Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Notices 14641 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (FRA–2006–

25564) and must be submitted to the 

Docket Clerk, DOT Central Docket 

Management Facility, Room PL–401 

(Plaza Level), 400 7th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Communications received within 45 

days of the date of this notice will be 

considered by FRA before final action is 

taken. Comments received after that 

date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). The 

statement may also be found at 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC on March 21, 

2007. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E7–5620 Filed 3–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

[Docket No. FRA–2007–27623] 

Notice of Informal Safety Inquiry 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of informal safety 

inquiry; technical conference. 

SUMMARY: FRA is conducting an 

informal safety inquiry and technical 

conference to explore the safety 

implications associated with the use of 

a variety of safety-relevant technologies 

that while possibly providing significant 

efficiencies, may not be designed with 

failsafe characteristics. Such 

technologies might range from powerassisted switches historically used in 

yard operations being used on main 

tracks, switch position detection and 

indication in dark territory, to trainpacing software designed for fuel 

savings. FRA seeks to gain a better 

perspective on the use of such 

technology and the safety concerns that 

may be presented. 

DATES: Technical Conference: A 

technical conference will be held on 

April 19, 2007 at 10 a.m. in Washington, 

DC. 

Comments: Interested parties may 

submit comments relevant to the issues 

identified in this notice or discussed at 

the technical conference to the address 

noted below. Such written materials 

should be submitted by May 18, 2007, 

however comments submitted after that 

date will be considered to the extent 

possible. 

ADDRESSES: (1) Technical Conference: 

The technical conference will be held in 

the Washington and Jefferson Rooms at 

the Marriott Residence Inn, 1199 

Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20005. 

(2) Attendance: Persons wishing to 

participate in the technical conference 

are requested to provide their names, 

organizational affiliation, and contact 

information, to Michelle Silva, Docket 

Clerk, FRA 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202–

493–6030). 

(3) Comments: Anyone wishing to file 

a comment related to this informal 

safety inquiry should refer to the FRA 

Docket Number FRA–2007–27623. You 

may submit your comments and related 

material by only one of the following 

methods: 

(i) By mail to the Docket Management 

System, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Room PL–401, 400 7th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590–

0001; or 

(ii) Electronically through the Web 

site for the Docket Management System 

at http://dms.dot.gov. For instructions 

on how to submit comments 

electronically, visit the Docket 

Management System Web site and click 

on the ‘‘help’’ menu. 

The Docket Management Facility 

maintains the public docket for this 

proceeding. Comments and documents 

as indicated in this preamble will 

become part of this docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying at 

room PL–401 on the Plaza Level of the 

Nassif building at the same address 

during regular business hours. You may 

also obtain access to this docket on the 

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. 

FRA wishes to inform all potential 

commenters that anyone is able to 

search the electronic form of all 

comments received into any of our 

dockets by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–

78) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

McFarlin, Staff Director, Signal and 

Train Control Division, FRA Office of 

Safety Assurance and Compliance, 

RRS–13, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., 

Stop 25, Washington, DC 20950 

(telephone 202–493–6203), or Mark 

Tessler FRA Office of the Chief Counsel, 

RCC–10, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., 

Stop 10, Washington, DC 20950 

(telephone 202–493–6061). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of the technical conference is to 

permit the exchange of information, and 

to discuss safety considerations and 

concerns, regarding these various 

systems being developed and installed 

outside of the scope of a ‘‘conventional’’

signal or train control system. 

Historically, FRA has regulated existing 

signal and train control system 

configurations under the provisions of 

49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 236, 

Subparts A through G. 

During the past few years, the railroad 

industry has begun to deploy a variety 

of new devices and systems in what has 

traditionally been considered to be nonsignaled territory. These new systems 

and devices, or conventional devices 

used in new applications, are generally 

constructed from aggregations of 

existing traditional technologies. Such 

systems include: remote-controlled 

power-operated switches in nonsignaled track warrant control territory, 

switch position detection and 

indication, power-assisted switches 

used in main track applications, and 

various track integrity warning systems. 

Additionally, ‘‘train pacing’’ systems are 

being developed which could, in the 

near future, be integrated into existing 

positive train control (PTC) systems. 

Generally the separate components that 

make up these systems have 

individually proven to provide a 

reasonably high level of safety. When 

properly designed, implemented, and 

maintained, such integrations may 

result in significant safety and 

operational benefits; however, the level 

of safety of systems resulting from the 

integration of such technologies into 

new configurations has not always been 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
14642 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Notices 

proven. These devices or systems when 

used outside of conventional traditional 

signal or train control systems are not 

always designed or implemented with 

fail-safe characteristics. 

A number of issues are raised by use 

of these technologies outside of 

traditional signal systems: 

Power-Operated or Power-Assisted 

Switches 

Power-operated or power-assisted 

switches being implemented without 

the same level of mechanical and/or 

electrically locking, or with a full array 

of signal indications, as has been 

historically provided within 

conventional signal systems. 

Methods for protecting power-assisted 

switches include various forms of 

switch position indications and 

electrical locking, but there is little 

consistency amongst the methods. 

Issues include, but are not limited to the 

following: 

• Failure to design and implement 

these type of switches using the closed 

circuit principle; 

• Use of yard-type switches lacking 

traditional switch-and-lock movement 

for main track operations; 

• Exceeding maximum speeds 

intended for the type of equipment 

used; 

• Failure to provide proper or 

sufficient mechanical or electrical 

locking to ensure safety of train 

operations; 

• Failure to provide secure 

communications in the control circuitry; 

• Failure to provide vital loss of 

shunt protection at some locations; 

• Failure to produce an overall vital 

design of the system; and 

• Failure to establish specific and/or 

sufficient standards for the design, 

installation, maintenance, inspection, 

testing, and repair; along with 

associated recordkeeping. 

Special Track Condition Detection 

Devices 

Special track condition detection 

devices have been installed both within 

a conventional signal system, in nonsignaled territory, and within PTC 

systems. These devices include 

electronically-detected erosion or other 

significant disturbance of the track bed 

structure, and if erosion or a disturbance 

is found, the signals governing 

movement through the affected are 

caused to display their most restrictive 

aspects; or in the case of non-signaled 

territory, other methods of providing 

notification of a possible hazardous 

condition are used (e.g., radio broadcast 

messaging, wayside indicator lights, 

indication/warning communicated to 

central dispatching locations, etc). 

Another track integrity system is 

designed to detect broken rails and train 

occupancy, and to provide indication to 

a central dispatching center as well as 

to trains approaching the area in 

otherwise non-signaled territory. This 

system may or may not include switch 

position detection and it may or may 

not be of the fail-safe variety. 

Issues raised by use of these 

technologies are similar to those of 

power-operated or power-assisted 

switch machines used in non-signaled 

territory. There may be no formal 

commissioning procedure, nor a formal 

maintenance program that would 

include records of inspections, tests, 

maintenance, and repairs. 

Other Train Control-Like Systems 

Many defined areas of remote control 

locomotive (RCL) operations are being 

established by which point protection 

for train movements is not required. In 

several areas, devices have been or are 

being installed at the extremities of 

these ‘‘RCL zones’’ to provide positive 

protection against unintended 

encroachment of train movements. 

Again, not unlike these other systems, 

there may be no specific constraints on 

their design, installation, and/or 

maintenance. 

Although FRA intends that this safety 

inquiry and technical conference 

address safety and economic 

implications related to the use of such 

equipment, FRA expects the focus of the 

discussions at the technical conference 

and written comments submitted in 

connection with this informal safety 

inquiry, to include the following issues: 

• Use of yard-type switches lacking 

traditional switch-and-lock movement; 

• The safety implications related to 

the design, implementation, installation, 

and maintenance of existing equipment 

in new or novel configurations; 

• The operational limitations that 

should be placed on such systems; 

• Criteria for determining when such 

new or novel configurations are 

defective or unsafe or both; 

• The extent of FRA oversight 

required; 

• Criteria for determining when 

combinations of new or novel 

configurations require FRA oversight; 

• The economic implications of any 

type of modification and/or FRA 

oversight program; 

• Alternative approaches to 

mandatory modification of existing 

equipment (e.g., notification of when 

the appliances become defective, or 

replacement of the appliances when that 

condition exists; mid-life over-hauls) 

and the economic implication of any 

suggested approach; 

• The safety implications and 

standards that should and could be 

addressed by FRA’s safety oversight of 

such systems; 

• What components and part or parts 

of a system should FRA allow without 

oversight; 

• What quality control standards 

should apply to these components and 

systems; 

• What qualifications/training should 

the individuals performing the 

installation, maintenance, testing, and 

repair, of these components and systems 

possess; 

• How should field or shop repairs of 

these components and systems be 

conducted; 

• What are the safety implications of 

allowing such repairs; 

• When should a component or 

system be considered defective; 

• What visual and non-destructive 

inspection techniques are appropriate; 

• At what interval should the 

components or system functions be 

inspected and/or tested; 

• What records, if any, should be 

maintained of these inspections and 

tests; 

• What, if any, requirements should 

be applicable regarding the modification 

or discontinuance of these systems once 

they are in service; and 

• What special instructions should be 

in place concerning these systems and 

what efficiency testing standards should 

be established and followed? 

Any person wishing to attend the 

technical conference should notify 

FRA’s Docket Clerk by mail at the 

address provided in the ADDRESSES

section at least five working days prior 

to the date of the meeting and if 

possible, three copies of any materials 

they wish to present at the conference. 

FRA reserves the right to limit 

participation in the conference of 

persons who fail to provide such 

notification. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22, 

2007. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E7–5614 Filed 3–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES