NEW FRA EMERGENCY ORDER

cliffnotes?

Interesting read. Thanks for the post.

US Railroads can no longer leave a train unattended, effective immediately.

Stricter procedures for leaving an engine(or consist) unattended including reporting more details to the dispatcher and the dispatcher confirming the details.

Each railroad shall develop a safety plan to ensure that the procedures will be implemented when leaving a train unattended.

FRA will not approve those plans, but will monitor the effectiveness, until the practices are determined to be effective.

Same penalties for non-compliance with Federal criminal penalties added.

Interesting background on oil, ethanol and hazmat rail traffic and accidents.

I think you are going to see sidings built so a train can park with derails on both ends.  And I think at least HALF of the cars of a train will have to have hand brakes applies!

That's not quite true because there are specifications and exceptions noted in that more detailed instruction.

Actually, seems to me that the railroads need to go back to two-person (minimum) crews. I'm sure no expert, but it appears to me that two people, working as a team, would reduce the potential of a similar accident occurring.

That all depends on the percentage of grade you are on. On a 2.2% grade, just have of the hand brakes being set on a 19,000 ton coal train many NOT be enough.

Remember, the true test on whether one has enough hand brakes set is to release ALL the air brakes, i.e. train AND and independent air, and see if the train rolls!

We already have sidings with derails on both ends.

We already have rules in place that specify how many handbrakes, which include all hand brakes for specific trains/cars.

We already have rules to "test" the securement of a train after the hand brakes are tied.

It does mean that crews will be stuck baby sitting for many hours, and even after they go DOL, they will have to wait for a relief crew to babysit. Instead of securing a train, and leaving it in a siding, or on the mainline until the yard can take it (which is many many hours at times) we will sit there and babysit.  

I agree with Allan. There are simply some aspects of railroading you cannot automate, and there is a bill to mandate two person crews floating around the House of Representatives, but I would not hold my breath for them to do anything as they seem incapable of anything other than striking poses for the networks. That much tonnage, and the potential for unanticipated examples of Murphy's law seems to mandate a conservative approach of two men per consist. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I wonder what the bill will be for the Canadian catastrophe, let alone in thinking of the horrible human toll.

Bruce

That's the impression I got -- full time baby-sitting of anything hazardous.

When I was in law school one of my professors always said "hard cases make for bad law/policy." This looks like a knee-jerk reaction to a tragedy which (IMO) doesn't necessarily prevent something like the tank car runaway situation from happening again.

Do you know if they found out how those cars got away in the first place? Were they runaways or "break aways"?

Matt I haven't heard a thing except all the briefs we have got since then .... make sure to do the "release test" after you have tied a "sufficient" amount of handbrakes.

Just because I say I tied a "sufficient" amount, the proof is in the "release test".

They want me to babysit....fine, at least I don't have to change any diapers. It's easy $$ to sit there for hours on end...boring, but easy!

This is another typical knee-jerk over-reaction by the FRA. They are attempting to publish a "procedure" to make sure this kind of accident doesn't happen again, yet they admit in the EO itself that they do not know the cause of this accident! Am I the only one who thinks this is absolutely ridiculous?

Sadly the dumbing down of the railroad industry continues unabated, made worse by this kind of reactionary over-regulation.

I'm glad I'm getting close to pulling the pin for good...

Roger that! I agree 100%! Absolutely ridiculous! I have another 18 years to go

Hand brakes are not the only way to hold a train.  I always liked skates.  The train can be pushed up onto the skates, then no one can tamper with them.  I believe that in the Canadian derailment, the engineer claims that he set enough hand brakes and the railroad's position is that someone released some of the hand brakes.  Could not happen with properly applied skates. I did not see in the EO where skates were mentioned, which would be an error on the part of the FRA.  Admittedly having enough skates for a long train could be a problem, but on short lines where a train of only a few cars that might be left somewhere, skates are a practical option.  When I read the EO, it did not appear to me that the FRA was requiring the train baby sitter be qualified train crew.  It was not clear to me what their job was. I got the impression that the baby sitter could be a security guard who's job was to prevent the train from being tampered with.  At some point the EO will be turned into a regulation and it will make a lot more since then.

Believe it or not, some Class 1's (CSX) will not use skates. They claim it is not "safe" to be placing your hands in such close proximity to the wheels when placing or removing the skate. What nonsense. 

I went round and round over this with CSX when I was Superintendent of Operations for the Ohio Central in Youngstown several years ago. We had an interchange track on a grade. The local kids figured out how to release hand brakes. The cars would then roll down the grade and over the derail. Gee what fun! We then had to get out there with a locomotive and rerailers and get 'em back on the rails, costing us time and money. We figured a skate was the perfect answer to stop this vandalism.

The first time the CSX local crew showed up and found the skate in place, they refused to touch the cars. After going several rounds with the local CSX Trainmaster, we ultimately had to remove the skates. They would not allow their trainmen to handle skates...period!

To prevent future derailments without using skates, I put out a Superintendent's Bulletin telling my crews to spot the cars within 6" of the derail. When spotted that close, even if the hand brake was released the car would not gain enough momentum to go over the derail and on the ground. It would just roll up against the derail and stop. The CSX crews and supervision even complained about this, but we prevailed on this one.

It is this kind of "dumbing down" that is crippling the industry.

Can you just imagine how many "skates" the two man crew would have to have stored on the units handling one of the BNSF or UP 135 car unit coal trains? Say you get stopped on a 1.5% grade and have to "tie down" the appropriate quantity of cars in a 19,000 ton coal train, including "skating each car"! Wonder how many men and trips it would take carry all those stupid things back along the train, in 20 degree below zero weather in Wyoming?

Totally ridiculous! 

Not sure about system wide, but BNSF does not allow the use of skates any more on the California Division. They said they are too dangerous as they may come shooting out at you.

"Dumbing down" the industry is only getting, and going to get worse. You should see / hear some of the stuff the new hires are taught. That's why I said before, what ever happened to hiring "qualified" people? Not a certain "number" of people.

quote:

Am I the only one who thinks this is absolutely ridiculous?

No.

Only 4 years, 8 months, 23 days, 8 hours and 14 minutes to go... but who's counting?

dumb questions.  why would a train need to be left unattended?  can't the railroads schedule another crew to relieve the current crew? or why don't they?

 This is what crews in Bluefield,WV deal with all the time,plenty of handbrakes galore .

 I've seen conductors tie 100% brakes on the east side of the mountain in the yard on an intermodal train.

 I know I've not witnessed it myself,but old heads told me you would start from the cab (rear) putting on brakes and the recrew would show up walking from the head end knocking them off ! Seemed like a lot of work to me 

 But in my opinion,only hand brakes and a proper c-102 test is all that's required.

 Now if the FRA wanted to get down to the nitty gritty of it all they would have to hire a lot of new personnel and set a standard of how to secure cars for each yard, siding or industry,and since their not going to do that then it will be up to the railroads to police their own railroad employee's .

 The Canadian incident was horrible and all the railroada can learn from it,but it's something that doesn't happen everyday on the railroads.BUT..thru proper training and flat out observing the rules on the c-102 test's can these incidents be prevented.Good-grief were talking simple procedure that I'm sure has been practiced since the invention of the handbrake.What did they do with a tied doen train or car before Westinghouse invented the air brake system ???  They applied a hand operated handbrake !

 It's just getting people to do this and understanding the consequences if you don't do your job properly.

 And yes there's the outside the railroad employee factor of tampering,but that's hard to prove unless the cars are in a monitored yard or siding.I've seen cars that have derailed on the Pocahontas Division because the brakes were knocked off by kids who were seen by a passing crew doing so,and the cars rolled from a middle track siding onto the mainline over a derail and blasting thru a switch.

 Just diligence on the job means a lot .

An admittedly over-simplified explanation...

You have a train of loaded cars to deliver to a customer. However the customer has not completed unloading the previous train. There is nowhere to put the loaded train on the customer's property because there is already another train there. So...the loaded  train that is waiting to be delivered is tied down on a siding or in a yard somewhere, to await delivery.

It makes no sense to call a crew just to sit on a train that is not going anywhere.

Or ( this cost $$$$ and co-ordinations) but not allow the next train to depart origination dock until the destination dock about to be clear in X days just in time for next train to arrive.  Just in time concept. 

Thanks!

Thanks!

Some of this is influenced from the Transport Canada orders.  But could some of this on our side is because of that terror threat for this Sunday for locations outside the US?

No.

A certain amount of regulation is probably necessary.  Once you pass a threshold, things get carried away.  I know nothing about railroad regulation, but am familiar with aviation.  What is happening to us is - there are half as many non- airline flights now as there were in 1977, and twice as many regulators and inspectors.  They are finding that guidelines and technical orders can be used as regulations, without going through any "notice/comment" in the Federal Register.

One guideline says that I have to have an "after takeoff" checklist in my Piper Cub.  I don't, of course, but if I send a student for a checkride without one, the student will flunk.  I had to make one up : "RPM? Check. After takeoff checklist complete." And it has to be a piece of paper, so you can read it to make sure you got it right.

There are so many of them that they invent problems to solve.  In 1977 taxiway incursions were not a problem - nobody was keeping track.  Now it is a very big deal, because they have folks watching.  We have had six this year alone, so now we have a multi- million dollar system designed to keep track of exactly who is where, when.  I will be issued a magnetic stripe card with all my personal data on it, and when I enter the airport, a digital record will be sent to the main office.

If Rich brings his King Air to my airport, and wants to leave after about four PM, he will have to find some nice guy like me to let him in.

Maybe the 1970s were our zenith?  They still had PAs in warbonnet then, I think. And maybe I could ride a passenger train?

There are a few fundamental facts that legislative/regulatory bodies don't seem to understand -- (1) you can't legislate/regulate against crazy, (2) you can't legislate/regulate against stupid, (3) you can't legislate/regulate against the unknown freak accident. At some point, you attempt to violate the law of diminishing returns -- i.e. you violate the 90/10 rule (you get to the 90% point with 10% of your resources, then blow the rememaining 90% of your resources trying to pick off the last 10%).

When you try to legislate/regulate against these three items, you have a tendency to legislate against the use of common sense and end up wasting time and money having people more concerned about the "process" rather than the product/result. This consumes time and money and/or  having people leave the regulated industry and/or raising prices to compensate for all of the regulatory nonsense.

Sorry for the rant, but I think they're going to end up causing more injuries to railroad workers than preventing accidents like this one.

I beg to differ with you Allan. Item #1, p.2 and Item #1, p.19 is the E.O. .

There is a factual account in the FRA E.O. posted above. Pages 4 & 5.  Rolled away.

It seems to me the solution to this problem is quite simple.  Don't leave trains unattended.  Schedule it so that there is always a relief crew available, and the train completes its run!  OR, Why not provide "rest facilities" on board! Let's bring back a really comfortable caboose and put it behind the engine. Given the outrageous rates charged by motels these days, it would probably be cheaper!

Have your rose colored glasses on this morning, Kent?

Kent, you truly don't understand the railroad industry. What you have suggested is simply not possible.

Now that is funny! It's just not that simple Kent. Like stated above by others, sometimes trains have to be parked for various reasons, for hours on end. Now we have to baby sit because of 1 man and his mistake, poor judgement, laziness, or whatever you want to call it, in another country.

>>Have your rose colored glasses on this morning, Kent?

>>Kent, you truly don't understand the railroad industry. What you have suggested is simply not possible.

>>sometimes trains have to be parked for various reasons

Ah well, I suppose George Westinghouse heard the same sort of comments.

While we're at it, if we can put a man on the moon, why can't somebody come up with a failsafe automatic parking brake for freight cars?  Just flip a switch in the cab.

Ok, here is a question:  Does the RR employee "babysitter" have to be a person who has to have USDOT qualifications to run the train, so rust enough qualifications just to "babbysit"?

And how will this all affect Union contracts?

Mr. Westinghouse's airbrake system is an example of elegance.  Simple, reliable, effective.  As is the manual handbrake.

Additionally, Mr. Westinghouse's airbrake eliminated the need for brakemen to walk along the tops of cars in, all sorts of weather, while a train was in motion to set or release brakes on individual cars as needed while the train was decending a grade.  Engine brakes alone were insuffcient to prevent runaways. 

So, just what operates this marvelous theoretical parking brake?  Raido? Wi-Fi? Cell phone? Cable running from car to car? 

It would require some kind of electronics package be installed on each car with a mechanism strong enough to apply the brake, keep it applied, release the brake, a means to supply power to the electronics (batteries?) a means to keep power the power supply recharged and the ability to work in all kinds of tempratures and conditions.  Plus the transmitters in the locomotives.  Then there's the cost to install and maintain the system on each car...

"Unable to set parking brake: XYZ RR 123456.  Abort, Retry, Fail" comes to mind...

Of course, all this assumes the engineer remembers to "flip the switch..."

Rusty

What does the USDOT have to do with the Railroad System in the US?? 

The FRA covers the US Railroad System!

I see you still have those rose colored glasses on.  

Please remember that the U.S. taxpayers paid to put a man on the moon, and NOT private enterprise, such as the railroads.

Yes, the train rolled away by itself...that is a known fact.

What they do NOT know is WHY they rolled away. The jury is still out on that one.