1tap masterplanning kick-off25 september 2012 tap tsi masterplanning item 3: company individual...

1TAP Masterplanning kick-off 25 September 2012

TAP TSI Masterplanning

Item 3:Company individual implementationplans – definitions, objectives, timelines …

Masterplanning Kick-offBrussels, 25 September 2012


Agenda

1. Introduction - Background

2. Obligations related to the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 454/2011

3. TAP master plan and company individual implementation plans: definitions, objectives, timelines, tools and baseline documents

a) Introduction

b) Retail obligations

c) Retail architecture

d) RU/ IM obligations and architecture

e) Organisational matters

4. Relation to existing TAF master plan (implementation of Commission Regulation (EC) 62/2006)

5. Adjournment


The TAP TSI regulation consists of Basic Parameters (provisions) relating to both Retail data and RU/IM communication

= Basic Parameters (BP) of the Regulation4.2.x

RU/ IM(Closely linkedwith TAF TSI)

RetailAnnex III:

ERA TechnicalDocuments(TDs) withIT specs


Phase One:Preparation

Phase Two:Development

Phase Three: Deployment

Implementation Phases

Milestones: Monthly: Progress report1 13 November 2011:

RUs to publish certain information on their websites

8 December 2011: Intermediate report1

13 May 2012: Deliverables submitted1

Over the summer 2012:ERA recommendation on deliverables to Commission

Approx mid-2014

tbd

Multi-stakeholder Steering Committee,co-chaired by EU Commission and sector

Core Project Team of railway and ticket vendor representatives, operational since July 2011

Railways, infrastructure managers and ticket vendor experts in supporting work groups

Commission co-funding, ongoing monitoring by European Railway Agency (ERA)

Main deliverables:- Detailed IT specifications, architecture concept- Governance concept- Best estimate master plan

May 2011

TAP TSI will be implemented in three phases – concepts and specs were delivered mid-May 2012 by the multi-stakeholder Phase One project

1) Available on http://tap-tsi.uic.org

13 May 2012


Phase One deliverables in a nutshell

Enrichment of TAF TSI concepts with passenger RU requirements

De-centralised IT architecture, based on legacy

Limited new but relatively inexpensive common IT

Lean governance entity providing central services needed for regulatory compliance

Common IT components for retail available approx early 2016; already available for RU/IM

Time for stakeholders to prepare thoroughly: Railways to assess their individual timelines in Q4 2012

Better mutual understanding of traveller, ticket vendor and railway requirements

Agreement for private industry follow-up activities complementing the regulatory framework

Phase One deliverables


2012/3 2012/4 2013/1 2013/2 2013/3 2013/4 2014/1 2014/2 2014/3 2014/4 2015/1 2015/2 2015/3 2015/4 2016/1

Phase Two - transition

Phase Two - development

Phase Three - operation

Masterplan Meeting

Republished TAP TSI and TAF TSI Regulations

Retail Governance entity operational

Regulatory services operational

RU and IM individual planning

Consolidation of RU and IM plans

RU and IM individual budget cycle

RU and IM individual implementation projects

Overall TAP TSI masterplan as delivered by the Phase One project


Implicated railways now need to establish their individual implementation plans

By the end of this year railways will have to provide their plans when

they will be compliantwith the Regulation.

The TAP TSI Regulation requires RUs and IMs to prepare an implementation plan

The plan has to show when each of the obligations in the Regulation will be met – when the RU or IM will be compliant

The Phase One project has defined in detail how the obligations can be met by RUs and IMs

It is therefore possible for individual RUs and IMs to prepare their plans with confidence

These plans are to be assembled by the Phase Two project into a consolidated plan

The consolidated plan will be used by the project to monitor progress during implementation


Agenda




a) Introduction






5. Adjournment


TAP TSI reference documents

Reg. 454/2011

Text Annex I … Ann. IV

Ch. 1 … Ch. 4 … Ch. 8

4.1 4.2 4.8

4.2.1 … 4.2.11 … 4.2.22

Characterisation of the subsystem

Functional and technical spec. of the subsystem

Retail Basic Parameters

Other documents1

ERA Technical Documents

B.1 Timetables…B.10 PRM2 assistance booking

Directory of passenger code lists

Implementation Guides (IT3 specs)

TimetablesTariffsReservationDirect fulfilmentIndirect fulfilmentPRM assistance booking

(2) Persons with Reduced Mobility (3) Information Technology

(1) Can be found on:- http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/TAP-

TSI.aspx (versions prior to ongoing Change Control process)- http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html


Unconditional Conditional

Since11 Nov. 2011

4 (1) Conditions of carriage

5 Carriage of luggage

6.1 Conditions for travel of PRM

7.1 Carriage of bikes

8.1 Carriage of cars

To be planned in Phase Two

1 Exchange of timetables

2 Exchange of tariffs for int‘l or foreign sales

3 RU‘s (3) contact details

6.2, 6.3 PRM assistance

7.2, 8.2, 9.1 Reservation requests

7.3, 8.3, 9.2 Reservation answers

11.1 Value paper tickets

11.2 Home printed tickets

To be done after closing of the “open points” by ERA

2 Exchange of tariffs for domestic sales

10 Security elements

11.2 ToD, MoL (2)

11.3 Domestic direct fulfilm.

11.4 Domestic indirect fulfilm.

TAP TSI retail obligations overview

(1) Numbers refer to subdivisions of chapter 4.2 (2) Ticketing on Departure, Manifest on List (3) Railway Undertaking


Obligations concerning Timetables(for details see Timetables IG on http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html)

Reference docs: TD (1) B.4, Timetable IG (2)

Unconditional

Make available (not send) schedules data and stations data

Both files (SKDUPD and TSDUPD) in EDIFACT

Make available to all stakeholders (not to public)

Include all services, also buses and ferries if existing

Services operated by the RU alone or jointly with others

Annual timetable 2 months before change date, if sole control

Intermediate changes 7 days in advance, if known

Keep available expired data for 12 months

IG defines how to deal with special cases

(1) Technical Document (2) Implementation Guide


Obligations concerning Tariffs(for details see Tariffs IG on http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html)

Reference docs: TDs B.1, B.2, B.3, Tariff IG

Immediate obligation concerns international or foreign sales

Conditional, only if international or foreign sales allowed

When open point is closed, domestic sales unconditional

Make available (not send) tariffs and fares

Tariffs are terms & conditions, fares are prices

3 types of tariffs: NRT (1), IRT (2), Special Offers

Each type consists of a set of flat text files

Make available to all PAs (3) + authorised RUs and TVs (4) (not to public)

NRT data to be made available 3 months before application

IRT and Special Offers data according to commercial rules

(1) Non-integrated Reservation Ticket (2) Integrated Reservation Ticket (3) Public Authority (4) Ticket Vendor


Obligations concerning Reservation(for details see Reservation IG on http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html)

Reference docs: TD B.5, Reservation IG

Conditional, only if RU offers or requests reservations

Full commercial freedom (what to offer and to whom)

Concerns transport of persons, cars, bicycles

Only reservation or reservation included in ticket (IRT)

Implies the existence of a requesting system and an attributing one

Each RU can play one or both (or none) of those roles

B.5 defines a standard set of messages, but different ones can be used on bilateral agreement

B.5 messages are bit oriented, IG explains how to build them with detailed examples


Obligations concerning Fulfilment (for details seeIndFulfiment & DirFulfilment IGs on http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html)

Reference docs: TD B.6, B.7, Direct fulfilment IG, Indirect fulfilment IG

Immediate obligation concerns international or foreign sales

Conditional, only if international or foreign sales allowed

When open points are closed, domestic sales unconditional (?)

Full commercial freedom (what to offer and to whom)

Direct fulfilment makes use of value paper (guarantee background)

B.6 defines a standard set of ticket layouts, but different ones can be used on bilateral agreement

3 types of indirect fulfilment foreseen : A4, ToD, MoL

ToD and MoL still open points, only A4 defined in B.7

3 possible implementation methods for A4, RU can choose one


Obligations concerning PRM assistance(for details see PRM Assistance IG on http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html)

Reference docs: TD B.10, PRM assistance booking IG

Conditional, only if IT is used for exchange of assistance requests

Subject to agreement between requester and provider of assistance

Providers can be other RU or IM (1) or SM (2)

Accepted assistance requests must be given a reference number to be communicated to the customer

B.10 defines a standard set of messages for dialogue between requester and provider, but different ones can be used on bilateral agreement

B.10 messages are in XML (3)

(1) Infrastructure Manager (2) Station Manager (3) eXtended Markup Language


Agenda




a) Introduction






5. Adjournment


The architecture requirements are defined in one of the Basic Parameters of the Regulation

= Basic Parameters (BP) of the Regulation

RU/ IM(Closely linked with

TAF TSI)

4.2.x

Retail

GlobalArchitecture


Retail Architecture requirements in the Regulation

“Outline of the global architecture of the system based on the analysis of the system configurations capable of integrating the legacy IT facilities (…)”

The network and communication infrastructure supporting such a railinteroperability community will be based on a common ‘Information ExchangeArchitecture’, known and adopted by all those participating in it. The proposed ‘Information Exchange Architecture’:

o is designed to reconcile heterogeneous information models by semantically transforming the data that are exchanged between the systems and by reconciling the differences in business processes and application- level protocols,

o has a minimal impact on the existing IT architectures implemented by each actor,

o safeguards IT investments already made.

Basic Parameter 4.2.21.1


The following architecture has been designed with the active participation of experts from Railway Undertakings and Ticket Vendors.

36 representatives of Railway Undertakings1 and Ticket Vendors2 participated in 11 architecture workgroup sessions and intermediate work.

1) UIC members2) ETTSA and ECTAA members

Designing the architecture involved multiple stakeholders


All data types are considered as Resources (timetables, fares, reservations…)

Distributed solution: the architecture is based on Resource Producers (RUs) and Resource Consumers (RUs, TVs, PAs) exchanging data directly between themselves, not through a central service nor using a common interface

A Registry provides accurate and essential information so that Consumers know where the resources are located

Three components constitute the common services of the architecture:

1) A Registry keeps track of all the resources, acting as an address book

2) A Data Quality Management tool is available to ensure Timetables and Fares Resources are of good quality

3) The Retail Reference Data provide locations, code lists, company and country codes to all

Information Exchange Architecture description


The Registry can answer to the following type of questions:

“Where and how can I get Estonian Railway’s timetable data?”

“Where and how can I get Eurostar’s IRT fare data?”

“What is the commercial contact for RENFE”

The registry has a list of consumers that are interested in given resources (notification service)

- Each time a Producer updated a resource, it notifies the Registry

- The Registry will in turn notify the subscribed Consumers

This component is new: it will be created and procured, managed by the governance entity once created

1) Common Component: Registry


Helps Producers to ensure Timetable and Fares/Tariffs Resources are compliant with expected quality criteria of TAP

Relies on quality rules listed in Implementation Guides

Gives guidance to Producers on detected errors

Gives Consumers the possibility to double-check quality of Resources

2) Common Component: Data Quality Management (DQM) tool


Hassle-free access to reference data: RRD will offer a simpleinterface to Resource Producers and Consumers:

Hiding the difficulties to get those data from different sources

Ensuring consistencies when data are used in different areas

Delivering the most updated data

Controlling access by a single sign-on per User

Triggering the notification service of the Registry after changes

3) Common Component: Retail Reference Data (RRD)


Governance Entity will procure the three common components

Architecture related activities in Phase Two comprise:

- Tender launch

- Provider(s) selection

- Development of Common Components

- User acceptance test

Future governance of Common Components


TAP Phase Two is also about:

- Development by RUs in order to have their systems compliant with the Regulation

- User acceptance test by RUs with the 3 common components

» Access to Registry to inform of any changes in Resources

» Access to RRD

» Access and Use of DQM

» Use of the notification service to automate the downloading of selected Resource updates

RU activities regarding the Common Components


TV 2

FTPTV 1

FTP

IP

Network

RU1

FTP

RU2

FTP

–RU3

–RU4

–RU5

–RU6

–RU7

FTPRU

FTP

RU

FTPRU = Railway Undertaking

RU

FTP

RU

FTP

Retail Reference Data

Location codes

• Company codes

Country codes

Passenger code Lists

FTP

Registry

DQMDataQualityMgt.

RRD

New

FTP

FTP

PA

FTP

TV = Ticket Vendor (3rd party)PA = Public Authority

Summary: TAP TSI Retail Architecture –A distributed solution with three common components


Agenda




a) Introduction






5. Adjournment


The goal of TAP RU/ IM standards is providing interoperability…

TAP RU/ IM functions take into account different stakeholders than TAF, with an overlap on the IM side

Providing passengers with important travel information on all rail journeys

This is different to TAF

Involved actors: - Infrastructure Managers - Passenger RUs - Station Managers

… for Passengers

Railway companies can – with the same standards for domestic and interoperable services -- order train paths- control and manage their train

services- improve passenger information

… for Rail Companies

Station Managers (SMs) in the sense of TAP are entities responsible for passenger information in the stations

SMs and Passenger RUs are actors that fall under TAP and have had limited or no implication by TAF


TAP RU/ IM functions are close to TAF RU/ IM Communication

Overview of TAP RU/ IM functions

Short Term Path

Requests

Train Preparation

Train Running Info + Forecast

Service Disruption

Very close to TAF

Close to TAF Other TAF functions not relevant1

Close to TAF Involving SMs Other TAF functions not relevant2

Relation to TAF

Close to TAF Triggers further communication

Dialogue between RU and IM to order or modify paths

Info from RU to IM that train is ready/not ready

Info from IM to RU and SM about punctuality

Content

Info from IM to RU/SM that train stopped and continuation is unclear

1) TAF functions for Train Preparation not relevant for TAP: Train Accepted, Train Composition, Train Not Suitable, Train Position, Train at Start

2) TAF functions for Train Running not relevant for TAP: all Enquiries and Enquiry Responses

Functions


TAP RU/ IM functions are clustered for the MasterplanningDescription in the Regulation and the Implementation Guide

Reference of TAP RU/ IM functions

Short Term Path

Requests

Train Preparation

Train Running Info + Forecast

Service Disruption

Chapter 12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14, 18

RU/IM Implementation Guide1

Chapter 15, 18

BP 4.2.17

BP 4.2.14

BP 4.2.15

TAP Regulation

BP 4.2.16

1) The RU/IM IG contains a “Who should read what”-section that is advised to be consulted. All general chapters (Part A and D) should be read for all clusters. The RU/IM Implementation Guide is available at http://tap-tsi.uic.org/IMG/pdf/20120629_tap_ru_im_implementation_guide_v53c.pdf

Reference


Some TAP RU/ IM functions are new and not relevant for TAF

Additional TAP RU/ IM functions

Change of Track

Train Journey Modified

Passenger information; not relevant for TAF

Relation to TAF

Info from IM to RU/ SM about platform

Info during operation from IM/ RU to SM that train is rerouted, cancelled etc.

Content


Info in stations

Info in vehicles



Info from SM to customer (content only)

Info from RU to passenger (content only)

Functions


TAP RU/ IM functions are clustered for the MasterplanningDescription in the Regulation and the Implementation Guide

Reference to TAP RU/ IM functions

Change of Track

Train Journey Modified

BP 4.2.12 Chapter 17, 19

Chapter 16, 19

RU/IM Implementation Guide1

BP 4.2.12

TAP Regulation

1) The RU/IM IG contains a “Who should read what”-section that is advised to be consulted. All general chapters (Part A and D) should be read for all clusters.

Info in stations

Info in vehicles

Chapter 19

Chapter 19

BP 4.2.12

BP 4.2.13

Reference


Standard interfaces to allow communication between stakeholdersvia standard data networks

CI

CI CI

CI

Common Reference data. Location-ID Company-ID

IP Network

RU 1 RU 2

IM 1

CI

IM 2CI

SM 1

CI

CUS

illustrative

CI = Common InterfaceCUS = Commonly Used System

IM = Infrastructure ManagerRU = Railway UndertakingSM= Station Manager

CIRU 3

General architecture of the RU/IM communication


TAP RU/ IM prerequisites are very close to TAF TSI

Overview of TAP RU/ IM prerequisites

Reference Files

Common Interface

Train Identifiers

Governance

Very close to TAF

CCG CI is available Individual solutions possible1

Phased approach using existing identifiers is developed in collaboration with TAF2

Relation to TAF

Not specified yet

Data on Locations, Countries, Companies

Tools to allow interoperable message exchange

Unambiguous identification for IT applications

Not replacing rail operational numbers

Content

Availability of rules for standards and common elements

1) Companies can implement own solutions conform to the reference CI, allowing the exchange of TAP messages2) Start using TAP messages with existing identifiers, move towards technical identifiers as developed by TAF, partners need to agree

on migration

Functions


TAP RU/ IM prerequisites are very close to TAF TSI

Reference to TAP RU/ IM prerequisites

Reference Files

Common Interface

Train Identifiers

Governance

Chapter 9

Chapter 6

Chapter 8 and Train ID handbook2)

Chapter 23

BP 4.2.19

BP 4.2.21

n/a

n/a

RU/IM Implementation Guide1TAP Regulation

1) The RU/IM IG contains a “Who should read what”-section that is advised to be consulted. All general chapters (Part A and D) should be read for all clusters.

2) The Train ID Handbook is available at http://www.uic.org/IMG/pdf/111122_wg_10_handbook_final.pdf

Reference


Reference data is technically speaking done centrally, but code allocation needs to be organised per country

Questions mainly for Infrastructure Managers and National Contact Points

When will your company/country

– identify the Code Allocation Entity in your country ?

proposed is that the largest IM in a country should execute this role or take care that this role is defined within their country

– be able to populate the reference file ?

– sign up to be registered on Reference File System (CRD) to execute tests ?https://crd.tsi-cc.eu/CRD/onlineUser/signUp.action


The RU/IM Implementation Guide together with the message catalogue is the main result of Phase One and the basis for implementation


Commercial solutions outside the TAP legal framework are being prepared by some sector organisations

Availability of support from stakeholder groups

Commercial/voluntary support of activities outside the legal TSI frame

Related initiatives such as PCS1 can support IMs and RUs on a voluntary basis

Activities to implement TAP in these initiatives will take place after the final specifications and the ability of users become clear

The reference implementation of the Common Interface is available and can be used. More information: [email protected]

Specifications TAP RU/ IM standards have been finalised

by May 2012; going through CCM now

Usability Ability of companies to use the standards

needs to be known via TAP Masterplan

1) Path Co-ordination System


Future: Both mandatory RU/IM work to fulfil the regulation as well as useful work to fulfil stakeholder requirements will start immediately

Check the external specifications of the reference implementation of the CI (CCG CI). Relevant for TAF and TAP

Clarify stakeholder questions on deliverables

Check/enhance messages for Short Term Path Request for

– Annual Path Requests

– One Stop Shops

– Coach Group (through coaches) Code list maintenance

Create a wagon ordermessage for passenger information

– This is relevant for TAP only

Enhance work on Train Identification (see also previous slide)

– Create technical messages needed for TAF and TAP

– to accommodate passenger specific requirements

Regulation driven Sector driven

Most points are valid forboth TAF and TAP

A common TAP and TAF RU/ IM Work Stream will deal with these topics.The results will add to the existing baseline/standards.


Reference documents for RU/IM communication

The following links host the reference documents for RU/IM communication

RU/IM Implementation Guidehttp://tap-tsi.uic.org/IMG/pdf/20120629_tap_ru_im_implementation_guide_v53c.pdf

Annexes to the RU/IM Implementation Guidehttp://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html

Train ID handbookhttp://www.uic.org/IMG/pdf/111122_wg_10_handbook_final.pdf

The following links host additional information or orientation from TAF Masterplanning with RU/IM relevance

TAF Masterplan resultshttp://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/TAF-TSI%20Preliminary

%20Master%20Plan.pdf General TAF links and information

http://www.uic.org/spip.php?article446


Agenda




a) Introduction






5. Adjournment


Passenger RUs need to consider two parts of the implementation plan– One will be for RU/IM and will be linked to the TAF plan; passenger RUs

are therefore advised to check the existing RU/IM plan with the IMs who they use and judge if it is suitable or not for them

– The other will be for Retail and will be a TAP only plan Passenger RUs can develop their own retail implementation plans

independently of other RUs IMs may consider re-using the timelines submitted to the TAF masterplan,

including the TAP-only functions

Masterplanning principles


Each RU and IM needs to set up a TAP TSI implementation planning project and to nominate a point of contact

Resources need to be allocated by the RU or IM so that the planning project can start now and can be completed by the end of 2012

The RU or IM point of contact needs to know what is to be done After today’s meeting, the TAP TSI project team will be able to provide

some support to RU and IM single points of contact Documentation and advice will be provided on the project website

http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4 If required, Q&A sessions on planning completion can be run Available dates are 6/7, 15/16 November (locations tbd) Member States will also provide information on the regulatory requirements

What do RUs and IMs need to do? What support will be provided?


Railways are asked to document the outcome of their individual implementation planning in an Excel template (available on website)

Company & company details

Each area of regulatory obligation

is specified

Structured documentation of

individual timelines

Reference document/ chapters


The TAP Phase One project deliverables provide sufficient information for RUs and IMs to do their individual implementation planning

The return of individual plans is due by 31 December 2012 If you would like to attend a Q&A session or have any queries, please send

a request to the project team at [email protected] Review and consolidation of plans will take place in early 2013

– Essentially project team task, with on-demand interaction with respondents

– Supervision and guidance by TAP TSI Steering Committee The consolidated plans will be delivered to the Commission by

30 April 2013

TAP TSI implementation plan project timetable


Most incumbent Passenger RUs are already exchanging data as defined in the ERA Technical Documents

It has been assumed in the Phase One plan that these RUs can be largely compliant by 2016

Where this date cannot be met by an RU this will normally be for a reason permitted in the Directive 2008/57

Member States will be requested to ensure their licensed RUs are compliant according to the Directive

The Governance entity will record the positions stated by RUs as regards compliance with the Basic Parameters

It will also provide support to RUs through the provision of regulatory services

Retail implementation monitoring


Full compliance of RU/IM obligations will take several years The European TAP TSI project team will not be responsible for or be able

to direct individual RUs or IMs The European TAP TSI project team will record the positions stated by

RUs and IMs as regards compliance with the Basic Parameters It will also provide support to RUs and IMs through the provision of

regulatory services

RU/IM implementation monitoring


Kick-off25 Sep. 2012

31 Dec. 2012

Informing RUs, IMs, SMs about work Start of planning within each company (each RU, IM, SM)

Each company submits a solid, near-final plan to the European TAP project team. Timelines given shall be the realistic times of the company

6/7 Nov. 2012

1st Q&A session for companies’ experts, focus on TAP Retail obligations (suggestion)

15/16 Nov. 2012

2nd Q&A session for companies’ experts, focus on TAP RU/IM obligations (suggestion)

Masterplanning timeline allows for assistance to companies inproducing solid plans with a possibility for alignment with partners (1/2)

Milestones for companies’ individual planning 2012

Today


31 Jan. 2013

30 Apr. 2013

TAP team issues first analyses of individual companies input

Actors that are (potential) partners get input for potential alignment

European TAP project team – following clearance by TAP TSI Steering Committee – submits final overall plan to DG MOVE, taking individual companies plans into account

Milestones for companies’ individual planning 2013

5 Apr. 2013 Each company submits the final, binding individual

companies implementation plan (that might be different to the December version due to alignment with partners)

Masterplanning timeline allows for assistance to companies inproducing solid plans with a possibility for alignment with partners (2/2)


Railway Undertakings

(RUs)

Means any public or private undertaking the principal business of which is to provide services for the transport of passengers by rail …

Any company providing rail services to passengers and falling under the Passengers’ Rights Regulation

Infrastructure Manager

(IMs)

Means any body or undertaking that is responsible for establishing and maintaining railway infrastructure. This may also include the management of infrastructure control and safety systems…

Any company providing rail infrastructure capacity to RUs

Station Manager

(SMs)

Means an organisational entity in a Member State, which has been made responsible for the management of a railway station and which may be the infrastructure manager

Any company responsible for customer information in stations

Note: Actors might play more than one role or have overlapping competencies.

TAP masterplanning roles

Summary of roles and responsibilities: TAP actors with obligations need to deliver a company individual implementation plan


Ticket vendor (TV) Means any retailer of rail transport services concluding transport contracts and selling tickets on behalf of a railway undertaking or for its own account

Only transferred obligations in case of contractually acting for an RU

National Contact Points

(National Enforcement Bodies)

First point of contact for any RU, IM, SM, TV to handle specific questions, incl. deployment of Member State specific issues

Assistance partner for actors with TAP obligations

Member states/ National Safety Authorities

Responsible entities for specific cases and handling Member State specific decisions

Responsible for informing all licensed RUs, IMs, SMs about their obligations

TAP TSI Steering Committee

Members are, amongst others, representatives from the rail sector representative bodies

Keep industry associations and their members informed

TAP masterplanning roles

Summary of roles and responsibilities: TAP actors without direct obligations may assist the implementation planning


For further information, please consult:

General overview of TAP TSI: http://tap-tsi.uic.org/ Reference documents: http://tap-tsi.uic.org/What-s-new,4.html Masterplanning team eMail: [email protected] TAP TSI project team members:

– Overall matters: R. Fenkes, Project Leader, [email protected]

– Retail Implementation Guides: U. Dell’Arciprete, [email protected]

– Retail Architecture: D. Margottin, [email protected]

– All RU/IM matters: S. Naundorf, [email protected]

– Masterplan: C. Querée, [email protected]

– Ticket vendor-related matters: R. Parkinson, [email protected] Your National Enforcement Body for questions on derogations, exemptions and

Member State-specific questions Contact for access/usage of Common Components Group related matters (CCG

Common Interface and Central Repository Domain): [email protected]