow path refers to any path/path segment prior to reaching an intermediate point on the corridor (feeder path) or any path/path segment after leaving the corridor at an intermediate point (outflow path).
Feeder and outflow paths will be constructed on request in the concerned PCS-dossiers by following the national path allocation rules. The communication of the offer will be executed by the C-OSS within the same timeframe as the communication of the requested PaPs.
It must be noted that requesting a connecting path between two PaP sections is possible, but because of the difficulty for IMs to link two PaP sections, a suitable offer might be less likely.
Graph with possible scenarios for feeder/outflow paths in connection with a request for one or more PaP segment(s)
3.3.5 Multiple corridor paths
It is possible for capacity requests to cover more than one rail freight corridor. The applicant might request PaP sections of different RFCs in one PCS dossier. Each C-OSS remains responsible for its concerning PaP sections, but the applicant might direct any questions to one of the involved C-OSS, who will coordinate with the other concerned C-OSS when needed.
3.4 Conditions for booking capacity through the C-OSS
RFC 9 applies the internationally agreed deadlines for placing path requests as well as for allocating paths (for the calendar, see http://www.rne.eu/timetabling.html).
An international request for capacity on a corridor has to fulfil the following requirement:
to be submitted to a C-OSS
o using the tool PCS including at least one PaP/RC segment (Access to PCS is granted
by RailNetEurope upon request of the applicant. Details are explained in the PCS User Manual (http://pcs.rne.eu/index.php/home.html));
o the entire train run from origin to final destination must be requested in one single PCS
dossier, but can consist of several PaP/RC segments on one or more corridors including feeder and/or outflow paths;
o to cross at least one border on a corridor;
o the technical parameters of the path request have to be within the range
of the parameters of the requested PaP segments (exceptions are possible if allowed by the concerned IM e.g. when the timetable of the PaP can be respected).
All applications have to be done in PCS, which is the unique booking tool for RFC 9. The Applicant submits the path request by choosing a specific PaP and opening a PCS dossier for it. The path request may contain feeder/outflow paths and/or minor adjustments to the displayed PaP (e.g. adjusted train parameters or alternative stops without influence to the published border times of PaP).
PaP applications placed via other channels to the C-OSS (e.g. e-mail, fax, telephone, RNE paper template) have to be redirected to PCS. The C-OSS informs the applicant accordingly and provides basic support for using PCS. The C-OSS is not entitled to open PCS dossiers for the applicant.
The C-OSS confirms the receipt of the path application and announces its further treatment.
3.5 Handling of capacity requests
The C-OSS receives and collects all path requests for PaPs placed via PCS.
3.5.1 Leading tool for the handling of capacity requests
Applicants placing requests at the C-OSS must use PCS. Within the construction process of feeder and outflow paths and tailor made paths, the national tool may show additional information to the applicant.
3.5.2 Path request phase (annual timetabling process)
The C-OSS checks all the incoming capacity requests. The C-OSS will only treat requests for freight trains using PaPs/RC and crossing at least one border on a corridor. All other requests will be immediately forwarded to the IM concerned for further treatment. In those cases, answers will be provided directly by the involved IM. Regarding requests for the annual timetable, the IMs will accept them as placed in time (i.e. until the 2nd Monday in April). This procedure does not apply for feeder/outflow paths, where the IMs offer will be communicated by the C-OSS together with the offer for PaP/RC.
In case the request is either incomplete or inconsistent, the C-OSS will contact the applicant(s) and ask him (them) to complete the missing information within five (5) working days. If the required information is not delivered within this timeframe, the request will not be treated any further.
If a request involves PaPs on several Rail Freight Corridors, the involved C-OSSs check the capacity request and involve the other participating C-OSS(s) to ensure their cooperation in treating multiple corridor requests. This way, the cumulated length of PaPs requested on each corridor will be used to calculate the priority value of possible conflicting requests. The different corridors can thus be seen as part of one combined network.
Requests with special cases
Jumping-PaP request
o It is possible to combine several PaP-sections including a spatial jump / time leap
in one request/PCS dossier (e.g. RFC09PAP0001 from A to B combined with RFC09PAP0003 from B to C).
However, directly linked through-going PaP requests will be prioritized over “jumping PaP” requests whereas in case of a tie the combined length of those “jumping PaP” will be taken into account in a second step.
Example:
Multi-Corridor request
o It is possible to combine several PaP-sections on different corridors in one request /
PCS dossier.
Sandwich PaP request
o This refers to the situation when Applicants request corridor capacity in the following
order:
PaP section
Tailormade request (sandwich-section)
PaP section
These requests will be taken in consideration as follows:
o If the planning is asked to be started at the origin of the request:
The C-OSS pre-allocates the PaP-sections from origin until the sandwich-sections. All sections after the sandwich-section will not be pre-allocated but treated as tailor made. This will have impact on the priority calculation.
The C-OSS pre-allocates the PaP-sections from the destination of the request until the sandwich-sections. All sections between the origin and the sandwich-sections will not be pre-allocated but treated as tailor made. This will have impact on the priority calculation.
o If the planning is asked out of the middle of the request:
The C-OSS pre-allocates the longer part of the PaP-sections either before or after the sandwich-section. All other sections will not be pre-allocated but treated as tailor made. This will have impact on the priority calculation.
Path Register
The C-OSS establishes and maintains a path register for all incoming PaP applications in PCS containing a dossier number, the name of the applicant, the requested PaP section, the requested number of running days and specifying the follow-up activities of the C-OSS concerning the concrete path request. This is available to the concerned IM at any time and in a simplified form allowing business confidentiality to all concerned applicants upon request.
3.5.3 Priority rules in capacity allocation
3.5.3.1 GeneralitiesIn the event of conflicting requests for PaPs placed until X-8 (2nd Monday in April), the priority rule described in the “Framework for capacity allocation” will be applied, in order to determine which request has the highest priority value.
However, resolution through consultation may be promoted and performed in a first step between applicants and the C-OSS, if all the following criteria are met:
Conflict is only on a single rail freight corridor Alternative pre-arranged paths are available
The C-OSS addresses both applicants and proposes a solution. If both applicants agree to the proposed solution, the consultation process ends. If for any reason the consultation process does not lead to an agreement between all parties at X-7.5 the priority rules described below apply. If the C-OSS does not to use the consultation procedure (because of a high number of conflict for example), the following priority rule will be used:
The priority rule consists of two steps. In a first step, the C-OSS checks if a Network PaP is involved in the conflicting requests, or not.
If no “Network PaP” is involved in the conflicting requests:
LPAP = Total requested length of all PaP sections on all involved RFCs Included in one
Dossier.
LF/O = Total requested length of the feeder/outflow path(s), for the sake of practicality,
is assumed to be the distance as the crow flies.
YRD = Number of requested running days for the timetable period K = The priority value
All lengths are counted in kilometres.
The priority is calculated according to this formula: (LPAP + LF/O) x YRD = K
The method of applying this formula is:
In a first step the priority value (K) is calculated using only the total requested length of
pre-arranged path (LPAP) multiplied by the Number of requested running days (YRD).
If the requests cannot be separated in this way, the priority value (K) is calculated using
the total length of the complete paths (LPAP + LF/O) multiplied by the number of requested running days (YRD) in order to separate the requests.
o The respective applicants will be acknowledged of the undecided conflict the latest five
working days after X-8 and invited to attend a drawing of lots in the RFC 9 office in any case before X-7,5.
o The actual drawing will be prepared and executed by the C-OSS, with complete
transparency to all attendees.
o The result of the drawing will be communicated to all involved parties, present or not,
via PCS and mail, before X-7,5.
If a “Network PaP” is involved in at least one of the conflicting requests:
If the conflict is not on a “Network PaP”, the priority rule described above applies
If the conflict is on a “Network PaP”, the priority is calculated according to the following
formula:
K = (LNetPAP + LOtherPAP + LF/O) x YRD K = Priority value
LNetPAP = Total requested length (in kilometres) of the PaP defined as “Network PaP” on either RFC LOtherPAP = Total requested length (in kilometres) of the PaP (not defined as “Network PaP”) on either RFC
LF/O = Total requested length of the feeder/outflow path(s); for the sake of practicality, is assumed to be the distance as the crow flies.
YRD = Number of requested running days for the timetable period. The method of applying this formula is:
in a first step the priority value (K) is calculated using only the total requested length
of the “Network PaP” (LNetPAP) multiplied by the Number of requested running days (YRD)
if the requests cannot be separated in this way, the priority value (K) is calculated using
the total length of all requested “Network PaP” sections and other PaP sections (LNetPAP + LOtherPAP) multiplied by the Number of requested running days (YRD) in order to separate the requests
if the requests cannot be separated in this way, the priority value (K) is calculated using the
total length of the complete paths (LNetPAP + LOtherPAP + LF/O) multiplied by the Number of requested running days (YRD) in order to separate the requests
if the requests cannot be separated in this way, a random selection is used to separate
the requests.
o The respective applicants will be acknowledged of the undecided conflict the latest five
working days after X-8 and invited to attend a drawing of lots in the RFC 9 office in any case before X-7,5.
o The actual drawing will be prepared and executed by the C-OSS, with complete
o The result of the drawing will be communicated to all involved parties, present or not,
via PCS and mail, before X-7,5. 3.5.3.2 Request with a higher priority value
In cases the priority rule has to be applied, the applicant of the request with a higher priority value will be informed beginning of May.
3.5.3.3 Request with a lower priority value
If the priority rule has to be applied, the applicant who did not get the requested PaP(s) (request with a lower priority value) will be informed.
Additionally the applicant with lower priority value will be offered an alternative PaP as close as possible to the first request within five (5) working days, in case an appropriate PaPs on the relevant section(s) is still available. The offered alternative has to be accepted within five (5) working days. In case there is no answer by the applicant or the alternative will not be accepted, the C-OSS forwards the original request to the concerned IM who will continue to handle the request. The appropriate IM offer however will not have the status of a PaP.
Unless otherwise communicated by the applicant or the nominated RU if any, the IM will use the parameters of the requested PaP (speed, length, operation points…) to construct the tailor made alternative solution. The request will be treated by the IM as placed in time (i.e. until the 2nd Monday in April). Feeder and/or outflow paths may have to be adapted as a consequence.
3.5.3.4 Late path request and reserve capacity
For these types of request, the priority rule “first come – first served” is applied.
3.5.4 Handling of unused PaPs at X-7.5
After the pre-allocation by the C-OSS all unused PaPs will be handed over to the IM. PaPs for late path requests are forwarded to C-OSS later (see 3 .3 .2).
3.5.5 Path elaboration phase (including f/o and tailor made), draft offer and acceptance
phases
The C-OSS forwards the requested Feeder/Outflow paths to the concerned IM at the latest until the second Friday after the deadline for placing requests for elaboration of a timetable offer fitting to the PaP already reserved (pre-allocated). Questions occurring during the path elaboration process (e.g. concerning feeders/outflows or connections between RFCs) may be discussed and arranged between the concerned IM and applicant bilaterally.
At the RNE deadline for Draft Timetable (X-5) the C-OSS communicates the draft timetable offer for every request concerning a pre-allocated PaP to the applicant via PCS on behalf of the IM. The C-OSS monitors the observations placed by the applicant on the draft timetable offer for the PaP in PCS. This however only concerns justified observations related to the original path request - whereas modifications to the original path requests are handed over to the concerned IM for further exclusive treatment in the late path request process (without further involvement of the C-OSS).
3.5.6 Final offer phase
At the RNE deadline (X-4), the C-OSS communicates the final timetable offer for every valid PaP request to the applicants via PCS on behalf of the concerned IM and informs the applicant that the contracts of use of railway infrastructure must be concluded between the IM and the applicant based on the national network access conditions. If, for operational reasons the publication via national tools is still necessary (e.g. ensuring documents for train drivers), the IM have to ensure that there are no differences with the PCS publication.
The applicant must check the final offers and may accept or reject these.
The applicant shall accept the final timetable offer within five working days by setting the green light in PCS.
Dossiers switched harmonised to the Active timetable will follow the normal PCS process Further treatment is ensured by the national IMs directly (not by C-OSS).
3.5.7 Late path request phase
Requests for remaining PaPs (i.e. placed after the 2nd Monday in April), will be treated and allocated according to the principle “first come – first served”. However, the feeder and/or outflow path(s) will be constructed by the concerned IM(s) once the timetable with the requests placed on time has been finalised. This means, applicants will not receive an offer for the entire train run before the second half of August, according to the RNE International Calendar.
3.5.8 Ad-hoc path request phase
During this phase, applicants can request paths published as reserve capacity from X-2, in to the running timetable, up to 30 days before the actual train run.
The C-OSS receiving the request via PCS will check the consistency of the request and designate the IM involved in the path request. The C-OSS will coordinate the handling of the request and provide the answer via PCS to the client, which will also be notified via e-mail.
The applicant will receive the ad hoc request offer not later than 10 days before train run.
3.5.9 Exceptional transports and Dangerous Goods
Trains transporting Dangerous Goods or Exceptional Transports will be considered as such according to the national rules of each Infrastructure Manager.
National rules regarding both Dangerous Goods and Exceptional Transports will apply in these cases.
When the capacity requested by the Applicant is to be used for the transport of dangerous goods, it shall be so declared in the PCS dossier, and the Applicant shall guarantee the fulfilment of all requirements and rules governing such transport in each involved IM, to safeguard the safety of others and of infrastructures.
3.5.10 Overlapping sections
The setting up of the corridor lines bring to situations where there are corridors lines overlapping with other(s). The aim of the corridors in this case is to prepare the best possible offer in order to respect the main flow of traffic connections and also to show all the possible solutions of connecting main connecting points through several corridors.
In this situation, corridors are developing a common offer visible through all potential corridors. Applicant may order PaPs using one or several corridors and choose the best possible connections to elaborate the international path request.
In case of conflict, the responsible COSS will deal with the process of deciding which request should have the priority together with the other corridor(s). In any case the applicant will be consulted by the responsible corridor.
PaPs are published in PCS in such a way to allow the customers to choose sections through corridors
All PaPs on RFC 9 are prepared with separate approach, which means that every PaP is assigned to exact RFC corridor. Applicants are allowed to combine PaPs from different corridors freely as they wish.
On RFC 9 there are these overlapping sections with other corridors:
Infr. Man. Overlapping Section RFCs involved PaP Offer
SŽDC Hranice na Moravě Ostrava RFC5 RFC9 Separate
SŽDC Ostrava Český Těšín RFC5 RFC9 Separate
SŽDC Český Těšín SK/CZ Border RFC5 RFC9 Separate
ŽSR SK/CZ Border Čadca RFC5 RFC9 Separate
ŽSR Čadca Žilina RFC5 RFC9 Separate
ŽSR Žilina Púchov RFC5 RFC9 Separate
SŽDC Praha Česká Třebová RFC7 RFC9 Separate
3.6 Request for changes
3.6.1 Modification
Change requests for PaPs placed by the AP after the X-8 deadline until X-4 are treated by the C-OSS according to the following rule:
"Downsizing" changes to the PaP request (e.g. cancellation of running days, shortening
of route by deleting entire PaP sections, lower parameters) which do neither affect the international character of the PaP nor the ranking of the request in the allocation decision according to the priority rule, are handled by the C-OSS and documented in the PCS dossier and the path register accordingly.
"Substantial" changes to the PaP request affecting the border times and the ranking
of the request in the allocation decision according to the priority rule, are assumed as complete cancellations of the PaP request. Those change requests are then forwarded to the concerned IM for further treatment as late requests in remaining capacity.
The modifications after final allocation need to be addressed directly to the relevant IMs.
3.6.2 Withdrawal
Withdrawing a request is only possible between X-8 (after path requests deadline) and X-4 (before final allocation) for annual timetable requests and between the date of request and the date
of allocation for reserve capacity. Once the allocation has taken place, only cancellation remains as a possibility.
At the moment, no harmonised rules for the entire corridor can be presented. So this topic will follow the national rules below.
Country: Condition:
Czech Republic Free of Charge
Slovakia Free of Charge
3.6.3 Transfer of capacity
Once capacity is allocated to an applicant, it shall not be transferred by the owner to another applicant. The use of capacity by an RU when carrying out the business of an applicant which is not an RU, is not considered as a transfer.
3.6.4 Cancellation
Cancellation refers to the phase between the final allocation and the train run. Cancellation can refer to one, several or all running days and to one, several or all segments of the path.
3.6.4.1 Addressing and form of a cancellation
The cancellation needs to be addressed directly to the relevant IMs. 3.6.4.2 Overview of cancellation fees and deadlines on RFC 9
At the moment, no harmonised rules for the entire corridor can be presented. So this topic will follow the national rules below.
Country: Condition:
Czech Republic
Capacity reservation fee 100% of reservation fee according
to Network Statement
For planned train journey when cancellation of allocated train path was submitted before the scheduled train departure (except cancellation done before the date for regular timetable change)
or
Trains with a delay of 1200 minutes or more for reasons on the side of the RU
10,- CZK per trainkilometer per day of ride on main routes
or
7,50 CZK per train kilometre per day of ride on regional routes
Slovakia
ŽSR does not charge additional fees for the cancellation of allocated path.
Fee for ordering and allocation
of capacity U1 under Decree
of Railway Regulatory Authority No.
3/2010 as amended by later
regulations shall be charged even if allocated path has been cancelled.
3.6.5 Non-usage
If the RU does not show up, i.e. does not use the allocated path, the case will be treated as follows:
Country: Condition:
Czech Republic
Capacity reservation fee 100% of reservation fee according
to Network Statement
For planned train journey when cancellation of allocated train path was submitted before the scheduled train departure (except cancellation done before the date for regular timetable change)
or
Trains with a delay of 1200 minutes or more for reasons on the side of the RU
10,- CZK per trainkilometer per day of ride on main routes
or
7,50 CZK per train kilometre per day of ride on regional routes
Slovakia
ŽSR does not charge additional fees for the cancellation of allocated path.
Fee for ordering and allocation
of capacity U1 under Decree
of Railway Regulatory Authority No.
3/2010 as amended by later
regulations shall be charged even if allocated path has been cancelled.
3.7 Rail-Related Services
All questions regarding rail related services can be asked directly to the C-OSS who will contact the concerned IMs and who will provide an answer within a reasonable time frame. For IM-specific information, you can consult CID book II, chapter 5.
3.8 Invoicing
The infrastructure usage contracts and invoicing are concluded / emitted between the IMs and the applicant on basis of national network access conditions.
All costs (charges for using a path, administration fees, etc.) are invoiced by the respective IMs. Currently, there is a difference within the various countries regarding the invoice for the path charge. In some countries, the path applicants will receive the invoice, in other countries the invoice will be sent to the RU who has used the path.
3.9 Appealing Procedure
Based on Article 20 of Regulation 913/2010: in case of complaints regarding the allocation of PaPs (e.g. due to a decision based on the priority rules for allocation), the Applicants may address the respective Regulatory Body.
4. Coordination of Planned Temporary Capacity Restrictions
4.1 Goals
Based on Article 12 “Coordination of works” of the Rail Freight Regulation (RFR) EU No 913/2010 each corridor shall coordinate and ensure the publication of the schedule for carrying out the works on the infrastructure and its equipment that would restrict available capacity on the freight corridor in one place, in an appropriate manner and timeframe. RFC 9 aims to comply by regularly updating the information and presenting the relevant planned temporary capacity restrictions (hereafter TCRs) in an easy accessible way.
4.2 TCR Corridor Coordinator
According to RNE´s ”Guidelines for Coordination / Publication of Planned Temporary Capacity Restrictions” (hereafter RNE-Guidelines) the TCR Corridor Coordinator is a “function in charge of the overall coordination of TCRs along the whole RFC as well as for checking their impact on the capacity availability”. On Baltic-Adriatic RFC this function is provided by the head of the sub-group “Coordination of Planned Temporary Capacity Restrictions” (hereafter CoTCR).
4.3 Procedures
The IM’s of RFC 9 established a dedicated sub-group “Coordination of Temporary Capacity Restrictions” (CoTCR) in charge for setting rules for the coordination process and the scope of information. Additionally the sub-group identifies the need of synchronization among the involved IMs with particular focus on the cross-border lines.
According to the RNE-Guidelines the coordination process foreseen three stages
1. Regular bilateral or trilateral coordination meeting between involved IMs: This stage considers at least all the know works in the period X-17 until X-1. The outcome is a list of coordinated works, fixed on data, impact for RUs as far as known, mentioning alternative routes.
The meetings are organised by the IMs, the Corridor Coordinator has to be informed about the results and open issues about TCRs on Corridor lines.
2. Coordination on RFC level: Regular coordination meetings will take place according to the guidelines at least twice a year. At these meetings all known relevant TCR should be presented and discussed in order to coordinate and optimise them on the entire corridor. The results of this coordination have to be published at least twice a year in the common tool used by the RFCs. The result of this coordination is a pre-condition for stage 3.
3. In the third stage conflicts between RFCs can be recognized. This coordination has to be done also twice a year on a proper date according to the needs of the timetabling process.
4.4 Involvement of RUs
After a primary coordination of TCRs between IMs on the RFC 9 RFC a publication of the coordinated TCRs is released and made available to the RUs. So they have the possibility to comment on the planned activities. Comments should be sent to the corridor organization. The representative of each IM who is in charge of the coordination of TCRs will bring the comments into the working group. The comments by RUs have an advisory and supportive character and shall be taken into consideration as much as possible. Regular meetings of the Railway Advisory Group (RAG) are used for discussing issues regarding the planning process of TCRs. Extraordinary meetings with RUs/applicants for discussing and solving open issues will be treated case by case.
4.5 Tools
RFC 9 intends to use the agreed version of the MS Excel macro document and/or any other IT-solution nominated in the RNE-Guidelines “Coordination/Publication of TCRs” to provide an interactive overview of the planned capacity restrictions, which is easily accessible to all involved parties. For capacity planning and timetabling, impacts of the possessions regarding the availability of the infrastructure are described (e.g. closure of the line, single line operations), including the impacts on rail traffic and the duration of restrictions. After initial publication of TCRs further details may be added as soon as available.
4.6 Publication
Coordinated TCRs should be published according to RNE-Guidelines at least on the following dates:
X-17 Information on major coordinated TCRs , also based on results of the national consultation of RUs and the harmonisation between IMs - can be taken into consideration before starting the construction of pre-arranged paths (PaPs)
X-12 Detailed coordinated TCRs – issued prior to the publication of PaPs at X-11
X-5 Update of already published TCRs- prior to final allocation and for planning of reserve capacity for ad-hoc trains.
The TCR Corridor Coordinators will calculate and define the exact dates for publication.
After initial publication at X-17 and during the process described in these guidelines, available information will be more detailed, and changes and additional TCRs will have to be taken into consideration. After coordination between all IMs involved in the RFC, the results will be published.
4.7 Involvement of Terminals
According to Article 14 (9) of the RFR, the process of capacity allocation between IMs shall take into account access to Terminals. Therefore TCRs affecting access to Terminals have to be included in the coordination and publication process of the RFCs.
TCRs regarding rail infrastructure or loading/unloading facilities inside terminal areas are the responsibility of terminal owners/operators.
4.8 Legal Notice / Disclaimer
By publicising the overview of the corridor, concerned infrastructure IMs will present the planning status for TCRs to infrastructure availability along RFC 9. The published TCRs represent a snapshot of the situation at the date of publication and are subject to further changes. Please note that the information provided should be used for rough orientation purposes only and may not constitute the basis for any legal claim.
The publication of TCRs does not substitute any national law or legislation. Customers have to refer to national Network Statements.
5. Traffic Management
The Art.16 of the regulation is stating that “the management board of the freight corridor shall put in place procedure for coordinating traffic management along the Rail Freight Corridor. The management boards of connected Rail Freight Corridors shall put in place procedures for coordinating traffic between such freight corridors”.
5.1 Generalities
The infrastructure managers of the Rail Freight Corridors shall jointly define and organise international arranged train paths for freight trains. In case of trains running on these pre-arranged international paths and having specific characteristics as specified below, they may have higher priority. For the monitoring purpose of traffic management, RFC 9 has agreed to use all train path allocated by C-OSS.
5.2 Border Crossing
Since the Infrastructure Managers are working together, there are existing bilateral agreements. These bilateral agreements are mostly based on state contracts.
6. Traffic Management in the Event of Disturbance
Art 17 of the Regulation is stating that “Management Board of the freight corridor shall adopt common targets for punctuality and/or guidelines for traffic management in the event of disturbance to train movements on the freight corridor…..”
6.1 Generalities
In the event of disturbance it is necessary to recover the smooth running of trains as soon as possible.
In case of need of re-routing of trains RFC 9 provides an overview (document published on RFC 9 website) with „Operational scenarios“ to describe basic information and conditions for the use of re-routing lines (Max. Train length, max. Train weight, power-supply, etc.).
6.2 Priority Rules in Traffic Management
There is no need to apply the same priority rules in the different network along the corridor, only the target has to be common.
Under the pre-condition, priority rules have a different legal status in the countries along RFC 9. RFC 9 has agreed “principles of priority on RFC 9”. These principles are described in Annex 4.B.
6.3 Communication
In principle the current status of trains is available in TIS, no additional information is foreseen. The IM should inform the neighbouring IMs and the concerned RUs in their own country. These activities are described in TSI OPE, the details are part of the bilateral agreements.
6.4 Emergency Management
Every IM is responsible for setting up plans to be applied in case of emergency (train derailment, dangerous goods loss, accidents, etc.) occurring on sections of RFC 9 according to the relevant national rules and regulations.
6.5 Assistance to Defective or Damaged Trains
Assisting to defective trains is regulated in TSI OPE, Appendix B.http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/OPE-TSI.aspx
6.6 Itinerary Modifications
For the case of necessary re-routing of trains RFC 9 the “Operational scenarios” describe basic information and conditions for the use of re-routing lines. To recover the smooth run of traffic and to reduce the negative effect on network level is the target in such situation, a re-routed RFC train should be considered as it was „on time“ and keep its priority as far as possible.
Annex 4.A: Corridor map
Annex 4.B: Priority Rules
Priority list during the train run (in case of delay, maintenance works, rerouting, track/signal breakdown, aso):
1) Emergency trains
2) Special trains of public interest (transport in the state interest)
3) International passenger Express and Fast trains (including locos for these trains)
4) National Express and Fast passenger trains, International Express freight trains, international passenger trains (including locomotive train and empty passenger train for these trains)
5) Other national passenger trains (including locos for these trains) 6) National Express freight trains
7) Other international freight trains 8) Other national freight trains
In case of conflict between trains with the same priority has priority train with higher value of delay or higher speed. In the frame of freight transport the priority is given also to the trains carrying perishable goods and living animals as well as the trains with guaranteed transport time.
