Standing Committee on Rail Transportation Oklahoma City September 22, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 54
About This Presentation
Title:

Standing Committee on Rail Transportation Oklahoma City September 22, 2009

Description:

40. Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for HSR. Best practice shows the way: ... Closures/separations more cost effective over the long term than technology. 42 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:48
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 55
Provided by: dot392
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Standing Committee on Rail Transportation Oklahoma City September 22, 2009


1
Standing Committee on Rail TransportationOklahom
a City September 22, 2009
  • High-Speed Passenger
  • Rail Safety Strategy
  • Grady Cothen
  • Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety
    Standards

2
June 17, 2009 Administrator Szabo issued a
Notice of Fund Availability.
  • The Notice stated that transportation Safety and
    Safety Planning would be used as evaluation
    criteria for merit consideration of proposed HSR
    projects and programs.
  • The High Speed Passenger Rail Safety Strategy
    describes how FRA will provide specificity and
    additional safety guidance for the development of
    the HSR systems.

3
High Speed Passenger Rail Safety Strategy
Document
  • FRA developed the High Speed Rail Safety Strategy
    document on July 24, 2009 as a
  • Discussion Draft for Public Outreach.
  • FRA requested Comments by August 28, 2009

4
In general, the High Speed Passenger Rail Safety
Strategy
  • Establishes safety standards and program guidance
    for HSR.
  • Applies a System Safety approach to address
    safety concerns on specific rail lines.
  • Ensures that railroads involved in passenger
    train operations can effectively and efficiently
    manage train emergencies.

5
Current FRA Safety Regulations include
  • TIER I Equipment Safety Standards for trains
    operating up to 125 mph.
  • TIER II Equipment Safety Standards for high speed
    trains operating up to 150 mph.
  • Track Safety Standards that specify track
    geometry, cant deficiency, and car body
    acceleration limits for speeds up to 200 mph (FRA
    Classes 6 9).

6
FRA also administers additional Safety Standards
that, in most cases, are speed independent.
  • Requirements for
  • Track
  • Equipment
  • Operating Rules and Practices
  • Signals and Train Control
  • Communications
  • Emergency Preparedness
  • Certification of Locomotive Engineers
  • Control of Alcohol and Drug Use
  • Others
  • Portions of these standards require updating and
    augmenting for HSR.

7
there is more work to be done. Going forward,
FRA is
  • Reviewing Worldwide equipment standards to
    develop guidance for trains operating up to 220
    mph.
  • Advancing rules that amend the Passenger
    Equipment Safety Standards and Track Safety
    Standards for high speed train operations.
  • Completing this High Speed Passenger Rail Safety
    Strategy!

8
FRA intends to Use the Four HSR Categories as the
starting point and then consider additional
factors.
  • For example
  • The presence or absence of freight traffic,
  • The degree to which passenger equipment used on
    the corridor is of similar construction.
  • The degree of isolation of the passenger system
    from other hazards (ROW incursions and security
    or the presence of natural hazards such as
    seismic events or high water),
  • Other environmental and operational factors.

9
Through this strategy, the FRA intends to expand
Tiers of rail Passenger Service described in
Appendix B.
10
Tiers of rail Passenger Service described in
Appendix B.
11
FRAs proposed strategy is organized into four
categories
  • Prevention
  • Vehicle Track Interaction
  • Positive Train Control
  • Grade Crossing Safety
  • Maintenance of Way Safety Management
  • Right of Way Safety
  • Real Time System Monitoring

12
FRAs proposed strategy categories (continued).
  • Mitigation
  • Structural Standards
  • Cab Car Forward
  • Fuel Tank
  • Emergency Management
  • System Safety Programs

13
1. Prevention a. Vehicle Track Interaction
  • Strategy
  • Finalize rule requiring updated Vehicle Track
    Interaction (VTI) standards.
  • Resolve and Reconcile inconsistencies between
    Track and Passenger Equipment Safety Standards at
    various speeds.

14
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Strategy
  • The Rail Safety Improvement Act requires
    implementation of PTC systems on every passenger
    rail main line.
  • In anticipation of high speed service, FRA is
    considering tiered requirements for PTC systems.

15
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Prevent train-to-train collisions
  • Existing architectures effective
  • Display restricted speed and enforce upper limit
    of restricted speed in certain instances (e.g.,
    where permitted to pass red signal in TCS, joint
    authorities)
  • Issue of side collisions at diamond crossings
    given limited build out, enforce as to non-PTC
    line where two lines cross and where risk is
    relatively high

16
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Prevent over-speed derailments
  • Enforce permanent and temporary speed
    restrictions based on class of train
  • Include restrictions associated with identified
    highway-rail grade crossing malfunctions
  • No requirement to enforce equipment-specific
    speed restrictions, but encouraged where system
    design permits

17
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Prevent incursions into roadway work zones
  • Arrange system to prevent single point human
    failure
  • Employee in charge to maintain control over entry
  • For later implementation portable roadway
    worker terminals

18
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Prevent movement of a train through a switch left
    in the wrong position
  • In dark territory, individual switches would be
    monitored with position detected and secured
  • 25K locations at gt10,000 per switch
  • Sidings with speeds above 20 mph considered main
    line
  • In signal territory, signal circuits may be used
    to verify route integrity (main line and
    controlled sidings)
  • FRA to consider other approaches

19
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
20
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • Higher speeds and auxiliary functions
  • Above 59 mph passenger and 49 mph freight,
    functionality of block signal system, including
    fouling circuits and broken rail detection
    (tracks current regulations)
  • Above 90 mph, technology must be vital, perimeter
    protection must prevent unauthorized entry and
    rollouts
  • Above 125, must demonstrate performance
    equivalent to high speed rail of same class
    internationally (may also require incursion
    detection strategy)
  • Above 150, must be integrated into system safety
    plan approved by FRA

21
1. Prevention b. Positive Train Control
  • FRA ACTION PLAN
  • FRA will finalize standards for PTC systems by
    the end of October 2009.

22
1. Prevention c. Grade Crossing Safety
  • Strategy
  • Four Proposed Safety Principles
  • Eliminate redundant and unnecessary crossings and
    those that cannot be made safe.
  • Install the most sophisticated traffic
    control/warning devices compatible with the
    location for train speeds between 80 and 110 mph.
  • Protect rail movements with full width highway
    barriers where train speeds are between 111 and
    125 mph.
  • Eliminate or grade separate all crossings where
    train speeds are greater than 125 mph.

23
1. Prevention c. Grade Crossing Safety
  • FRA ACTION PLAN
  • FRA will provide draft guidance to supplement
    existing regulations with respect to highway-rail
    grade crossings on HSR lines, elicit stakeholder
    comment and provide final guidance for use in
    funding HSR projects.
  • FRA will also review the success of safety
    enhancements on designated HSR corridors in
    Illinois, Michigan and Pennsylvania in connection
    with the Sealed Corridor Study and provide a
    report of the findings for use by those planning
    the details of HSR systems.

24
1. Prevention d. MOW Safety Management
  • Strategy
  • Emphasize the importance of providing on track
    safety for those inspecting and maintaining track
    and structures (RWP).
  • Ensure that track is not disturbed ahead of
    trains.
  • Ensure that maintenance equipment is kept clear
    of live tracks except when authorized to be
    there.
  • Ensue that equipment is kept clear of passing
    trains.

25
1. Prevention e. Right of Way Safety
  • Strategy
  • The track safety standards for train speed
    greater than 125 mph requires the track owner to
    submit for approval a ROW plan for the prevention
    of
  • Vandalism,
  • Launching of objects from overhead bridges or
    structures into the path of trains.
  • Intrusion of vehicles from adjacent right of ways.

26
1. Prevention e. Right of Way Safety
  • Challenges
  • Common corridors with freight or conventional
    passenger operations.
  • Shared rights-of-way with interstate highways.
  • Little information on how to safely integrate a
    highway system with a railroad system.
  • Risk of a car or truck falling from an overpass
    and fouling the track.

27
1. Prevention f. Real Time System Monitoring
  • Strategy
  • A variety of technologies are now available to
    monitor the health and performance of the
    railroad operating system in real time.
  • On board sensors
  • Wayside detection devices
  • Autonomous track geometry systems
  • These technologies should be evaluated for
    suitability in light of total residual risk as
    determined in system safety program planning.

28
2. Mitigation a. Structural Standards
  • Strategy
  • FRA proposes to explore the possibility of
    describing a new tiered series of standards for
    the entire operating system, including equipment,
    in lieu of the current two-tiered structure that
    focuses on equipment only.

29
2. Mitigation a. Structural Standards
  • Strategy (continued)
  • New tiered standards would describe a range of
    operating environments and, for each such
    environments, would specify
  • Basic end strength and CEM performance.
  • Side strength and roof strength as a function of
    weight.
  • Fixture securement.
  • Acceptable occupant accelerations and restraint
    strategies.

30
2. Mitigation a. Structural Standards
  • FRA ACTION PLAN
  • FRA will finalize the pending cab end strength
    rule and then will define additional options for
    compliance with tiered passenger car safety
    standards.

31
2. Mitigation a. Structural Standards
  • RSAC Engineering Task Force
  • Cambridge this week
  • Foundation is existing Tier I standards
  • Conclude within 60-90 days
  • Technical Criteria and Procedures for
    Demonstration of Equivalent Safety

32
2. Mitigation b. Cab Car Forward
  • Strategy
  • New standards would also address circumstances
    under which the use of passenger-occupied lead
    units may or may not be acceptable.
  • (FRAs regulations for Tier II operations, which
    covers passenger trains that operate up to 150
    mph, requires that the power cars at the ends of
    the train exclude passengers.)

33
2. Mitigation c. Fuel Tank Integrity
  • Strategy
  • FRAs current fuel tank standards are derived
    from freight standards. Arguments have been
    advanced that a more flexible approach should be
    taken for tanks positioned in such a way as to be
    better protected.

34
3. Emergency Management
  • Strategy
  • Current strategy is to reduce the magnitude and
    severity of casualties in railroad operations by
    ensuring that railroads involved in passenger
    train operations can effectively and efficiently
    manage passenger train emergencies.
  • Second NPRM on Emergency Systems

35
4. System Safety Programs
  • Strategy
  • FRA is drafting a proposed rule that will require
    each HSR, intercity, and commuter passenger
    railroad, together with any other railroads
    engaged in joint operations, to develop and
    implement a documented SSP.
  • System safety programs integrate the process of
    identifying safety needs and managing them over
    time.

36
4. System Safety Programs
  • Strategy (continued)
  • The proposal would require the SSP to
  • Be defined and documented through a written
    System Safety Program Plan.
  • Include hazard management processes designed to
    proactively identify, assess and mitigate hazards
  • Be fully implemented by the passenger railroad.
  • Be audited for compliance by the FRA.

37
Summary of FRA Actions
  • FRA will address
  • prevention,
  • mitigation,
  • emergency management, and
  • system safety integration.
  • FRA will structure a new tiered approach to
    passenger operations, taking into account
  • maximum operating speeds
  • right-of-way characteristics,
  • safety technology,
  • planning requirements, and
  • the presence or absence of less-compatible rail
    traffic.
  • FRA will continue to evaluate and act on
  • petitions for rules of particular applicability,
    and
  • waivers.

38
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for HSR
  • HSR Safety Strategy Element
  • Built on existing FHWA/MUTCD guidance and
  • Track Safety Standards
  • Barrier systems above 110 mph
  • No at-grade crossings above 125 mph
  • Note AAR and ICC would lower this speed to 110
    mph

39
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for HSR
  • Focus is Emerging HSR
  • Gap in policy between conventional speeds (79
    mph) and 110 mph target for many projects

40
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for HSR
  • Best practice shows the way
  • Consolidation and grade separation
  • Safety improvements at private crossings
  • Sealed corridors
  • Warning system interconnection
  • Train control integration
  • Barrier systems
  • Pedestrian and trespass emphasis
  • Systems approach

41
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 1. Consolidation and grade separation
  • Strong agreement
  • One freight railroad suggested NTE 2 crossings
    per mile on Emerging HSR corridor
  • Closures/separations more cost effective over the
    long term than technology

42
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 2. Safety improvements at private crossings
  • Need for tools to elicit crossing holder
    participation on reasonable terms
  • Proposed gt5 residences public access crossing
  • Industrial crossings require individual
    assessment
  • Concern that locked gate requirement could pose
    workload issue for dispatchers, result in
    unneeded slow orders inappropriate role for host
    RR unworkable

43
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 2. Safety improvements at private crossings
  • Should demonstrate application for closure to
    state regulatory commission where available
  • Gate locks should be integrated into signal and
    train control system with time release

44
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 3. Sealed corridors
  • Strong support from passenger and freight
    interests
  • Recognition of multiple main tracks as an issue
    regardless of speed
  • Desire expressed for highway side to share in the
    investments required
  • Concern with existing operations (NY)

45
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 4. Warning systems and other traffic control
  • Advance signal preemption should be required
  • Comment notes proposed FHWA warrant for traffic
    control at intersections near highway-rail grade
    crossings
  • Health monitoring supported

46
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 5. Train control integration
  • Support expressed for presence detection, health
    monitoring, closed loop to train
  • Health monitoring should poll/report periodically
  • Recognition that this strategy is not applicable
    to freight trains on the route
  • Opportunity for pre-starts and acceleration on
    approach
  • gt90 mph threshold for train control

47
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 6. Barrier systems
  • No quarrel with FRA conclusion that prior
    demonstrations were not successful
  • One request to allow a performance standard in
    lieu of full-width barrier

48
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 7. Pedestrian and trespass emphasis
  • Comments asked for specific standards or
    guidelines, including use of fencing to
    channelize
  • Pedestrian gates and channelization at all
    locations
  • Flangeway gap max. 3 for new installation

49
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for
HSRComments
  • 8. Systems approach
  • Slow trains as a last resort

50
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for HSR
  • General comments
  • Others should participate in defraying costs
  • More funding required
  • Should be dedicated revenue source targeted at
    the safety needs
  • Liability is an issue
  • Quiet zone regulation should be reviewed for
    applicability and adjustment in HSR context

51
Points of ContactGeneral
  • Grady Cothen
  • grady.cothen_at_dot.gov
  • 202-493-6302
  • Robert Lauby, Staff Director, Passenger Safety
  • robert.lauby_at_dot.gov
  • 202-493-6474

52
Points of ContactPTC
  • David Blackmore
  • david.blackmore_at_dot.gov
  • 202-493-6474
  • Tom McFarlin
  • thomas.mcfarlin_at_dot.gov
  • 202-493-6203

53
Points of ContactCrossings
  • Ron Ries
  • ronald.ries_at_dot.gov
  • 202-493-6285

54
Questions?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com