Provides new path for passenger safety to be evaluated and achieved; Agency invites comments on proposal
WASHINGTON – The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) proposed updates for the passenger train safety standards used in the United States as the country looks to add high-speed trains that can travel up to 220 miles per hour and replace its aging passenger fleet. The proposed updates represent nearly a decade of work by FRA’s passenger rail division. “As several regions of the United States build faster passenger rail service, the trains on those tracks must keep passengers safe,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “To do that, we want to allow manufacturers to innovate and achieve all-new levels of safety. These proposed changes put us on track to do just that.” The proposed updates would establish a new category of passenger equipment, Tier III, for trains traveling up to 220 mph. The updates would offer an alternative method for evaluating how well passengers and crews are protected in an accident, often called crashworthiness. The public, railroad industry, railroad labor, manufacturers and other stakeholders will have an opportunity to provide feedback and comment on the proposed rule during the next 60 days. In addition to measuring a train’s crashworthiness based on whether it meets current prescriptive strength standards, the proposed changes would allow a train’s crashworthiness to be evaluated based on it meeting an equivalent level of safety achieved through crash energy management technology or other innovative engineering methods. “We look forward to hearing from everyone on how this proposal can help our country build a stronger passenger rail network – one that is not only faster but allows for new technologies to make passenger trains even safer,” said FRA Administrator Sarah E. Feinberg. Although Tier III trains will be required to have exclusive track to operate at speeds above 125 mph, the new standards will allow Tier III trains to safely share track with current Tier I and Tier II commuter, intercity and Acela trains. Compatibility between equipment types is a key strategy to allow trains to share existing corridors to reach downtown stations. Click here to view the proposed updates.
Proposed rule: “Competitive Passenger Rail Service Pilot Program”
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register August 22. This proposed rulemaking from the FRA is a direct result of Section 11307 of the FAST Act which requires FRA to implement a pilot program for competitive selection of petitioners other than Amtrak to operate up to three long-distance routes currently operated by Amtrak. The final rule will establish the procedures for interested parties to submit bids and the information that petitioners must submit to FRA. It will also establish the procedures for the Secretary to evaluate bids, and select and notify selected petitioners, should there be any.
SMART TD, TTD and all of rail labor opposed this concept and other privatization mandates as the bill was going through the legislative process and fought to remove it or include conditions that would protect workers and create a level playing field if it ever went into effect. In the end, while the pilot provision stayed in the final bill, a number of conditions were attached to it at our request and it was limited to three long-distance routes. Given the political realities we face on the Hill and the opposition to Amtrak that exists, this was not an easy task.
TTD submits comments on proposed rule
Yesterday, September 6, the Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO commented on the proposed rule published by the FRA. Click here to read TTD’s comments.
National Legislative Director John Risch on TTD’s comments:
Risch “The comments filed by TTD urge FRA to ensure that labor, service and Buy America rules that attach to this program are fully implemented. Specifically, TTD’s comments call on FRA to ensure that so-called 4R rail employee protections cover workers impacted by this program. As TTD notes in their comments, we think the law requires this result, but we need to make sure the FRA implements this in the right way. I should note that Rich Edelman, on behalf of the BMWE (which was not included in TTD’s comments since they are not members) also filed comments. Edelman, who has a strong background in this area of the law, goes into more detail on the legal background on the protections which should be helpful. It is important to note that both TTD and Edelman’s comments are on the same page. (Click here to read Edelman’s comments.) They demand 4R act protections and our comments have a whole section that talks about why they are legally needed to be applied and specifically ask that the proposed regulations be amended to require any winning bidder be responsible for those protections. We also are asking FRA to issue guidance to adopt them to this situation.
“TTD’s comments also urge FRA to adopt hiring preferences and procedures for Amtrak employees and to ensure that any new entity is covered by rail laws just like Amtrak is today.
“We all need to keep this in perspective. Amtrak receives preferential pricing from the Class 1’s to operate over their track, something the Class 1’s have for years decried as inadequate. A new entrant will not likely receive nearly as good an operating rate as Amtrak currently does. If there is a winning competitive bidder on any of these three routes they will only receive 90 percent of the funding that Amtrak currently receives to provide the service making the bidding process even harder.”
SMART TD Testifies before FRA
Today, September 7, the FRA held a public hearing on the proposed rule. SMART Transportation Division National Legislative Director John Risch was at the hearing and testified on behalf of SMART TD. Click here to read his comments.
SMART TD member Mike Rankin recounts his own experience for The Hill with a focus on FRA hearings being held today, to advocate closing all loopholes and enact a rule mandating that all freight trains be operated with a minimum of a two-person crew. Read the complete article here.
Previsich SMART Transportation Division President John Previsich and Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) President Dennis Pierce, issued a joint statement, following their submission of their comments to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) on train crew size. “Operating freight trains with one-person train crews is unsafe and must be prohibited. That is the message we delivered yesterday in the comments filed with federal rail safety regulators,” Previsich and Pierce said. “Our comments provide a clear rationale for the FRA to finalize a rule this year and to close loopholes included in the agency’s initial proposed rule that could permit the limited use of one-person crew freight operations.” Pierce Click here to read the official press release from both unions. Click here to read the comments submitted to the FRA, followed by the polling results of 11 individual states on two-person crews conducted by DFM Research on behalf of SMART TD (see page 18 for polling results).
Previsich SMART Transportation Division President John Previsich and Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) President Dennis Pierce, issued a joint statement, following their submission of their comments to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) on train crew size. “Operating freight trains with one-person train crews is unsafe and must be prohibited. That is the message we delivered yesterday in the comments filed with federal rail safety regulators,” Previsich and Pierce said. “Our comments provide a clear rationale for the FRA to finalize a rule this yearDennis Pierce, President, BLET and to close loopholes included in the agency’s initial proposed rule that could permit the limited use of one-person crew freight operations.” Click here to read the official press release from both unions. Click here to read the comments submitted to the FRA, followed by the polling results of 11 individual states on two-person crews conducted by DFM Research on behalf of SMART TD (see page 18 for polling results).
John Previsich, President, SMART TD On Wednesday, June 15, SMART Transportation Division and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) submitted their joint comments on the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) proposed two-person crew rule. While both unions strongly support the proposed rule, they suggested in their comments that the rule be made stronger before being made final. “We firmly believe that the only safe way to operate a train is with a crew of at least two people – a federally certified locomotive engineer and a federally certified conductor,” the unions emphasized. Dennis Pierce, President, BLET Click here to read the unions’ comments. Following the comments (on page 18) are the polling results of 11 individual states on two-person crews conducted by DFM Research on behalf of SMART TD. Members, family, friends and communities can comment on the proposed rule until tonight at 11:59 p.m. eastern time and are encouraged to do so. Click here to comment.
The question? May an employee wear a device like a “Garmin Vivofit” or “Fitbit” wristband that acts like a watch, and counts the steps that an individual takes each day? The devices are not searching for the internet, or Wifi, to do this and must be synchronized with Bluetooth on a separate device. The devices are essentially digital watches and track the number of steps an individual takes each day in the background. Does the FRA consider these devices “smart watches”?
FRA considers Fitbits and similar devices to be “personal electronic devices” that are subject to the restrictions in part 220. Per the definition of an “electronic device” at 49 CFR 220.5, they are an electronic device that performs functions not necessary for the health or safety of that person and entail the risk of distracting employees from safety-related tasks.
FRA understands some Fitbit devices are rather limited in their functionality. However, a number of different fitness tracking devices are available. The Fitbit Blaze, for example, has functions that include mobile playlists, call alerts, text alerts and fitness tracking. These functions are the same type of distracting functions that have caused railroad accidents and were the impetus for the restrictions contained in part 220.
The regulation text of part 220 does not distinguish between Fitbits that have limited functionality, and those that are more akin to smartphones or smartwatches. Unless a waiver granting an exemption for certain fitness tracking devices with limited functionality were issued by FRA in the future, the agency considers all such devices to be “personal electronic devices” that are subject to the restrictions in part 220. However, railroad operating employees are allowed the use of digital clocks or wristwatches whose primary function is to tell time.
Timepieces are commonly used in the railroad industry to verify the accuracy of a locomotive’s speed indicator. This function is safety-related in that it accurately allows a train crew to comply with relevant track speed limits during the course of a train’s movement. This exception is limited to those wristwatches that do not have functions which violate the requirements set forth under 220 subpart C. The Primary function of fitness tracking devices is not to tell time.
As stated in Title 49 CFR 220.303, a railroad operating employee shall not use an electronic device if that use would interfere with the employee’s or another railroad operating employee’s performance of safety-related duties. No individual in the cab of a controlling locomotive shall use an electronic device if that use would interfere with a railroad operating employee’s performance of safety-related duties.
The exceptions within 220 subpart C account for varying operating situations, with particular flexibility for railroad supplied devices.
The only exceptions within 220 subpart C are specially stated in § 220.309:
§ 220.309 Permitted uses; exceptions to other restrictions.
Notwithstanding any other limitations in this subpart, a railroad operating employee may use the following, if that use does not interfere with any employee’s performance of safety-related duties—
(a) The digital storage and display function of an electronic device to refer to a railroad rule, special instruction, timetable, or other directive, if such use is authorized under a railroad operating rule or instruction.
(b) An electronic device as necessary to respond to an emergency situation involving the operation of the railroad or encountered while performing a duty for the railroad.
(c) An electronic device to take a photograph of a safety hazard or a violation of a rail safety law, regulation, order, or standard, provided that—
A camera that is part of a cell phone or other similar multi-functional electronic device is not included in this exception unless it is a railroad supplied device and is used for an authorized business purpose;
The camera, unless otherwise permitted, is turned off immediately after the documentation has been made; and
If the camera is used in the cab of a moving train, the use is only by a crewmember other than the locomotive engineer.
(d) A stand-alone calculator if used for an authorized business purpose.
(e) A medical device that is consistent with the railroad’s standards for medical fitness for duty.
(f) A wireless communication device to conduct train or switching operations if the railroad operating employee is part of a crew assigned to a train that is exempt under § 220.9(b) from the requirement of a working radio when the employing railroad has fewer than 400,000 annual employee work hours.
Additionally, railroads may impose more stringent requirements that are subject to change at the railroad’s discretion, without notice to FRA, and can vary from railroad to railroad.
The question? May an employee wear a device like a “Garmin Vivofit” or “Fitbit” wristband that acts like a watch, and counts the steps that an individual takes each day? The devices are not searching for the internet, or Wifi, to do this and must be synchronized with Bluetooth on a separate device. The devices are essentially digital watches and track the number of steps an individual takes each day in the background. Does the FRA consider these devices “smart watches”?
FRA considers Fitbits and similar devices to be “personal electronic devices” that are subject to the restrictions in part 220. Per the definition of an “electronic device” at 49 CFR 220.5, they are an electronic device that performs functions not necessary for the health or safety of that person and entail the risk of distracting employees from safety-related tasks.
FRA understands some Fitbit devices are rather limited in their functionality. However, a number of different fitness tracking devices are available. The Fitbit Blaze, for example, has functions that include mobile playlists, call alerts, text alerts and fitness tracking. These functions are the same type of distracting functions that have caused railroad accidents and were the impetus for the restrictions contained in part 220.
The regulation text of part 220 does not distinguish between Fitbits that have limited functionality, and those that are more akin to smartphones or smartwatches. Unless a waiver granting an exemption for certain fitness tracking devices with limited functionality were issued by FRA in the future, the agency considers all such devices to be “personal electronic devices” that are subject to the restrictions in part 220. However, railroad operating employees are allowed the use of digital clocks or wristwatches whose primary function is to tell time.
Timepieces are commonly used in the railroad industry to verify the accuracy of a locomotive’s speed indicator. This function is safety-related in that it accurately allows a train crew to comply with relevant track speed limits during the course of a train’s movement. This exception is limited to those wristwatches that do not have functions which violate the requirements set forth under 220 subpart C. The Primary function of fitness tracking devices is not to tell time.
As stated in Title 49 CFR 220.303, a railroad operating employee shall not use an electronic device if that use would interfere with the employee’s or another railroad operating employee’s performance of safety-related duties. No individual in the cab of a controlling locomotive shall use an electronic device if that use would interfere with a railroad operating employee’s performance of safety-related duties.
The exceptions within 220 subpart C account for varying operating situations, with particular flexibility for railroad supplied devices.
The only exceptions within 220 subpart C are specially stated in § 220.309:
§ 220.309 Permitted uses; exceptions to other restrictions.
Notwithstanding any other limitations in this subpart, a railroad operating employee may use the following, if that use does not interfere with any employee’s performance of safety-related duties—
(a) The digital storage and display function of an electronic device to refer to a railroad rule, special instruction, timetable, or other directive, if such use is authorized under a railroad operating rule or instruction.
(b) An electronic device as necessary to respond to an emergency situation involving the operation of the railroad or encountered while performing a duty for the railroad.
(c) An electronic device to take a photograph of a safety hazard or a violation of a rail safety law, regulation, order, or standard, provided that—
A camera that is part of a cell phone or other similar multi-functional electronic device is not included in this exception unless it is a railroad supplied device and is used for an authorized business purpose;
The camera, unless otherwise permitted, is turned off immediately after the documentation has been made; and
If the camera is used in the cab of a moving train, the use is only by a crewmember other than the locomotive engineer.
(d) A stand-alone calculator if used for an authorized business purpose.
(e) A medical device that is consistent with the railroad’s standards for medical fitness for duty.
(f) A wireless communication device to conduct train or switching operations if the railroad operating employee is part of a crew assigned to a train that is exempt under § 220.9(b) from the requirement of a working radio when the employing railroad has fewer than 400,000 annual employee work hours.
Additionally, railroads may impose more stringent requirements that are subject to change at the railroad’s discretion, without notice to FRA, and can vary from railroad to railroad.
Risch In a letter dated May 26, 2016, to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), SMART TD National Legislative Director John Risch brought attention to the fact that some railroads are requiring needless radio broadcasts to the already-congested radio airways, which caused a derailment and loss of life in the case of the May 2015 Amtrak crash. “Places where there is too much radio traffic impairs the ability of train crew members to communicate effectively with roadway workers, dispatchers and other train crews causing safety issues,” Risch wrote. “We have reports from members who say they have lost situational awareness because of the constant blaring of the locomotive radio and I can attest that it has happened to me.” Click here to read Risch’s letter to the FRA in its entirety.
The following is an article written by SMART Transportation Division Illinois State Legislative Director Bob Guy and was originally published on the Illinois State Legislative Board website, www.illini.utu.org. Upon the urging of SMART, the Will County Board passed a resolution supporting the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) proposed two-person crew rule. The deadline to submit comments on the propose rule is May 16, 2016. Click here to submit your comments.
Will County Board passes resolution supporting FRA’s proposed two-person crew rule
Guy
JOLIET, Ill.—A coordinated effort recently among SMART TD and SMART led to the passage of a resolution in support of FRA’s proposed two person crew rule by the Will County Board.
The resolution passed unanimously last Thursday at the regular meeting of the Will County Board after passing unanimously out of the Legislative Committee on April 12. “When FRA announced its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for two person crews, SMART TD State Directors were encouraged to garner support for the pending rule,” said SMART TD Illinois State Director Robert W. Guy. “What better way to show support than by having a rail-intensive community pass a resolution in support of FRA’s proposed rule and submitting it as part of the docket,” Guy said. The strong relationship between our Illinois members of SMART TD and SMART really paid off in this effort. “Once we got our marching orders from our national legislative office I met with Don Moran,” Guy said. “Brother Don is a Business Representative for SMART Local 265 out of Carol Stream, but also serves on the Will County Board.” “When I briefed Don on the pending rule he immediately saw the potential negative implications for his community should rail carriers be allowed to operate trains with a lone crew member,” Guy said. “He was more than happy to introduce and shepherd through the supportive resolution.” “The overwhelming support for the resolution is a testament to Don’s hard work,” Guy said. “We owe a big thank you to Don and his colleagues on the Board.” “The ground work that Don accomplished really showed when I addressed the Board at their meeting last week,” Guy said. “After explaining what the proposed rule would do the Board passed the resolution unanimously.” That local support should way heavy on FRA when they consider all comments received in regards to the proposed rule. It’s communities like Will County that have the potential to suffer most if rail carriers are allowed to operate trains with one crew member. “This kind of support reinforces the results of the extensive polling SMART-TD has conducted over the past few years regarding crew size,” Guy said. “Citizens overwhelmingly have shown that they don’t want trains running through their communities with less than two people on board.”
The Resolution as passed by the Will County Board: RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS Resolution in Support of FRA Crew Size Rule WHEREAS, the safe operation of freight and passenger trains are vital to commerce; and Will County supports efforts to keep train operations safe in our (state, county) WHEREAS, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding adequate staffing on trains, a factor we believe is vital to ensuring safe train operations; and WHEREAS, national studies show that a minimum of two on-board crew members are vital to operate a train safely and minimize the likelihood of train-related accidents; and WHEREAS, virtually all trains in North America are already operated by crews of at least two individuals, making the economic impact of this proposed rule minimal; and WHEREAS, the FRA agrees that, while advancements in automated technology such as Positive Train Control (PTC) systems improve railroad safety, they are not a substitute for a train’s on-board crew members. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Will County Board hereby supports the Federal Railroad Administration’s proposed ruling, requiring that trains operated in America be operated by no less than a two-person crew. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Clerk shall send a copy of this Resolution to the United States Department of Transportation in the form of comments in support of the proposed federal rule. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Preamble of this Resolution is hereby adopted as if fully set herein. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval as provided by law.
The question
