Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or Modification of a Railroad Signal System or Relief From the Requirements of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 236, 18730-18731 [E7-7070]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
18730
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA–2005–23281, Notice No.
5]
Safety of Private Highway-Rail Grade
Crossings; Notice of Safety Inquiry
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of open meeting date
change.
AGENCY:
On July 27, 2006, FRA
published a notice announcing its intent
to conduct a series of open meetings
throughout the United States, in
cooperation with appropriate State
agencies, to consider issues related to
the safety of private highway-rail grade
crossings. FRA has conducted four
meetings to date and on March 17, 2007,
FRA published a notice announcing the
scheduling of an additional meeting to
be held April 26, 2007, in Syracuse,
New York. Due to recently developed
scheduling conflicts, however, it is
necessary to postpone this April 26
meeting. This Notice No. 5 is an
announcement that the Syracuse, New
York, meeting has been rescheduled for
July 26, 2007. FRA regrets any
inconvenience this date change may
have caused.
At the meeting, FRA intends to solicit
oral statements from private crossing
owners, railroads, and other interested
parties on issues related to the safety of
private highway-rail grade crossings,
which will include, but not be limited
to, current practices concerning the
responsibility for safety at private grade
crossings, the adequacy of warning
devices at private crossings, and the
relative merits of a more uniform
approach to improving safety at private
crossings. FRA has also opened a public
docket on these issues so that interested
parties may submit written comments
for public review and consideration.
DATES: The fifth public meeting will be
held in Syracuse, New York on July 26,
2007, at the Renaissance Syracuse Hotel,
701 East Genesee Street, Syracuse, New
York 13210, beginning at 9:30 a.m.
Persons wishing to participate are
requested to provide their names,
organizational affiliation, and contact
information to Michelle Silva, FRA
Docket Clerk, 1120 Vermont Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:
202–493–6030). Persons needing sign
language interpretation or other
reasonable accommodation for disability
are also encouraged to contact Ms. Silva
using the aforementioned information.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Ron
Ries, FRA Office of Safety, 1120
Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20590 (telephone: 202–493–6299);
Miriam Kloeppel, FRA Office of Safety,
1120 Vermont Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202–
493–6299); or Kathryn Shelton, FRA
Office of Chief Counsel, 1120 Vermont
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20590
(telephone: 202–493–6038).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
additional information, please see the
initial notice published July 27, 2006, in
the Federal Register (71 FR 42713) and
available at https://
a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/
01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/
2006/pdf/06–6501.pdf
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Request for Comments
While FRA solicits discussion and
comments on all areas of safety at
private highway-rail grade crossings, we
particularly encourage comments on the
following topics:
• At-grade highway-rail crossings
present inherent risks to users,
including the railroad and its
employees, and to other persons in the
vicinity should a train derail into an
occupied area or release hazardous
materials. When passenger trains are
involved, the risks are heightened. From
the standpoint of public policy, how do
we determine whether the creation or
continuation of a private crossing is
justified?
• Is the current assignment of
responsibility for safety at private
crossings effective? To what extent do
risk management practices associated
with insurance arrangements result in
the ‘‘regulation’’ of safety at private
crossings?
• How should improvement and/or
maintenance costs associated with
private crossings be allocated?
• Is there a need for alternative
dispute resolution mechanisms to
handle disputes that may arise between
private crossing owners and the
railroads?
• Should the State or Federal
Government assume greater
responsibility for safety at private
crossings?
• Should there be nationwide
standards for warning devices at private
crossings, or for intersection design of
new private grade crossings?
• How do we determine when a
private crossing has a ‘‘public purpose’’
and is subject to public use?
• Should some crossings be
categorized as ‘‘commercial crossings,’’
rather than as ‘‘private crossings?’’
• Are there innovative traffic control
treatments that could improve safety at
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
private crossings on major rail corridors,
including those on which passenger
service is provided?
• Should DOT request enactment of
legislation to address private crossings?
If so, what should it include?
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 9,
2007.
Jo Strang,
Associate Administrator for Safety.
[FR Doc. E7–7064 Filed 4–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Notice of Application for Approval of
Discontinuance or Modification of a
Railroad Signal System or Relief From
the Requirements of Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 236
Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 235 and 49
U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad
has petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) seeking approval
for the discontinuance or modification
of the signal system or relief from the
requirements of 49 CFR part 236 as
detailed below.
[Docket Number FRA–2007–27287]
Applicant: BNSF Railway Company, Mr.
Gregory C. Fox, Vice President
Engineering, P.O. Box 961034, Fort
Worth, Texas 76161–0034.
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) seeks
relief from the requirements of the
Rules, Standards and Instructions, Title
49 CFR part 236, Section 236.377
Approach Locking, 236.378 Time
locking, 236.379 Route Locking, 236.380
Indication Locking, and 236.381 Traffic
Locking, on processor-based systems to
the extent that only the following be
required every four years after initial
testing or program change:
• Verification of the CRC/Check Sum/
UCN of the existing location specific
application logic to the previously
tested version.
• Tests on equipment outside the
processor (switch indication, track
indication, searchlight signal indication,
approach locking (if external)) are
verified to the processor’s inputs and
switch locking is tested from the
processor’s output to the switch
machine.
• Testing of the duration of any
timers with variable settings.
Applicant’s justification for relief:
Many of BNSF’s interlockings and
control points are controlled by solidstate processor-based systems. The 2year signal locking tests for solid-state
E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM
13APN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Notices
interlockings required by the FRA place
an undue burden on the railroad. Due to
train traffic, some large control points
can take a month or more to complete
the 2-year locking tests. Once a
processor-based system has been tested
and locking tests documented on
installation, re-testing should not be
required since the logic continues to
operate in the same manor as it did
when installed and the operation does
not change.
Any interested party desiring to
protest the granting of an application
shall set forth specifically the grounds
upon which the protest is made, and
include a concise statement of the
interest of the party in the proceeding.
Additionally, one copy of the protest
shall be furnished to the applicant at the
address listed above.
All communications concerning this
proceeding should be identified by
docket number FRA–2007–27287 and
may be submitted by one of the
following methods:
• Web site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic site;
• Fax: 202–493–2251;
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
0001; or
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the Plaza Level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Communications received within 45
days of the date of this notice will be
considered by the 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
https://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 https://dms.dot.gov.
FRA expects to be able to determine
these matters without an oral hearing.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
18731
However, if a specific request for an oral
hearing is accompanied by a showing
that the party is unable to adequately
present his or her position by written
statements, an application may be set
for public hearing.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 9,
2007.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety
Standards and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7–7077 Filed 4–12–07; 8:45 am]
Issued in Washington, DC on April 9, 2007.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety
Standards and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7–7070 Filed 4–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
[Docket Number FRA–2007–27599]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket Number FRA–2006–23687]
Notice of Informational Filing
For informational purposes only, the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
is providing notice that it has received
an informational filing from BNSF
Railway Company (BNSF) to test the
next version of the railroad’s Electronic
Train Management System (ETMS)
submitted pursuant to Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part 236.913.
The informational filing is described
below, including the submitting party
and the requisite docket number where
the informational filing and any related
information may be found. The
document is also available for public
inspection; however, FRA is not
accepting public comment on the
document.
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF)
[Docket Number FRA–2006–23687]
BNSF has submitted an informational
filing to FRA to continue operational
testing of the next version of the
railroad’s ETMS. This continued testing
will allow BNSF to obtain the necessary
information required to amend its
current Product Safety Plan (PSP) for a
future submittal to the FRA. The
informational filing has been placed in
the Docket Number FRA–2006–23687,
and is available for public inspection.
All documents in the public docket
are available for examination during
regular business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at
the DOT Central Docket Management
Facility, Room Pl–401 (Plaza Level), 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC.
All documents in the public docket are
also available for inspection and
copying on the Internet at the docket
facility’s Web site at https://dms.dot.gov.
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
https://dms.dot.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of Application for Approval of
Discontinuance or Modification of a
Railroad Signal System or Relief From
the Requirements of Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 236
Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 235 and 49
U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad
has petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) seeking approval
for the discontinuance or modification
of the signal system or relief from the
requirements of 49 CFR Part 236 as
detailed below.
Applicant: CSX Transportation,
Incorporated, Mr. C. M. King, Chief
Engineer, Communications and
Signals, 500 Water Street , SC J–350,
Jacksonville, Florida 32202.
CSX Transportation, Incorporated
(CSXT) seeks approval of the proposed
modification of the traffic control
system, on the main track and yard
tracks, at CP-Bowl, milepost 000–384.3,
on the Atlanta Division, Boyles
Terminal Subdivision, near
Birmingham, Alabama. The proposed
changes consist of a reduction to the
limits of the traffic control system,
including the following: discontinuance
of all controlled signals at CP-Bowl,
conversion of all remaining poweroperated switches to hydraulic type
switches under the jurisdiction and
control of the local yardmaster, and
designation of the trackage to Yard
Limits, CSXT Operating Rule 193, for
train movement authority.
The reason given for the proposed
changes is that present day operation,
along with the proposal to modify the
track configuration, including
installation of an additional main track
between Black Creek and Mary Lee,
does not warrant retention of the poweroperated switches and signals.
Any interested party desiring to
protest the granting of an application
shall set forth specifically the grounds
upon which the protest is made, and
include a concise statement of the
interest of the party in the proceeding.
Additionally, one copy of the protest
E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM
13APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 71 (Friday, April 13, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18730-18731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7070]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or
Modification of a Railroad Signal System or Relief From the
Requirements of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 236
Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 235 and
49 U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad has petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking approval for the discontinuance
or modification of the signal system or relief from the requirements of
49 CFR part 236 as detailed below.
[Docket Number FRA-2007-27287]
Applicant: BNSF Railway Company, Mr. Gregory C. Fox, Vice President
Engineering, P.O. Box 961034, Fort Worth, Texas 76161-0034.
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) seeks relief from the requirements of
the Rules, Standards and Instructions, Title 49 CFR part 236, Section
236.377 Approach Locking, 236.378 Time locking, 236.379 Route Locking,
236.380 Indication Locking, and 236.381 Traffic Locking, on processor-
based systems to the extent that only the following be required every
four years after initial testing or program change:
Verification of the CRC/Check Sum/UCN of the existing
location specific application logic to the previously tested version.
Tests on equipment outside the processor (switch
indication, track indication, searchlight signal indication, approach
locking (if external)) are verified to the processor's inputs and
switch locking is tested from the processor's output to the switch
machine.
Testing of the duration of any timers with variable
settings.
Applicant's justification for relief: Many of BNSF's interlockings
and control points are controlled by solid-state processor-based
systems. The 2-year signal locking tests for solid-state
[[Page 18731]]
interlockings required by the FRA place an undue burden on the
railroad. Due to train traffic, some large control points can take a
month or more to complete the 2-year locking tests. Once a processor-
based system has been tested and locking tests documented on
installation, re-testing should not be required since the logic
continues to operate in the same manor as it did when installed and the
operation does not change.
Any interested party desiring to protest the granting of an
application shall set forth specifically the grounds upon which the
protest is made, and include a concise statement of the interest of the
party in the proceeding. Additionally, one copy of the protest shall be
furnished to the applicant at the address listed above.
All communications concerning this proceeding should be identified
by docket number FRA-2007-27287 and may be submitted by one of the
following methods:
Web site: https://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments on the DOT electronic site;
Fax: 202-493-2251;
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590-0001; or
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the Plaza Level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by the 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 https://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 https://dms.dot.gov.
FRA expects to be able to determine these matters without an oral
hearing. However, if a specific request for an oral hearing is
accompanied by a showing that the party is unable to adequately present
his or her position by written statements, an application may be set
for public hearing.
Issued in Washington, DC on April 9, 2007.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. E7-7070 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
