Скачать презентацию Delay Attribution Guide April 2013 Changes Ana Maria Скачать презентацию Delay Attribution Guide April 2013 Changes Ana Maria

849f405642b9f2293056b002db73d6bf.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 7

Delay Attribution Guide April 2013 Changes Ana Maria Sanchez Delay Attribution Board Secretariat support Delay Attribution Guide April 2013 Changes Ana Maria Sanchez Delay Attribution Board Secretariat support 1 ST MARCH 2011

New Codes • 2 new codes have been introduced to the April 2013 Delay New Codes • 2 new codes have been introduced to the April 2013 Delay Attribution Guide (DAG) • JB – this is a replacement for the old QL code. A new incident is required for any reactionary delays caused by a late running train as a result of a ‘P’ coded TSR. • YQ - Where an operator’s service suffers delay as a result of overcrowding or station overtime due to that train being of short-formation, and all reasonable attempts to mitigate have been made, the delay should be attributed to the prime cause incident that resulted in the train being of short-formation for that service. CODE CAUSE JB Reactionary Delay to ‘P’ coded TSR YQ Passenger overcrowding caused by a train being of short-formation 1 st April 2013 ABBREVIATION PLND TSR SHRT FRMD 2

New JB code example • JB Example Train “A” runs 5 late, with a New JB code example • JB Example Train “A” runs 5 late, with a P-coded Temporary Speed Restriction being the largest cause of delay. Train “B” is then regulated for “A” and is itself delayed. The delay to Train “B” is explained as “YB” to Train A, but this cannot be allocated to the original P-coded incident. A separate incident coded “JB” must therefore be created, to account for the fact that the TSR has caused reactionary delay, and the delay to Train “B” allocated there. 1 st April 2013 3

New code YQ example • YQ Definition – As per current but with the New code YQ example • YQ Definition – As per current but with the additional comment: “The delay should be explained as a reaction to whichever train is initially responsible for the short formation”. • YQ Example The diesel unit scheduled to form Train “A” encounters a brake defect and has to be taken out of service. To avoid cancelling the service, the operator detaches a unit from Train “B” (which is booked to run with two attached units) and runs that in place of the failure. This means that Train “B” (and possibly later workings) has to run with half its planned passenger capacity. Delays caused by overcrowding on the short-formed Train “B” should be allocated to an incident coded “MN” (to account for the original failure) and described as “YQ” to Train “A”. This principle would equally apply where, for example, Train “A” encountered an external object on the line which damaged the train and the incident was established as vandalism, the responsibility of Network Rail. Delays subsequently caused by overcrowding on the short-formed Train “B” (and possibly later workings) should be allocated to an incident coded XB and described as “YQ” to Train “A”. 1 st April 2013 4

4. 25 Guidance where NFF 4. 25 Guidance where no fault found (technical equipment) 4. 25 Guidance where NFF 4. 25 Guidance where no fault found (technical equipment) has been updated to indicate that: • If there is NO agreement that all reasonable efforts have been undertaken to investigate the delay, then the NFF section is not to be used. Where parties have agreed that all reasonable efforts to investigate have been done then NFF is applied. 4. 25. 3. 2 has been updated to include the words in the below paragraph in italics • Where a train fails to read a piece of infrastructure based equipment but then reads subsequent equipment and it cannot be determined if the fault is train based or infrastructure based, it should be deemed unless otherwise proven, that the fault is with the train based equipment. Where two or more separate trains fail to read the same equipment in similar circumstance, it should be deemed that the fault is with the infrastructure based equipment. This principle of two or more separate trains should also be applied in the same way to two separate train-based radios. 1 st April 2013 5

4. 25. 4 Delays caused by RETB system failure where no fault is found 4. 25. 4 Delays caused by RETB system failure where no fault is found following investigation, are considered to be the responsibility of the Operator. The table in 4. 25 has been amended also. 1 st April 2013 6

Any Questions? • We encourage you all to visit the DAB website at: www. Any Questions? • We encourage you all to visit the DAB website at: www. delayattributionboard. co. uk • There you will find the latest copies of the DAG, Freight user documents and competency standards. • The web site is updated regularly with up and coming events and activities that the DAB are undertaking. • You can use the website to obtain forms to make proposals for change to the DAG and PDAC as well as to make requests for guidance. • You can use the website to make suggestions on how to improve delay attribution on the whole. • You can email the website, however, please do not use this facility to request specific attribution guidance – the request for guidance process is to be followed in these cases. • Feel free to email the DAB Secretariat on: [email protected] co. uk for clarification on process in regard to delay attribution/disputes. 1 st April 2013 7