Good Navigation Status

Transcription

1 Good Navigation Status Regional GNS workshop Strasbourg, 16 th September 2016

2 Agenda for today 9:00 Welcome and introduction 9:10 Session 1: Presentation of Good Navigation Status study Questions & answers 9:30 Session 2: Good Navigation Status on the Rhine experiences and measures of the CCNR Questions & answers 10:00 Session 3: Presentation of current results and approach towards GNS Questions, answers and discussion 11:00 Coffee break 11:15 Session 4: Recommendations and discussions on selected GNS indicators for the Rhine area (by CCNR/ MS experts) 12:30 Lunch 13:30 Session 5: First proposal of exemption criteria for non compliance with Art. 15.3(a)by GNS consortium, discussion on possible criteria and examples 14:00 Session 5: Contributions and discussion on Good Practice Guidelines based on initial overview of topics 14: 45 Conclusions and actions, further cooperation 15:00 Closing 2

3 Session 1: Presentation of Good Navigation Status study Martin Quispel, GNS Consortium/STC-NESTRA 3

4 Background and purpose of GNS study To substantiate Article 15 3.(b) of TEN T Guidelines (Reg.1315/2013) as regards Good Navigation Status: Member States shall ensure that on the Comprehensive Network Rivers, canals and lakes are maintained so as to preserve Good Navigation Status while respecting the applicable environmental law Article 38: For inland navigation infrastructure within the TEN T core network, Good Navigation Status has to be achieved (and thereafter preserved) by 31 December

5 Background and purpose of GNS study Entire TEN T inland waterway network Not only core network corridors All CEMT IV waterways Including (isolated) inland waterways in Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Italy, Portugal and Spain Good Practice also of interest for CEMT <IV waterways and non EU countries 5

6 Implications and possible outcome Use of result is open : Technical background for the legal interpretation of Article 15 3.(b): e.g. Input for a Staff Working Document by DG MOVE Basis for project selection criteria by INEA (CEF funding..) No new targets will be set by the study Proposals, oriented on existing agreements Focus on how to implement targets and monitor performance 6

7 Planned Deliverables Study 1/ /2017: Agreed GNS components and requirements (quant./qual.) Monitoring and reporting options and requirements Input to TENtec Database IWW Glossary Specification of exemption criteria to Art (a) GNS network assessment GNS parameters and KPIs Roadmaps for critical GNS sections Good Practice Guidelines for implementation of GNS 7

8 Status Ongoing bilateral expert contacts and discussions Survey on GNS elements among European Working Group Input to updated draft TENtec glossary Draft discussion papers on GNS concept Presentation, discussion of concept: EFIP Executive Committee, 7 8 April 2016, Vukovar CCNR Roundtable 2 March 2016, Strasbourg Pan European meeting on 20 June 2016, Rotterdam Regional workshops Klaipeda, Budapest, Strasbourg, Berlin 8

9 The GNS Working Group Purpose: to keep track of work and exchange feedback, discuss intermediate results Members: o o o o o Method: Experts from river commissions: CCNR, DC, MC, SC Experts from national and regional waterway managers and ministries of transport Experts from the European Commission Experts from IWT industry Experts representing other uses/users of rivers, lakes and canals 3 pan European meetings ( ), regional workshops, dedicated meetings and/or surveys 9

10 Today s session Specific focus of discussion with you: Overall GNS concept and approach GNS components and key performance indicators First discussion on exemption criteria: interpretation of TEN T minimum requirements for draught and height under bridges and stocktaking on possible criteria Focus topics and possible contributions as regards good practices and needed guidelines for achieving GNS 10

11 Basic outline of GNS concept 11

12 1st Pan European Working Group 20/6/2016 Main outcome: Broad range of views varying between broad and extensive GNS approaches to a very narrow and focused scope. Outcome of 20 June: GNS concept shall be flexible and take regional conditions and different user segments into account The focus needs to be laid on how to achieve and maintain GNS rather than setting quantitative targets GNS elements shall not duplicate relevant existing legal regulations Good practices for supranational cooperation exist, but need to be extended GNS shall foster the exchange of good practices and benchmarks GNS activities should contribute to the achievement of agreed standards and implementation of regulations/plans Monitoring shall be a major topic in work on GNS 12

13 Background of GNS concept What is important for Good Navigation Status? Maximising payload on board, economies of scale Minimising waiting times Reliability and predictability of transport Safety Sustainability (o.a. fuel consumption, working with nature) Article 15 b: Rivers, canals and lakes are maintained so as to preserve good navigation status key focus physical waterway infrastructure 13

14 Proposed definition of Good Navigation Status Good Navigation Status (GNS) means the state of the inland navigation transport network, which enables efficient, reliable and safe navigation for users by ensuring minimum waterway parameter values and levels of service. Moreover, GNS is to be achieved considering the wider socioeconomic and environmental sustainability of waterway management. 14

15 Proposed elements of the GNS concept 1. Quantitative measureable hard components related to the output of waterway management addressing the navigability standards for users Dimensions of navigation channels, locks and bridges and their availability over time 2. Process related and/or qualitative soft components Waterway infrastructure management process (e.g. maintenance), traffic management process (e.g. information to users) and wider scope (e.g. facilities along waterways) 3. Minimum standards of a process to define GNS objectives, implementation, monitoring, application of exemptions and revision of the GNS concept 15

16 Outline of GNS concept

17 Main findings Klaipeda workshop Klaipeda: Fairway marking regarded as important issue to improve fairway conditions, in particular as regards lakes Mixed traffic waterways: Focus of GNS on inland navigation transport networks, reference could be made to waterways belonging to zones 3 and 4 in regulation on technical requirements of inland navigation vessels (EC 2006/87/EC) Approaches on ice handling: Ice class requirements for vessels and either continuity of traffic (SE) or seasonal closure (FI) Coordination with third countries is challenge and is seen as barrier for EU funding (e.g. Saimma canal on land rented from Russia) Focus on soft components, e.g. traffic management and regulation in SE/FI Lock construction required to improve fairway conditions in LT, but legal restrictions prevent such construction Question as regards the consideration of river currents 17

18 Main findings Budapest workshop Budapest: A wide stakeholder integration is very important (e.g. environment) Don t forget requirements for passenger cruise vessels Hint for the GNS process: similarities and lessons to be learned from WFD Current targets according international agreements already challenging! Need for clear reference water levels Make use of existing data(bases) and link/integrate them Waiting times at borders (KPI) to be addressed, but to be treated seperately We are only at the beginning focus first on need to haves (e.g. in guidelines) 18

19 Session 2: Good Navigation Status on the Rhine experiences and measures of the CCNR CCNR Secretariat expert / MS delegate expert 19

20 Session 3a: Presentation of current results and approach towards GNS; part 3a) the draft GNS Concept Henrik Armbrecht, GNS Consortium/Planco 20

21 Legal Requirements Implementation of: 1. Article 15.3 a) CEMT IV minimum requirements or an exemption in a duly justified case (key issues: 2.5m draught; 5.25m height under bridges) 2. Article 16 b) In promotion of projects of common interests, giving priority to reaching higher standards than class IV where appropriate when modernising existing or creating new waterways 3. Articles 15.3 c) and article 39.2 b) RIS implementation and availability of clean fuels 21

22 Legal Requirements Implementation of: 3. Article 15.3 b) Rivers, canals and lakes shall be maintained so as to preserve good navigation status proposed hard and soft GNS components 4. Exemptions as defined in article 15.3 a) Elaborated definition, proposed criteria and process 5. Minimum standards of a process for the development, implementation and monitoring of Good Navigation Status 22

23 Outline of GNS concept

24 GNS hard components Focus physical waterway infrastructure: navigability standards for users (fairway, locks, bridges) Applies to the entire TEN T waterway network Subject to TEN T or AGN Experts in the GNS working group confirm high priority SMART criteria apply: quantitative European parameter values to measure Good Navigation Status on EU level is possible via KPIs Possible to be monitored via the TENtec database of the European Commission ( session 3b) 24

25 KPIs for GNS hard components 2 proposed KPIs for GNS: Navigation Reliability and Waiting times KPI on Navigation Reliability Link to articles 15.3 (a) and 16.(b) (class IV or higher) Daily availability of draught, height, width and length per year TEN T objective: 365 d/year or reference to local conditions according to ECMT Resolution 92/2 on classification of waterways? KPI on Waiting times Waiting time at locks 25

26 GNS soft components Process related components which contribute to score of hard components infrastructure management (e.g. maintenance, marking) traffic management (e.g. information to users) Wider scope of inland navigation infrastructure (e.g. facilities along waterways) Specific EU regulations already apply (e.g. RIS, clean fuels) Relevance may be limited to specific regions No need for quantitative measurable parameters across Europe on section level Experts in the GNS working group confirm their relevance 26

27 GNS soft components Process oriented How to reach GNS? Identifying objectives for soft components: Selected benchmarks and guidelines described in Good Practice Manual on GNS ( session 5) To be defined according to minimum standards of process for development of GNS (tbd) Monitoring and reporting based on minimum requirements (checklists) GNS Concept as regards guidance and checklists for soft components shall focus first on the key topics and can be expanded and further elaborated in future 27

28 Process to develop GNS Purpose: Not only focus on the output of GNS, but on how to reach it To reach agreements on exemptions for core GNS elements To reach agreements on soft GNS objectives/benchmarks, if applicable To foster implementation and maintenance of GNS To monitor GNS process Study defines minimum standards of the process in order to keep it flexible and applicable to existing, well functioning mechanisms 28

29 Process to develop GNS I Draft minimum standards I: Objectives/Measures are developed in a coordinated way between waterway managers (if applicable (trans )nationally/regionally coordinated) Systematic consideration of: TEN T minimum requirements The transport potential demand and user requirements of a waterway section (domestic and foreign) The applicable environmental law. Where possible, synergies are created ( working with nature ) Further uses of a river, canal or lake (cross sectoral) Overall socio economic impacts of measures (costs vs benefits) Possibilities of innovation and technological development (ship design, maintenance technologies..) 29

30 Process to develop GNS II Draft minimum standards II: Monitoring of implementation and effectiveness of measures Targeting a continuous improvement process and pro active implementation Regular implementation of the process, frequency depending on the type of measures and maturity as regards GNS Communication and discussion with the involved users by the waterway managers about status and planned measures 30

31 Summary GNS concept GNS parameters and quantitative KPIs related to the physical waterway infrastructure and its use Exemptions as regards CEMT IV 2.5m draught and 5.25m height based on specific criteria Minimum standards of process to define exemptions, develop and monitor maintenance measures Additional softer elements, flexible approach using qualitative descriptions, checklists inspired by good practices Process to reach GNS, enforcement of objectives, monitoring Taking into account external factors such as: innovation, market development, climate change, Link to Good Practice Guidelines on how to reach GNS 31

32 Discussion What is your view on the GNS concept and approach as presented? Do you agree? Do you have comments and/or suggestions for modification? What is your view on the minimum standards, do you agree, what are your comments/suggestions for modification? Your view on process to develop/monitor GNS? Is it applicable in practice? Into what extent is the process already `common practice, e.g. as regards the minimum standards? Are there elements missing/redundant? 32

33 Session 3b: Presentation of current results and approach towards GNS; part 3b) KPIs and monitoring Henrik Armbrecht, GNS Consortium/Planco 33

34 GNS hard components and proposed KPIs Waterway parameters Draught of vessel ( depth of fairway channel) Beam of vessel ( width and curve radius of fairway channel) Height of vessel ( air clearance under bridges and other infrastructure) Length of vessel ( curve radius of waterway and size of locks) KPI: Navigation Reliability of a specific (TENtec) section Availability of the physical waterway infrastructure: yearly score on reaching the targeted infrastructure dimensions KPI: Waiting times Capacity/use of locks, ship lifts, moveable bridge: Average waiting time of vessels 34

35 KPI Navigation Reliability CEMT class IV targets Local targets Targeted physical dimensions for vessel/convoy at waterway section: - Draught/depth navigation channel - Height under bridges - Beam - Length Availability of physical dimensions: - Available depth/width navigation channel - Available height under bridges Closures of waterways >24h - Man-made (announced >12 weeks in advance) and/or natural causes - For waterway links and objects (locks, bridges) Navigation dimensions of a specific section: ->Targeted Classification KPI for GNS Navigation reliability of a specific section: -> Targeted dimensions met in days/year

36 Examples Targeted navigation dimensions: Min CEMT class IV (article 15.3(a)): 2.5m draught/5.25m height under bridges on 365d/year (or local conditions (92/2 ECMT resolution))? and Local target value (higher than CEMT class IV): 2.8m fairway depth and 9.10 m height under bridges at the applicable reference water level (e.g. 345 days/year ELWL; 361 days HNWL) or Local target value (exemption): 1.9m fairway depth and 9.10 m height under bridges at the applicable reference water level (e.g. 345 days/year ELWL; 361 days HNWL) 36

37 KPIs lock CEMT class IV targets Local targets Targeted physical dimensions for vessel/convoy at lock: - Draught/fairway depth - Height - Beam - Length Closures of locks >24h - Man-made and/or natural causes - For waterway links and objects (locks, bridges) Navigation dimensions of a specific lock/section: ->Targeted Classification KPIs for GNS Navigation reliability of a specific lock/ section: -> Targeted dimensions met in days/year Availability of locks - capacity and use Waiting time at a specific lock/ section during peak times

38 KPI Waiting times at locks Indicator is strongly demanded by Industry Definition is varying Data is not available all across Europe Accept fuzziness? Elaborate waiting times indicator until 2030? Find alternative indicators? Average chamber utilisation, average operation time, number of vessels waiting,.. Apply a model based approach? Collection of lock and traffic characteristics and simulation with standardised model? high efforts 38

39 Monitoring based on TENtec TENtec: Multimodal European database for TEN T Network development IWW part: parameters on characteristics and performance of waterway links, locks and bridges TENtec shall serve as tool to monitor parameters and KPIs on GNS (first data collection is running, additional will follow) GNS study provided first input for revised glossary: improved parameters and definitions Further contribution by GNS study to achieve meaningful data set for 2016 and the next years to come Initial data collection will be base for network assessment Focus on GNS hard components Total 58 parameters, of which 22 dynamic Further data collection planned for

40 Summary Key Performance Indicators for GNS Address navigability standards (physical infrastructure, hard GNS components) KPI: Navigation reliability of a specific (TENtec) section (availability of navigation dimensions, closures) KPI: Waiting time at locks, ship lifts, moveable bridge Definition to be elaborated to be monitored via TENtec Targets: CEMT class IV Local targets higher classes or exemptions to be agreed; at applicable reference water level 40

41 Questions for discussion Do you agree with the KPIs for GNS? What is your view on feasibility/data availability? Local targets your view on measuring fairway depth instead of draught? Your view on relating it to reference water level? Reference values for factor draught/depth? Recommended ratio fairway depth/draught : 1.4 (e.g. Dutch Waterway Guidelines, PIANC) ; Rhine: operators calculate with 0.2m keel clearance; Reasonable? Danube: depth : draught m in some sections? Waterway closures only >24 hrs, or more detail? When are man made closures considered as planned? Announcement to users 12 weeks in advance sufficient? Which significant developments expected towards 2030 as regards data availability (technological innovation..) that may facilitate GNS assessment/ monitoring? 41

42 Session 4: Recommendations and discussions on selected GNS indicators for the Rhine area CCNR Secretariat expert / MS delegate expert 42

43 Session 5: First proposal of exemption criteria for noncompliance with Art. 15.3(a)by GNS consortium, discussion on possible criteria and examples Henrik Armbrecht, GNS Consortium, Planco 43

44 Understanding of Article 15.3 (a) Article 15.3 (a): rivers, canals and lakes comply with the minimum requirements for class IV waterways as laid down in the new classification of inland waterways established by the European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) and that there is continuous bridge clearance, without prejudice to Articles 35 and 36 of this Regulation. At the request of a Member State, in duly justified cases, exemptions shall be granted by the Commission from the minimum requirements on draught (less than 2,50 m) and on minimum height under bridges (less than 5,25 m); 44

45 Definition minimum criteria Study objectives: Catalogue of feasible exemption criteria Outline of process enabling acceptance of exemptions What is the definition of 2.5 metre & 5.25 metre? 365 days? ECMT Resolution 92/2 on New Classification of Inland Waterways including the footnotes and how to interprete these? 45

46 ECMT Resolution 92/2 on New Classification of Inland Waterways 46

47 ECMT Resolution 92/2 on New Classification of Inland Waterways footnotes Relevant footnotesecmt Resolution 92/2: 1. The class of a waterway is determined by the horizontal dimensions of the vessels or pushed units, especially by their width. 2. The draught of a inland waterway must be specified with reference to local conditions. 4. Takes into account a security clearance of 30 cm between the highest point of the vessel or its load and the height under the bridge. 6. Adapted for container transport: 5.25 metres for vessels carrying two layers of containers; 7.00 metres for vessels carrying three layers of containers; 9.10 metres for vessels carrying four layers of containers; 50 per cent of the containers may be empty, otherwise ballast must be used. 7. The first figure relates to existing situations and the second to future developments or, in some cases, also existing situations. 47

48 Definition Rhine profile How to see the Rhine profile in relation to exemptions for 2.5 draught? Width and depth guaranteed at reference water levels: on the Rhine distributaries, the reference is the equivalent low water level (ELWL), a level that is not exceeded on 20 days on which the temperature is above zero (no ice), and thus occurs approximately 5% of the time. Height under bridge at highest navigable water level (HNWL) (1% of time exceeded in past 10 yrs) 48

49 Exemption criteria Proposed topics for exemption criteria: local conditions (hydrology, hydro morphology, further uses of a river..) extreme weather events (floods, ) environmental requirements (e.g. WFD) benefit/cost ratio less than 1 cultural heritage Other? For each topic, criteria need to be specified 49

50 Exemption criteria Example: Extreme weather events, hydrological conditions CASE 1: Local target value (exemption to GNS core and availability dimension criteria): 1.9m fairway depth at ELWL (345 days per year ) ELWL value reached on 345 days in the current year No further exemption applicable 1.9 m fairway depth available on 345 days in the current year: Local target met 50

51 Exemption criteria Example: Extreme weather events, hydrological conditions CASE 2: Local target value (exemption to GNS core and availability dimension criteria): 1.9m fairway depth at ELWL (345 days per year ) ELWL value NOT reached on 345 days in the current year, but on 274 days Exemption applicable availability target reduced 1.9 m fairway depth available on 274 days in the current year: Reduced exemption target met 51

52 Exemption criteria Example: Extreme weather events, hydrological conditions CASE 2: Local target value (exemption to GNS core and availability dimension criteria): 1.9m fairway depth at ELWL (345 days per year ) ELWL value NOT reached on 345 days in the current year, but on 274 days Exemption applicable availability target reduced 1.9 m fairway depth only available on 182 days in the current year: Exemption target not met 52

53 Questions Rhine profile as the basic reference? What are the arguments for justification? How to deal with temporary limitations (e.g. sedimentations after floods) Are proposed topics for exemption criteria sufficient? Feedback on proposal for weather events? Possible further definitions for exemptions available? 53

54 Session 6: Contributions and discussion on Good Practice Guidelines based on initial overview of topics Sim Turf, GNS Consortium/ Vlaamse Overheid 54

55 Guidelines: Background and Purpose Need for guidelines and good practice examples on how to develop GNS confirmed by expert group Need for common understanding of key principles (vocabulary, fairway depth vs. water levels, requirements of different regulations etc.) Exchange on European level has proven fruitful in past activities, additional to PLATINA I and II Good Practice Manuals as well as further key documents Especially for soft GNS components, benchmarks (good practices) need to be identified vs. need to focus First version can not be exhaustive because of limited resources available in this study: need to focus on most important issues 55

56 GNS Good Practice Manual Content Proposed chapters: I. Introduction and reference to further manuals II. Basic information on fairway parameters and navigability III. Definition of GNS and implications IV. Minimum standards of a process on GNS development V. Good Practices for maintenance and rehabilitation (fairway, locks, bridges ) VI. Further topics in need of discussion (information to users, technological development, emergency response ) 56

57 II. Fairway parameters and navigability Key vocabulary and definitions Reference water levels Water levels and fairway depth Fairway depth and draught Source: Xavax 57

58 V. Maintenance and rehabilitation Waterway infrastructure maintenance: Bridges and Locks, ship lifts and weir maintenance: PIANC Reports: Waterway infrastructure asset maintenance management (2013) Maintenance and renovation of navigation infrastructure (2006) Inventory of inspection and repair techniques of navigation structures both underwater and in the dry (2013), ).[your input please!] Fairway maintenance Fairway Masterplan for the Danube and NEWADA duo Performance Indicators, Recommendations of the Danube Commission PLATINA I and II Good Practice Manuals IT supported Waterway Management System 58

59 VI: Further topics of relevance To be listed with references such as projects, literature, sources, etc: Water level measurements and forecast Information to users: shallow section information in ECDIS, RIS supported lock planning, Up to the minute bridge clearance information, Mooring places availability, Traffic planning Emergency response Administrative barriers for users, port procedures Mixed traffic Practical implications of the Water Framework Directive Port entrance areas (surveying and dredging) Waterway related facilities Interplay between structural (engineering) measures and regular maintenance activities Financing models for maintenance 59

60 Summary Need for guidelines confirmed by Expert Group Focus topics: Basic information on navigability issues, vocabulary etc. Good practices for planning and implementation of maintenance (fairway, locks, bridges) Suggested process to define exemptions, develop objectives, support and monitor implementation of GNS Reference to further topics in need of discussion Your input is welcome 60

61 Discussion Do you agree with the focus topics for the guidelines? Do you have further good practice examples for the focus topics in mind? Are there specific requests towards the form/methodology of the guidelines?. 61

62 Presentation of GNS study Closing session Summary of main findings Next steps 62

63 Next steps Ongoing bilateral expert contacts and discussions Updated papers on GNS concept Presentation, discussion of concept: Dedicated workshop with experts representing users, 13th of October, Brussels Regional workshop Berlin, 17 th of October Discussion of links to AGN with UN ECE, 2 November, Geneva Pan European meeting to validate GNS concept, Q Network assessment using TENtec parameter values Roadmaps Good Practice guidelines Exemption criteria 63

64 Thank you for your contributions.