Electronic Remote Authority Delivery Systems, 51896-51898 [E7-17800]
Download as PDF
51896
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 11, 2007 / Notices
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Department, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; the accuracy of the
Department’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
A comment to OMB is best assured of
having its full effect if OMB receives it
within 30 days of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.
Issued in Washington, DC on September 5,
2007.
D. J. Stadtler,
Director, Office of Financial Management,
Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–17809 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Electronic Remote Authority Delivery
Systems
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of interpretation.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice of
interpretation to inform interested
parties of its position regarding the
implementation of digital electronic
remote authority delivery systems that
permit authorized users to electronically
request, obtain, and release authorities
to occupy controlled tracks. These
activities are classified as safety-critical
functions, and may interact with the
functions of train control systems and
dispatching procedures. Depending on
the functionality and complexity of
these systems, railroads seeking to
implement digital electronic remote
authority systems may be required to
comply with Title 49 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 236,
Subpart H (Subpart H). This notice
classifies digital electronic authority
delivery systems based on their
functionality and identifies categories of
systems that are subject to compliance
with the requirements of Subpart H.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to Thomas McFarlin, Staff Director,
Signal and Train Control Division, or
Olga Cataldi, Senior Electronic
Engineer, FRA Office of Safety
Assurance and Compliance, by facsimile
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Sep 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
(202–493–6216) or e-mail
(thomas.mcfarlin@dot.gov) or
(olga.cataldi@dot.gov). Comments may
also be submitted to Kathy Shelton, FRA
Office of Chief Counsel, by facsimile
(202–493–6068) or e-mail
(kathryn.shelton@dot.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas McFarlin, Staff Director, Signal
and Train Control Division, Office of
Safety Assurance and Compliance, FRA,
1120 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC, 20590 (telephone:
(202) 493–6203), e-mail
(thomas.mcfarlin@dot.gov); Olga
Cataldi, Senior Electronic Engineer,
Office of Safety Assurance and
Compliance, FRA, 1120 Vermont
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20590
(telephone: (202) 493–6321), e-mail
(olga.cataldi@dot.gov); or Kathy
Shelton, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA,
1120 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493–6063), e-mail
(kathryn.shelton@dot.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
With technical advances and the wide
availability of wireless communication
technology, a number of Class I and
short line railroads have been
developing and, for the past several
years, implementing a variety of
software-based applications for the
electronic delivery of digital track
authorities to roadway workers.
Software-based digital communication
between railroad workers and the
dispatch center has proven to be an
effective alternative to voice
communication with the dispatcher via
radio. Digital communications may
potentially result in significant
increases in safety by eliminating
delivery or read back errors associated
with voice communications. Digital
communications may also increase the
effectiveness of railroad operations and
track maintenance resources utilization
by significantly decreasing the time
associated with obtaining and releasing
track authorities. These potential
operational and safety benefits are
prompting railroads to extend the use of
wireless data communication to digital
transmission of track warrants to trains.
Further, railroads are seeking to extend
the functionalities associated with the
digital communication of authorities to
roadway workers and train crews to
include the auto-generation and
issuance of authorities, excluding any
involvement of the dispatcher.
The regulations contained in 49 CFR
Part 214, Subpart C, which currently
govern the delivery of authorities for
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
exclusive track occupancy to roadway
workers, do not specifically address
digital communication between the
dispatcher and the employee in charge.
Currently, 49 CFR 214.321(a)(1) requires
that all authorities issued to a roadway
worker in charge be given by the
dispatcher or control operator who
controls train movement on that track.
The digital delivery of movement
authorities to train crews is addressed in
49 CFR Part 236, Subpart H. This set of
regulations prescribes the minimum
safety standards for the development
and operation of processor-based signal
and train control systems. As stated in
the preamble to Subpart H, FRA
purposely left the term ‘‘train control’’
undefined, as advances in technology
supporting these systems would make
any definition of the term ‘‘train
control’’, or any list of train control
systems and associated features,
‘‘undoubtedly outdated’’ in a relatively
short period of time. See 70 FR 11052,
11066. Therefore, the requirements
contained in Subpart H apply to ‘‘safetycritical products’’, which include
systems that provide safety-relevant
information on which crews are
expected to rely. See 49 CFR 236.901.
However, FRA emphasized in the
preamble to the rule that ‘‘[o]ther
systems providing safety-relevant
information on which crews are
expected to rely will also fall within this
term’’. See 70 FR 11052, 11066. In
regard to dispatching systems, a
centralized computer-aided train
dispatching system being a part of an
‘‘office system’’ may also be subject to
Subpart H compliance, if ‘‘it performs
safety-critical functions within, or
affects the safety performance of, a new
or next generation train control system.’’
See 49 CFR 236.911(c).
FRA recognizes that its current
regulations do not clearly address the
auto-generation and digital
communication of authorities to
roadway workers and locomotive
engineers. FRA is currently taking
measures to augment existing
regulations to more clearly address
these functionalities. For example, FRA,
with the participation of the Railroad
Safety Advisory Committee, has
explored appropriate conditions for the
digital transmission of authority to a
roadway worker in charge. In light of
these discussions, FRA expects to
include specific concepts in a notice of
proposed rulemaking for revision of 49
CFR Part 214, Subpart C. Further, FRA
has been in discussion with the
Association of American Railroads
regarding the need for general standards
to ensure the effectiveness and security
of wireless communications particularly
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 11, 2007 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
in the field of train control. Pending the
issuance of regulations and other
actions in this area, FRA believes that it
is both necessary and appropriate to
clarify the existing regulatory
requirements applicable to the autogeneration and digital delivery of
authorities. The following discussion is
intended to provide that clarification.
Classification of Digital Electronic
Remote Authority Delivery Systems
Software-based digital electronic
remote authority delivery systems can
be classified based on their purpose,
and the level of dispatcher involvement
as follows:
By purpose:
• Roadway Worker Protection (RWP)
systems (deliver track occupancy
authorities to a roadway worker in
charge).
• Remote Authority systems (deliver
track occupancy authorities to a
roadway worker in charge and
movement authorities to a train crew).
By dispatcher’s role:
• Dispatcher generated (or dispatcher
confirmed) authorities
• Automatically generated authorities
(these authorities may be generated by
the system itself, by a computer-aided
train dispatching system (CAD), or as
part of a positive train control system).
Remote Authority and Roadway
Worker Protection systems can both be
used in signaled and non-signaled
(dark) territories. These systems can
operate as either an autonomous
dispatching-type system or as an overlay
to an existing method of operation.
Based on the classification given above,
FRA has identified four distinct
categories of digital electronic remote
authority delivery system
functionalities:
1. Electronic transmission of
authorities to roadway workers with
dispatcher’s electronic confirmation;
2. Electronic transmission of
authorities to train crews with
dispatcher’s electronic confirmation;
3. Automatic generation and
electronic transmission of the
authorities to roadway workers without
dispatcher’s involvement; or,
4. Automatic generation and
electronic transmission of the
authorities to train crews without
dispatcher’s involvement.
While FRA fully supports the railroad
industry’s desire to implement digital
electronic remote authority delivery
systems, FRA also believes that to the
extent such systems execute the
necessary logic to generate valid
mandatory directives or roadway work
authorities, they are functionally forms
of train control subject to Subpart H.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Sep 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Further, digital pathways embedded in
conventional signal and train control
systems, including communicationbased train control systems, are relevant
subsystems deserving of consideration
within the context of Subpart H review.
In the event of malfunction of any of
these types of systems, FRA would
expect each employing railroad to have
operating rules in place that address
reversion to voice or written delivery of
authorities by the dispatcher, consistent
with any applicable existing regulations.
The following discussion provides
clarification on the applicability of FRA
regulatory requirements to each category
of digital electronic remote authority
delivery systems.
Systems Performing Electronic
Transmission of Authorities to Roadway
Workers With Dispatcher’s Electronic
Confirmation
The software-based application (or
processor-based system) belongs to this
category if:
1. It serves as an autonomous office
(dispatching) system in the absence of a
CAD system, or as an auxiliary system
interfaced with an existing CAD system,
and is used exclusively for issuing
authorities to roadway workers to
occupy controlled tracks;
2. It allows the employee in charge to
request, obtain, and release the
authority to occupy a controlled track
through wireless digital communication
with the dispatcher or control operator
in charge of the track;
3. Upon receipt of an electronically
transmitted request from a roadway
worker to occupy track, the authority is
generated by the dispatcher or
automatically by the application system
(or by CAD) and is electronically
transmitted by the application system
accompanied by electronic confirmation
of the dispatcher;
4. The dispatcher holds ultimate
responsibility for the proper issuance of
authority to roadway workers and for
maintaining proper records of track
occupancy by other authorized users;
and,
5. The system server retains electronic
records of roadway workers’ requests for
authority and dispatcher’s entries of all
authority granted by the dispatcher,
including those issued to trains.
Such systems perform functions
described in 49 CFR Part 214, although
that part currently does not address
means of authority delivery. These
systems are not, however, subject to
Subpart H because they only provide
electronic transmission of track
occupancy authority. The generation
and release of the authority remains the
responsibility of the dispatcher, as
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51897
currently required by 49 CFR
214.321(a). Once the revision of Part 214
is completed, these systems may be
subject to new requirements regarding
electronic delivery of authorities to
roadway workers in charge (related to
security and authentication of the
digital transmission).
Systems Performing Electronic
Transmission of Authorities to Trains
With Dispatcher’s Electronic
Confirmation
The definition of this category of
processor-based applications (or
computer-based systems) coincides with
the definition given above for RWP
systems, except the delivery of authority
is extended to trains.
FRA has determined that the
electronic delivery of movement
authority to trains is a safety-critical
function pertaining to train control
systems. If the dispatcher is involved in
the process of generating the authority
or is confirming the CAD systemgenerated authority, and the closed-loop
communication occurs between the
dispatcher and train crew, FRA
recognizes that the regulatory
requirements for systems delivering
authorities to trains should be the same
as for those delivering authorities to
roadway workers. FRA further
recognizes that, if the system includes
functions related to commanding or
warning crews based on changing field
conditions (e.g., in the same way a cab
signal would ‘‘drop’’ if a circuit were
deenergized by equipment rolling out
on the main line), then the system is a
train control application.
FRA utilizes the following criteria in
determining the applicability of Subpart
H to systems of this category:
1. If the content of electronic
messages transmitted to a train crew are
limited exclusively to movement
authorities and other mandatory
directives, the application system is
exempt from compliance with Subpart
H.
2. If the content of electronic
messages transmitted to a train crew, in
addition to movement authorities and
other mandatory directives, contain
warning or other enforcement
commands impacting train handling,
the application system must comply
with Subpart H.
3. If the communication subsystem
embedded in any new train control
system is an integral part of that system,
it is subject to Subpart H requirements.
FRA encourages railroads to arrange
digital systems which communicate
safety-critical information so that
security of the messages is maintained
and authentication of those issuing and
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
51898
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 11, 2007 / Notices
acknowledging mandatory directives is
established. Although use of digital
transmission has the advantage of
accuracy (avoidance of
misunderstandings) and efficiency,
insecure transmissions and lack of
proper authentication could introduce
new risks. FRA expects that, as this
technology fully matures, industry
standards will address these needs even
more suitably than at present within an
interoperable framework.
If Subpart H is applicable, the railroad
shall submit an RSPP and PSP required
by 49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Systems Performing Automatic
Generation and Electronic Transmission
of the Authorities to Roadway Workers
Without Dispatcher’s Involvement
The processor-based application (or
computer-based system) belongs to this
category if:
1. It serves as an autonomous office
(dispatching) system, in the absence of
a CAD system, or as an auxiliary system
interfaced or integrated with an existing
CAD system, and is used exclusively for
issuing authorities to roadway workers
to occupy controlled tracks;
2. It allows the employee in charge to
request, obtain, and release the
authority to occupy a controlled track
through wireless digital communication
without the dispatcher’s concurrence;
3. Upon receipt of an electronically
transmitted request from a roadway
worker to occupy track, the authority is
generated automatically by the CAD
system (or application system) and is
electronically transmitted by the
application system without the
dispatcher’s concurrence; and
4. The system server retains electronic
records of roadway workers’ requests for
authority and all granted authorities,
including those issued to trains.
Such systems are subject to
compliance with Subpart H. The
delivery of track occupancy authority to
roadway workers without the
dispatcher’s involvement is considered
a safety-critical function in the same
way that control of train movements is
safety-critical. This constitutes a basis
for these systems to comply with
Subpart H requirements. Railroads shall
submit an RSPP and PSP in accordance
with 49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907 prior
to implementing any such system. Relief
is also required from the requirements
of Part 214, Subpart C, related to
dispatcher involvement in the issuance
of roadway work authorities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Sep 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Systems Performing Automatic
Generation and Digital Transmission of
Authorities to Trains Without
Dispatcher’s Involvement
The definition of this category of
processor-based applications (or
computer-based systems) coincides with
the definition given in a previous
section for RWP systems, except that the
delivery of authorities is extended to
trains.
Systems of this category are subject to
compliance with Subpart H because the
delivery of track occupancy authority to
roadway workers and trains without
dispatcher involvement is considered a
safety-critical function of a train control
system. Therefore, railroads shall
submit an RSPP and PSP in accordance
with 49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907 prior
to implementing any such system.
Those interested in implementing
systems that automatically generate
mandatory directives, roadway work
authorities, or other instructions or
commands (executed by persons or
equipment) bearing directly on the
safety of train operations, are
respectfully referred to Appendix C of
49 CFR Part 236, which outlines safety
assurance criteria and processes that are
relevant to such an undertaking.
FRA seeks comments on this notice
from interested parties. Please refer to
the Addresses section for additional
information regarding the submission of
comments.
Issued in Washington, DC on September 4,
2007.
Jo Strang,
Associate Administrator for Safety.
[FR Doc. E7–17800 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Safety Advisory 2007–03
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of Safety Advisory;
Railroad Bridge Safety—Explanation
and Amplification of FRA’s ‘‘Statement
of Agency Policy on the Safety of
Railroad Bridges.’’
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing Safety
Advisory 2007–03 recommending that
owners of track carried on one or more
railroad bridges adopt safety practices to
prevent the deterioration of railroad
bridges and reduce the risk of casualties
from train derailments caused by
structural failures of such bridges.
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gordon A. Davids, P.E., Bridge
Engineer, Office of Safety Assurance
and Compliance, FRA, 1120 Vermont
Ave., NW., RRS–15, Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202–
493–6320); or Sarah Grimmer, Trial
Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA,
1120 Vermont Ave., NW., RCC–12, Mail
Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590
(telephone 202–493–6390).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FRA
published its ‘‘Statement of Agency
Policy on the Safety of Railroad
Bridges’’ (‘‘Policy’’) on August 30, 2000
(65 FR 52667). The Policy Statement,
included in the Federal Track Safety
Standards (Title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 213) as Appendix C,
includes non-regulatory guidelines
based on good practices which were
prevalent in the railroad industry at the
time the Policy was issued.
FRA has examined reports from
January 1, 1982 through December 31,
2006 of 52 train accidents caused by the
catastrophic structural failure of railroad
bridges, an average of two per year.
During that twenty-five year period, two
people were injured and no fatalities
were attributed to structural bridge
failure. In addition, since the
examination of those reports in April of
2006, FRA has learned of four instances
where lack of adherence to the
guidelines in the Bridge Safety Policy
resulted in trains operating over
structural deficiencies in steel bridges
that could very easily have resulted in
serious train accidents. It should be
noted that FRA uses the term
‘‘catastrophic failure’’ to describe an
incident in which a bridge collapses or
directly causes a train accident. A
simple ‘‘bridge failure’’ is a situation in
which a bridge is no longer capable of
safely performing its intended function.
During the past sixteen months, three
train accidents occurred due to
catastrophic structural failures of
bridges, all of which were timber
trestles. The most recent bridge-related
train accident occurred on the M&B
Railroad near Myrtlewood, Alabama,
where a train of solid-fuel rocket motors
derailed when a timber trestle railroad
bridge collapsed under the train. Several
cars, including one car carrying a rocket
motor, rolled onto their sides and six
persons were injured. FRA has also
recently evaluated the bridge
management practices of several small
railroads, and found that some had no
bridge management or inspection
programs whatsoever.
FRA therefore issues this nonregulatory Safety Advisory to
supplement and re-emphasize the
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51896-51898]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17800]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Electronic Remote Authority Delivery Systems
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of interpretation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice of interpretation to inform
interested parties of its position regarding the implementation of
digital electronic remote authority delivery systems that permit
authorized users to electronically request, obtain, and release
authorities to occupy controlled tracks. These activities are
classified as safety-critical functions, and may interact with the
functions of train control systems and dispatching procedures.
Depending on the functionality and complexity of these systems,
railroads seeking to implement digital electronic remote authority
systems may be required to comply with Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 236, Subpart H (Subpart H). This notice
classifies digital electronic authority delivery systems based on their
functionality and identifies categories of systems that are subject to
compliance with the requirements of Subpart H.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to Thomas McFarlin, Staff Director,
Signal and Train Control Division, or Olga Cataldi, Senior Electronic
Engineer, FRA Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, by facsimile
(202-493-6216) or e-mail (thomas.mcfarlin@dot.gov) or
(olga.cataldi@dot.gov). Comments may also be submitted to Kathy
Shelton, FRA Office of Chief Counsel, by facsimile (202-493-6068) or e-
mail (kathryn.shelton@dot.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas McFarlin, Staff Director,
Signal and Train Control Division, Office of Safety Assurance and
Compliance, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20590
(telephone: (202) 493-6203), e-mail (thomas.mcfarlin@dot.gov); Olga
Cataldi, Senior Electronic Engineer, Office of Safety Assurance and
Compliance, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20590
(telephone: (202) 493-6321), e-mail (olga.cataldi@dot.gov); or Kathy
Shelton, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493-6063), e-mail
(kathryn.shelton@dot.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
With technical advances and the wide availability of wireless
communication technology, a number of Class I and short line railroads
have been developing and, for the past several years, implementing a
variety of software-based applications for the electronic delivery of
digital track authorities to roadway workers. Software-based digital
communication between railroad workers and the dispatch center has
proven to be an effective alternative to voice communication with the
dispatcher via radio. Digital communications may potentially result in
significant increases in safety by eliminating delivery or read back
errors associated with voice communications. Digital communications may
also increase the effectiveness of railroad operations and track
maintenance resources utilization by significantly decreasing the time
associated with obtaining and releasing track authorities. These
potential operational and safety benefits are prompting railroads to
extend the use of wireless data communication to digital transmission
of track warrants to trains. Further, railroads are seeking to extend
the functionalities associated with the digital communication of
authorities to roadway workers and train crews to include the auto-
generation and issuance of authorities, excluding any involvement of
the dispatcher.
The regulations contained in 49 CFR Part 214, Subpart C, which
currently govern the delivery of authorities for exclusive track
occupancy to roadway workers, do not specifically address digital
communication between the dispatcher and the employee in charge.
Currently, 49 CFR 214.321(a)(1) requires that all authorities issued to
a roadway worker in charge be given by the dispatcher or control
operator who controls train movement on that track.
The digital delivery of movement authorities to train crews is
addressed in 49 CFR Part 236, Subpart H. This set of regulations
prescribes the minimum safety standards for the development and
operation of processor-based signal and train control systems. As
stated in the preamble to Subpart H, FRA purposely left the term
``train control'' undefined, as advances in technology supporting these
systems would make any definition of the term ``train control'', or any
list of train control systems and associated features, ``undoubtedly
outdated'' in a relatively short period of time. See 70 FR 11052,
11066. Therefore, the requirements contained in Subpart H apply to
``safety-critical products'', which include systems that provide
safety-relevant information on which crews are expected to rely. See 49
CFR 236.901. However, FRA emphasized in the preamble to the rule that
``[o]ther systems providing safety-relevant information on which crews
are expected to rely will also fall within this term''. See 70 FR
11052, 11066. In regard to dispatching systems, a centralized computer-
aided train dispatching system being a part of an ``office system'' may
also be subject to Subpart H compliance, if ``it performs safety-
critical functions within, or affects the safety performance of, a new
or next generation train control system.'' See 49 CFR 236.911(c).
FRA recognizes that its current regulations do not clearly address
the auto-generation and digital communication of authorities to roadway
workers and locomotive engineers. FRA is currently taking measures to
augment existing regulations to more clearly address these
functionalities. For example, FRA, with the participation of the
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, has explored appropriate conditions
for the digital transmission of authority to a roadway worker in
charge. In light of these discussions, FRA expects to include specific
concepts in a notice of proposed rulemaking for revision of 49 CFR Part
214, Subpart C. Further, FRA has been in discussion with the
Association of American Railroads regarding the need for general
standards to ensure the effectiveness and security of wireless
communications particularly
[[Page 51897]]
in the field of train control. Pending the issuance of regulations and
other actions in this area, FRA believes that it is both necessary and
appropriate to clarify the existing regulatory requirements applicable
to the auto-generation and digital delivery of authorities. The
following discussion is intended to provide that clarification.
Classification of Digital Electronic Remote Authority Delivery Systems
Software-based digital electronic remote authority delivery systems
can be classified based on their purpose, and the level of dispatcher
involvement as follows:
By purpose:
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) systems (deliver track
occupancy authorities to a roadway worker in charge).
Remote Authority systems (deliver track occupancy
authorities to a roadway worker in charge and movement authorities to a
train crew).
By dispatcher's role:
Dispatcher generated (or dispatcher confirmed) authorities
Automatically generated authorities (these authorities may
be generated by the system itself, by a computer-aided train
dispatching system (CAD), or as part of a positive train control
system).
Remote Authority and Roadway Worker Protection systems can both be
used in signaled and non-signaled (dark) territories. These systems can
operate as either an autonomous dispatching-type system or as an
overlay to an existing method of operation. Based on the classification
given above, FRA has identified four distinct categories of digital
electronic remote authority delivery system functionalities:
1. Electronic transmission of authorities to roadway workers with
dispatcher's electronic confirmation;
2. Electronic transmission of authorities to train crews with
dispatcher's electronic confirmation;
3. Automatic generation and electronic transmission of the
authorities to roadway workers without dispatcher's involvement; or,
4. Automatic generation and electronic transmission of the
authorities to train crews without dispatcher's involvement.
While FRA fully supports the railroad industry's desire to
implement digital electronic remote authority delivery systems, FRA
also believes that to the extent such systems execute the necessary
logic to generate valid mandatory directives or roadway work
authorities, they are functionally forms of train control subject to
Subpart H. Further, digital pathways embedded in conventional signal
and train control systems, including communication-based train control
systems, are relevant subsystems deserving of consideration within the
context of Subpart H review. In the event of malfunction of any of
these types of systems, FRA would expect each employing railroad to
have operating rules in place that address reversion to voice or
written delivery of authorities by the dispatcher, consistent with any
applicable existing regulations.
The following discussion provides clarification on the
applicability of FRA regulatory requirements to each category of
digital electronic remote authority delivery systems.
Systems Performing Electronic Transmission of Authorities to Roadway
Workers With Dispatcher's Electronic Confirmation
The software-based application (or processor-based system) belongs
to this category if:
1. It serves as an autonomous office (dispatching) system in the
absence of a CAD system, or as an auxiliary system interfaced with an
existing CAD system, and is used exclusively for issuing authorities to
roadway workers to occupy controlled tracks;
2. It allows the employee in charge to request, obtain, and release
the authority to occupy a controlled track through wireless digital
communication with the dispatcher or control operator in charge of the
track;
3. Upon receipt of an electronically transmitted request from a
roadway worker to occupy track, the authority is generated by the
dispatcher or automatically by the application system (or by CAD) and
is electronically transmitted by the application system accompanied by
electronic confirmation of the dispatcher;
4. The dispatcher holds ultimate responsibility for the proper
issuance of authority to roadway workers and for maintaining proper
records of track occupancy by other authorized users; and,
5. The system server retains electronic records of roadway workers'
requests for authority and dispatcher's entries of all authority
granted by the dispatcher, including those issued to trains.
Such systems perform functions described in 49 CFR Part 214,
although that part currently does not address means of authority
delivery. These systems are not, however, subject to Subpart H because
they only provide electronic transmission of track occupancy authority.
The generation and release of the authority remains the responsibility
of the dispatcher, as currently required by 49 CFR 214.321(a). Once the
revision of Part 214 is completed, these systems may be subject to new
requirements regarding electronic delivery of authorities to roadway
workers in charge (related to security and authentication of the
digital transmission).
Systems Performing Electronic Transmission of Authorities to Trains
With Dispatcher's Electronic Confirmation
The definition of this category of processor-based applications (or
computer-based systems) coincides with the definition given above for
RWP systems, except the delivery of authority is extended to trains.
FRA has determined that the electronic delivery of movement
authority to trains is a safety-critical function pertaining to train
control systems. If the dispatcher is involved in the process of
generating the authority or is confirming the CAD system-generated
authority, and the closed-loop communication occurs between the
dispatcher and train crew, FRA recognizes that the regulatory
requirements for systems delivering authorities to trains should be the
same as for those delivering authorities to roadway workers. FRA
further recognizes that, if the system includes functions related to
commanding or warning crews based on changing field conditions (e.g.,
in the same way a cab signal would ``drop'' if a circuit were
deenergized by equipment rolling out on the main line), then the system
is a train control application.
FRA utilizes the following criteria in determining the
applicability of Subpart H to systems of this category:
1. If the content of electronic messages transmitted to a train
crew are limited exclusively to movement authorities and other
mandatory directives, the application system is exempt from compliance
with Subpart H.
2. If the content of electronic messages transmitted to a train
crew, in addition to movement authorities and other mandatory
directives, contain warning or other enforcement commands impacting
train handling, the application system must comply with Subpart H.
3. If the communication subsystem embedded in any new train control
system is an integral part of that system, it is subject to Subpart H
requirements.
FRA encourages railroads to arrange digital systems which
communicate safety-critical information so that security of the
messages is maintained and authentication of those issuing and
[[Page 51898]]
acknowledging mandatory directives is established. Although use of
digital transmission has the advantage of accuracy (avoidance of
misunderstandings) and efficiency, insecure transmissions and lack of
proper authentication could introduce new risks. FRA expects that, as
this technology fully matures, industry standards will address these
needs even more suitably than at present within an interoperable
framework.
If Subpart H is applicable, the railroad shall submit an RSPP and
PSP required by 49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907.
Systems Performing Automatic Generation and Electronic Transmission of
the Authorities to Roadway Workers Without Dispatcher's Involvement
The processor-based application (or computer-based system) belongs
to this category if:
1. It serves as an autonomous office (dispatching) system, in the
absence of a CAD system, or as an auxiliary system interfaced or
integrated with an existing CAD system, and is used exclusively for
issuing authorities to roadway workers to occupy controlled tracks;
2. It allows the employee in charge to request, obtain, and release
the authority to occupy a controlled track through wireless digital
communication without the dispatcher's concurrence;
3. Upon receipt of an electronically transmitted request from a
roadway worker to occupy track, the authority is generated
automatically by the CAD system (or application system) and is
electronically transmitted by the application system without the
dispatcher's concurrence; and
4. The system server retains electronic records of roadway workers'
requests for authority and all granted authorities, including those
issued to trains.
Such systems are subject to compliance with Subpart H. The delivery
of track occupancy authority to roadway workers without the
dispatcher's involvement is considered a safety-critical function in
the same way that control of train movements is safety-critical. This
constitutes a basis for these systems to comply with Subpart H
requirements. Railroads shall submit an RSPP and PSP in accordance with
49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907 prior to implementing any such system.
Relief is also required from the requirements of Part 214, Subpart C,
related to dispatcher involvement in the issuance of roadway work
authorities.
Systems Performing Automatic Generation and Digital Transmission of
Authorities to Trains Without Dispatcher's Involvement
The definition of this category of processor-based applications (or
computer-based systems) coincides with the definition given in a
previous section for RWP systems, except that the delivery of
authorities is extended to trains.
Systems of this category are subject to compliance with Subpart H
because the delivery of track occupancy authority to roadway workers
and trains without dispatcher involvement is considered a safety-
critical function of a train control system. Therefore, railroads shall
submit an RSPP and PSP in accordance with 49 CFR 236.905 and 236.907
prior to implementing any such system.
Those interested in implementing systems that automatically
generate mandatory directives, roadway work authorities, or other
instructions or commands (executed by persons or equipment) bearing
directly on the safety of train operations, are respectfully referred
to Appendix C of 49 CFR Part 236, which outlines safety assurance
criteria and processes that are relevant to such an undertaking.
FRA seeks comments on this notice from interested parties. Please
refer to the Addresses section for additional information regarding the
submission of comments.
Issued in Washington, DC on September 4, 2007.
Jo Strang,
Associate Administrator for Safety.
[FR Doc. E7-17800 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P