Good Navigation Status Regional GNS workshop Klaipeda, 7 th of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Good Navigation Status

Regional GNS workshop

Klaipeda, 7th of September

2

Good Navigation Status – regional workshop

Agenda

TIME TOPIC SPEAKER 09:00 Welcome and introduction EMMA project / GNS consortium 09:10 Presentation of Good Navigation Status study GNS consortium 09:25 Q&A all 09:30 Navigation Standards in the Nordic countries and view

• n GNS concept

Regional waterway managers / authorities 10:00 Q&A all 10:10 Coffee break

3

Good Navigation Status – regional workshop

TIME TOPIC SPEAKER 10:25 Presentation of current study results and approach towards GNS GNS consortium 10:40 Q&A, discussion on approach and indicators Discussion on selected GNS aspects and indicators for Nordic countries GNS consortium all 11:10 Contributions and discussion on Good Practice Guidelines for developing GNS GNS consortium all 11:25 Discussion on possible exemption criteria for non- compliance with Art. 15 § 3.(a) of the TEN-T guidelines GNS consortium all 11:40 Discussion on implications of GNS assessment: Bottlenecks / Projects GNS consortium all 11:50 Conclusions and actions, further cooperation GNS consortium 12:00 Closing GNS consortium

General introduction on GNS and the study

• Background and purpose of study
• Possible outcome
• Timeline and current status
• Ways to get involved
• Overview of today`s session
• Outline of GNS concept

4

Presentation 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 2030.”

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

6

Background and purpose of GNS study

• Main challenge of the study: to develop a broadly accepted

GNS concept and common methodology allowing for sufficient differentiation to regional requirements and user needs

• Study focuses on technical content and methodology,

supervised by the European Commission

• 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..)

7

Implications and possible outcome

Study 1/2016 – 10/2017:

• Agreed GNS components and recommended parameters/

requirements (quantitative/qualitative)

• Monitoring and reporting options and requirements
• Input to TENtec Database IWW Glossary
• Specification of exemption criteria to Art. 15 § 3.(a)
• GNS network assessment ‐ additional GNS parameters and KPIs
• Roadmaps for critical GNS sections
• Good Practice Guidelines for implementation of GNS

8

Planned Deliverables

• 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 on 7 – 8 April 2016, Vukovar  CCNR Roundtable on 2 March 2016, Strasbourg  EMMA kick‐off meeting, Hamburg, 25 February 2016  Pan‐European meeting on 20June 2016, Rotterdam  Regional workshops Klaipeda, Budapest, Strasbourg, Berlin  Dedicated workshop with experts representing users (13 Oct.)  Discussion of links to AGN with UN‐ECE on 2 November 2016

9

Status and planned meetings

• Purpose:

 to keep track of work and exchange feedback, discuss intermediate results

• Members:
• 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

• Method:

 3 pan European meetings (2016 – 2017), regional workshops, dedicated meetings and/or surveys

10

The GNS Working Group

11

• 1st Pan‐European Working Group meeting: 20 June 2016

Broader audience, on invitation: validation of first views on GNS in different corridors

• Regional workshops 09‐10/2016: Klaipeda, Budapest, Strasbourg, Berlin

Expert group meetings with regional focus; discussion of technical content

• 2nd GNS pan‐European Working Group meeting: mid 2017

Broader audience on European scale: communicate and validate the study results

Status of meetings

12

Today’s session

Specific focus of discussion with you:

• Validation of the overall GNS concept and approach
• Discussion of GNS components and parameters for this

corridor/region

• Focus topics and possible contributions as regards good practices

and needed guidelines for achieving GNS

• First discussion on exemption criteria, stocktaking on possible

criteria

• Discussion on implications of GNS assessment

13

Basic outline of GNS concept

14

• 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 infrastructure

Outline of GNS concept

15

• 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 sustainability of waterway management.

Outline of GNS concept

16

• 1. Quantitative measureable “hard” components related to the
• utput of waterway management addressing the navigability

standards

• Dimensions of fairways, locks and bridges and their

availability over time 2. More indirect 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 for a process to reach GNS, monitoring and enforcement of objectives, application of exemptions and revision of concept

Outline of GNS concept

Outline of GNS concept

Contributions by regional waterway managers

• Navigation Standards in Nordic countries
• View on GNS concept

18

Current study results and approach towards GNS

• GNS concept
• GNS elements
• Parameters and KPI
• Proposed procedures for developing GNS

19

20

Implementation of related TEN‐T provisions:

• 1. Article 15.3 a)

CEMT IV minimum requirements or an exemption in a duly justified case (2.5m draught; 5,25m bridge clearance; 365 days per year)

• 2. Article 16.b)

Higher standards than class IV where appropriate (e.g. Class V, VI, AGN)

• 3. Articles 15.3 c) and article 39.2 b)

RIS implementation and availability of clean fuels

GNS concept

21

• 4. Article 15.3 b)

“Rivers, canals and lakes shall be maintained so as to preserve good navigation status”

• 1. Implementation of related TEN‐T provisions
• 2. GNS “hard” components and parameters
• 3. GNS “soft” components and requirements
• 4. Minimum standards of a process for the development,

implementation, monitoring of “Good Navigation Status”

• 5. Application of exemption criteria as referred to in article

15.3a)

GNS concept

GNS concept

23

• Focus physical waterway infrastructure: navigability

standards for users (fairway, locks, bridges)

• Homogeneous parameters applicable to the entire TEN‐T

waterway network

• Directly targeted by TEN‐T and/or AGN
• Quantitative parameter: Good Navigation Status measurable
• n EU level and meaningful information for using Key

Performance Indicators

• Experts in the GNS working group confirm high priority

GNS “hard” components

24

• Proposed core KPI on Navigation Reliability and Waiting

times

• Core 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
• Core KPI on Waiting times
• Waiting time at locks
• Exemption criteria may apply as regards TEN‐T minimum

requirements regarding 2.5 metre draught and 5.25 metre height under bridges  separate discussion

GNS “hard” components

25

• 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
• n section level
• Experts in the GNS working group confirm their relevance

GNS “soft” components

26

• Focus of requirements on process “How to reach GNS”?
• Targets / Objectives of “soft” components:

 Benchmarks and guidelines described in GNS Good Practice Guidelines  Monitoring and reporting based on minimum requirements by means of checklists

GNS “soft” components

27

Minimum standards:

• Identification of waterway sections for which GNS will be defined
• Objectives/measures are developed in a coordinated way between

waterway managers (if applicable – (trans‐)nationally/regionally coordinated)

• Systematic consideration of:
• Minimum TEN‐T requirements
• Transport potential demand and user requirements of a waterway

section (domestic and foreign)

• Local conditions as regards waterway sections
• Further uses of a river, lake or canal (cross‐sectoral)
• The applicable environmental law. Where possible, synergies are

created (“working with nature”)

• Cost and benefits of measures from a socio‐economic perspective
• Possibilities of innovation and technological development (ship design,

maintenance technologies..)

Minimum standards for process and methodology

28

Minimum standards:

• Exemptions can be granted based on systematic consideration of these

aspects and other exemption criteria to be defined

• Regularly Monitoring of inland waterway sections as regards GNS “hard”

and “soft” components, KPIs and progress

• Contributing to pro‐active implementation
• Implementation of remediating measures in case of deviation
• Targeting a continuous improvement process and full compliance by

2030

• Communication of status and measures to involved users and joint

discussion

Minimum standards for process and methodology

Key Performance Indicators

• n Good Navigation Status

29

30

Waterway parameters

• Draught of vessel, the minimum depth
• Beam of vessel, width of waterway and curve radius
• Height of vessel, air clearance under bridges and other infrastructure
• Length of vessel, curve radius of waterway and size of locks

Core KPI: Navigation Reliability of a specific (TENtec) section

• Availability of the physical waterway infrastructure:

yearly score on the targeted infrastructure dimensions Core KPI: Waiting times

• Waiting time (capacity/use) at locks, ship lifts, moveable bridge

GNS “hard” components and proposed KPIs

• Monitoring of parameters and KPIs on GNS using TENtec (first data

collection is running, additional will follow)

• Contribution to TENtec glossary by GNS study
• Meaningful GNS data set for 2016 and the next years to come

Core KPI Navigation Reliability

Navigation reliability

• f a specific section:
• > Targeted

dimensions met in days/year Targeted physical dimensions for vessel/convoy at waterway section:

• Draught/navigation channel depth
• Height under bridges
• Beam
• Length

Availability of physical dimensions:

• Available fairway depth/width
• Available height under bridges

Closures of waterways

• Man-made and/or natural causes
• For waterway links and objects

(locks, bridges) Navigation dimensions of a specific section:

• >Targeted

Classification CEMT class IV targets Local targets

31

• Targeted dimension CEMT class IV:

2.5m draught and 5.25 m height under bridges at 365d/year

• Local targeted dimension (if higher than CEMT class IV or

exemption): x m draught/fairway channel depth at x days/year

• Framework of draught/depth target with varying water levels

– applicable reference water level – N° of days with water level above reference water level – N° of days without ice

Example Navigation Reliability: Availability of fairway channel dimensions

32

What framework apply in the Nordic countries?

• Waterway closures

Proposed approach:  Event >24 hrs duration  Man‐made

• Planned (announcement >12 weeks in advance)
• Not planned

– Natural events

• Ice
• High water

33

Example Navigation Reliability: Waterway closures

34

• GNS “hard” components focus on the physical waterway

infrastructure

• Quantitative parameters and KPI for “hard” components
• Core KPIs Navigation Reliability and Waiting times
• GNS “soft” components related to infrastructure and traffic

management processes and to a wider scope

• More qualitative/indirect nature of “soft” components
• TEN‐T minimum requirements and local targets/objectives
• Minimum standards for process to reach GNS, define

exemptions, enforcement of objectives, monitoring and revision

• Benchmarks and Good Practice Guidelines
• Exemptions based on specific criteria and process

Summary

35

Discussion

• Your view on the GNS concept and approach?
• Do you agree with the scope of GNS? Does it correspond with

the needs in your region?

• Your view on GNS “hard” components and parameters?
• Main topics which need to be addressed in guideline document
• n developing GNS?
• Your view on process to develop/monitor GNS?
• Into what extent is it already `common practice’?
• Is it applicable in practice ?
• Are there elements missing/redundant?

36

Discussion

• Your comments on the Core KPIs?
• What is your view on feasibility/data availability?
• “Local targets” – your view on measuring fairway channel depth

instead of draught?

• Reference values for factor draught/depth?
• Framework for draught/fairway channel depth objectives in

Nordic countries?

• Measurement and reporting of waiting times: Suggestions for

common standard?

• Waterway closures: broken down to what extent on section

level? What standard period should apply?

• Properly announcement of man‐made closures: what is a

sufficient time limit in advance?

• What significant developments are expected towards the year

2030 as regards data availability (e.g. technological innovation)?

Regional Specifics

37

• Mixed traffic: Inland and maritime navigation along inland waterways
• Focus of GNS on inland navigation
• Definition for coverage of maritime navigation and maritime inland

waterways by GNS

• Interdependence with sea‐river transport and maritime transport
• Physical dimensions for inland navigation usually less relevant at

maritime waterways

• Other requirements may be of similar relevance: e.g. lock waiting

times

• Interdependence with zoning according to Directive 2006/87/EC
• Ship requirements related to wave class may only allow

coasters/maritime vessels

• TENtec parameter on zoning

Mixed traffic

38

How should waterways with mixed traffic be addressed by GNS?

• Closures are addressed by KPI Navigation reliability
• Separate TENtec parameter on waterway closures (>24 hours) due to ice
• Closures due to ice may qualify as exemption depending on climate and local

conditions

• Feasibility of ice breaking
• Timing of ice breaking
• Questions for discussion
• How do you determine the navigation period?
• When are closures due to ice necessary?
• What are the limits of ice breaking? Feasibility?
• When to do ice breaking? Adverse impact of quick reaction?
• How to operationalise exemption criteria regarding ice?

Closures due to ice

39

• Special requirements for GNS at lakes?
• Water level dynamics at lakes?
• Definition of reference water level?
• Implications on draught/fairway channel depth?

Lakes

40

• Possible relevance for GNS
• Other inland navigation interests and requirements
• Barrier for upgrade of waterway
• Requirement for exemption criteria
• Potential for connection of TEN‐T network with third

countries

• Questions for discussion
• Relevance for GNS?
• Need / Opportunities for exemption criteria?

Waterways running through third territory

41

Good Practice Guidelines

• Background and purpose
• Overview and suggested content

42

43

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 channel 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 GNS “soft” components, benchmarks need to be

identified vs. need to focus

44

GNS Good Practice Manual ‐ Content

I. Introduction and reference to further manuals II. Basic information on fairway parameters and navigability (“hard” components)

• 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 …)

45

Discussion

• Do you agree with the selection of topics?
• On which topics is guidance most needed?
• Good practice examples from your background/expertise?
• Are there specific requests towards the form/methodology
• f the guidelines?

Exemption criteria Proposed topics and discussion

46

47

Article 15.3a: In duly justified cases, exemptions shall be granted to Member States 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).

Exemption criteria

48

• Proposed topics for exemption criteria:

– local conditions (hydrology, hydromorphology, other use) – extreme weather events – environmental requirements – Socioeconomic cost‐benefit‐aspects of measures

• Coordination with the European Commission after following a

process covering the minimum standards for development of GNS

Exemption criteria

Catalogue of exemption criteria and procedures for application

49

Do you have examples for application of exemption criteria ?

• Local conditions
• Extreme weather events
• Environmental requirements
• Economic feasibility
• Other?
• What criteria (should) apply?
• Link to environmental law as referred to in article 15.3 (b)?
• Example exemptions regarding draught: Relevance of reference water

level?

• Trade‐off with the economic relevance for inland navigation?
• Procedure for application?

Discussion

50

GNS assessment

• Identification of Bottlenecks
• Projects / Roadmap

51

• Application of GNS concept to assess network
• Identification of bottlenecks
• Evaluation of deficits
• Projection of network assessment for 2030
• Development of network conditions and navigation status
• Stocktaking of upgrading projects planned to be completed by 2030
• Roadmap to achieve GNS
• Collection of measures to address bottlenecks
• Project outline including cost estimation
• Feasibility
• Timeline

Questions / Input from EMMA activities:

• Bottlenecks in Nordic countries?
• Projects are under implementation? Scheduled until 2030? Planned?
• Additional measures needed to address bottlenecks?

GNS assessment

Thank you for your contributions.

53

GNS Input to TENtec Glossary

• TENtec: Multimodal European database for TEN‐T Network development
• IWW part: parameters on characteristics and performance of waterway links,

locks and bridges

• GNS study provided first input for revised glossary:

improved parameters and definitions

• TENtec is tool to monitor parameters and KPIs on GNS (first data

collection is running, additional will follow)

• Meaningful data set for 2016 and the next years to come
• Initial data collection will be base for network assessment
• Focus on GNS core elements
• Total 58 parameters, of which 22 danymic
• Further data collection planned for 2017

Core KPIs ‐ locks

Navigation reliability of a specific lock/ section: -> Targeted dimensions met in days/year Targeted physical dimensions for vessel/convoy at lock:

• Draught
• Height
• Beam
• Length

Closures of locks

• Man-made and/or natural

causes - For waterway links and

• bjects (locks, bridges)

Navigation dimensions of a specific lock/section:

• >Targeted Classification

Availability of locks

• capacity and use

Waiting time at a specific lock/ section during peak times CEMT class IV targets Local targets

54

• KPI 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
• f vessels waiting, ..
• Apply a model based approach?
• Collection of lock and traffic characteristics and simulation with

standardised model?  high efforts

Waiting time at locks

55

56

Back‐Up Regional Specifics

• Questions for discussion
• Requirements for river‐sea/coastal/maritime traffic?
• How to address GNS for mixed traffic / maritime navigation?
• Feasibility of targets for physical dimensions?
• Opportunities to adapt zone classification?
• Criteria for classification of waterway?
• Traffic shares
• Zone (Directive 2006/87/EC)
• AGN: reference to coastal routes
• UNECE Blue Book: classification as sea vessels route

Mixed traffic

57

• Focus of GNS on physical waterway infrastructure
• Core elements
• Physical dimensions
• Reliability of physical dimensions
• Additional elements
• Information
• Incident management
• Equipment
• Facilities
• Etc.

Regional specifics: Scope of GNS

58

• Deficits regarding additional elements or even beyond may be barrier for

inland navigation

• regulation / initiative
• Implementation
• monitoring
• Questions for dicussion
• Scope of GNS?
• What additional elements have priority?
• How should they be addressed? Indicators? Guidelines?

Scope of GNS

59

• Maintenance management required to achieve GNS
• Maintenance plan
• Timely execution of planned maintenance work
• Maintenance management will be addressed by guidelines
• Planning
• Working procedures etc.

Questions:

• Relevance for GNS?
• Consideration in guidelines adequate?
• Focus of maintenance: Fairway/navigation channel? Constructions

(locks, bridges)? Other?

• Challenges? How to address these challenges?
• Feasibility of proper maintenance?

Maintenance management

60

61

Back‐Up Definitions

Source: Prsic, Carevic, Brcic : Promet – Traffic&Transportation, Vol. 23, 2011, No. 2, 147-154 Source:viadonau

63

Back‐Up Exemption criteria

64

Examples for possible application of exemption criteria

• Environmental requirements?
• Fairway dredging limited due to water framework directive
• Economic feasibility?
• Transport volume and social economic benefit insufficient to compensate (high)

cost of fairway dredging / lock upgrade / bridge renewal

• Limited maintenance due to low traffic
• Extreme weather events?
• Severe flood in the past has led to extensive damage / flood risk
• Waterway upgrade would increase flood risk beyond acceptable level
• Extraordinary drought leads to low water level
• Ice
• Local conditions?
• Hydrology/hydromorphology
• Water management
• Recreational use / housing

Exemption criteria

65

Possible determinants for exemption

• Environmental impact
• Impact on eco‐system
• Link with Requirements of water framework directive Art. 4 (7)
• Ecological status dependent on local conditions, waterway type etc.
• Relation to GNS through environmental law in Art. 15 3 (b) of TEN‐T regulation
• Danger of floods (reference to EC directive on flood danger and risk)
• Economic feasibility
• Traffic characteristics / economic benefit
• Volume (forecast/potential)
• Modal shift benefits
• Economic impact
• Cost of measures
• Upgrade investment
• Maintenance
• Reactive measures: ice breaking

Exemption criteria

66

• Extreme weather events
• Link to flood danger and risk assessment directive

Ex‐ante:

• Coverage by environmental law, e.g. water framework directive?
• Events in the past and related impact (flood / ice)
• Likelihood of flood and related danger
• Feasibility and reliability of preparatory measures

Ex‐post:

• Feasibility of ice‐breaking
• Consideration of flood/drought issues by change in water discharge/ temperature

Exemption criteria

67

• Local conditions:
• Hydrology/hydromorphology
• Discharge
• Morphological potential
• Water management
• Adverse impact on other uses (e.g. recreational use of waterway / housing)
• Impact of measure (related to environmental impact?)
• Social Relevance of uses

Exemption criteria

68

Back‐Up Guidelines

69

• II. Fairway parameters and navigability
• Key vocabulary and definitions
• Reference water levels
• Water levels and fairway depth
• Fairway depth and draught
• …

Source: Xavax

70

Purpose:

• To reach agreements on exemptions on core GNS elements
• To reach agreement on additional 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

• III. Process to develop GNS

71

Minimum standards:

• Identification of waterway sections for which GNS will be defined
• Objectives/measures are developed in a coordinated way between

waterway managers (if applicable – (trans‐)nationally/regionally coordinated)

• Systematic consideration of:
• Minimum TEN‐T requirements
• Transport potential demand and user requirements of a waterway

section (domestic and foreign)

• Local conditions as regards waterway sections
• Further uses of a river, lake or canal (cross‐sectoral)
• The applicable environmental law. Where possible, synergies are

created (“working with nature”)

• Cost and benefits of measures from a socio‐economic perspective
• Possibilities of innovation and technological development (ship design,

maintenance technologies..)

• III. Process to develop GNS

72

Minimum standards:

• Exemptions can be granted based on systematic consideration of these

aspects and other exemption criteria to be defined

• Regularly Monitoring of inland waterway sections as regards GNS “hard”

and “soft” components, KPIs and progress

• Contributing to pro‐active implementation
• Implementation of remediating measures in case of deviation
• Targeting a continuous improvement process and full compliance

by 2030

• Communication of status and measures to involved users and joint

discussion

• III. Process to develop GNS

73

• IV. Maintenance and rehabilitation
• Locks, ship lifts and weir maintenance
• ?
• Bridge maintenance
• ?
• 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
• …

74

Topics of relevance

• Key vocabulary and definitions
• Reference water levels
• Water levels, fairway channel depth and draught
• Process to develop GNS
• Fairway maintenance
• Locks, ship lifts, weir and bridge maintenance
• Information to users
• Technological development
• Emergency response
• …

75

Further topics of relevance

• 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
• …

76

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