TOCs, Unions, Passengers, Government

[whole diary]

[SandTEngineer]

So, if rules are not to be adhered to, then what's the point of having them?

Good question.  And there is a plenty of evidence from decades of subsequent use that the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) electrical clearance rules of the 1980s were perfectly safe and that the newer more stringent rules were a mistake. 

Where is ET when you need him.....
The requirements are laid out in EU^» (European Union - about) law (EN 50388:2012) and placed into UK^▸ (United Kingdom) requirements by the Rail Standards and Safety Board.  NR^» (Network Rail - home page) don't have much say in that (other than being a consultee during the standards production process).  The requirements are mandated in RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board) standard GL/RT1210 and GL/GN1610.

[ellendune]

Where is ET when you need him.....
The requirements are laid out in EU^» (European Union - about) law (EN 50388:2012) and placed into UK^▸ (United Kingdom) requirements by the Rail Standards and Safety Board.  NR^» (Network Rail - home page) don't have much say in that (other than being a consultee during the standards production process).  The requirements are mandated in RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board) standard GL/RT1210 and GL/GN1610.

EN 50388:2012 is NOT produced by the EU NOR is it the law!  It is the a European Standard, produced by CENELEC (a committee of national standards bodies of which the British Standards Institution (BSI^▸ (British Standards Institute)) is the UK member) and its status is just the same as a British Standard, because that is what it is in the UK (it is published by BSi as BS EN 50388:2012).

It only becomes the law if a legislator writes a law saying you have to comply with it. 

Since it is considered good practice if you don'e comply with it and cannot show good reason why not they you might be open to a civil action for damages from any injured party. In this case a risk assessment was done and so NR can demonstrate that they do not need to fully comply with this standard in this instance.

The RSSB's reference to it might give it more weight, but I will leave ET to comment on that. 

[SandTEngineer]

I believe it is driven by EU^» (European Union - about) Law https://www.cencenelec.eu/standards/DefEN/Pages/default.aspx

...and in particular..

European Standards (ENs) are documents that have been ratified by one of the three European Standardization Organizations (ESOs), CEN, CENELEC or ETSI; recognized as competent in the area of voluntary technical standardization as for the EU Regulation 1025/2012.

[ellendune]

The regulation you refer to makes it quite clear that standards are not automatically a legal obligation.  It only covers the procedure for making such standards.

The page you link to is also clear on this.

Standards are voluntary which means that there is no automatic legal obligation to apply them. However, laws and regulations may refer to standards and even make compliance with them compulsory.

The three European Standards bodies listed a separate bodies and are not part of the Commission.  Their members are the national standards bodies of the various member states (which include, but are not limited to the member states of the EU^» (European Union - about)).

If EN 50388:2012 has any legal force it must come from a specific piece of National or European legislation

[dviner]

So, if rules are not to be adhered to, then what's the point of having them?

Good question.  And there is a plenty of evidence from decades of subsequent use that the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) electrical clearance rules of the 1980s were perfectly safe and that the newer more stringent rules were a mistake. 

When the pigeon exploded at Hayes & Harlington, damaging the bridge, was it on the OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") that was put up for Heathrow Express/Heathrow Connect? If it was, then it would have been on the BR clearance rules... Mind you, I doubt that the ballistic qualities of sky rats was considered for the EN regulations.

[IndustryInsider]

Yes it was.

[ellendune]

When the pigeon exploded at Hayes & Harlington, damaging the bridge, was it on the OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") that was put up for Heathrow Express/Heathrow Connect? If it was, then it would have been on the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) clearance rules... Mind you, I doubt that the ballistic qualities of sky rats was considered for the EN regulations.

... for the EN regulations standard.

Please note the important distinction.  A standard is voluntary, regulations are not!

[SandTEngineer]

That's not how I read it.  See Section 6 here.......

http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/23004/electrical-clearances-policy-statement.pdf

We need ET to give us his take on all of this.