Bridge Safety Standards, 41558-41579 [E9-19367]

Agencies

• Federal Railroad Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 157 (Monday, August 17, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41558-41579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19367]



[[Page 41557]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV





Department of Transportation





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Federal Railroad Administration



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



49 CFR Parts 213 and 237



Bridge Safety Standards; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 74 , No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 41558]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Parts 213 and 237

[Docket No. FRA 2009-0014, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130-AC04


Bridge Safety Standards

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FRA is proposing to standardize and establish Federal 
requirements for railroad bridges. This proposed rule would require 
track owners to implement bridge management programs that include 
annual inspections of railroad bridges. The proposed rule would also 
require track owners to know the safe capacity load of bridges and to 
conduct special inspections if the weather or other conditions warrant 
such inspections. Finally, the proposed rule would also require the 
audit of the bridge management programs and the inspections.

DATES: Written comments must be received by October 1, 2009. Comments 
received after that date will be considered to the extent possible 
without incurring additional delay or expense.
    FRA anticipates being able to complete this rulemaking without a 
public, oral hearing. However if FRA receives a specific request for a 
public, oral hearing prior to September 16, 2009, one will be scheduled 
and FRA will publish a supplemental notice in the Federal Register to 
inform interested parties of the date, time, and location of any such 
hearing.

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments related to Docket No. FRA-2009-0014 may 
be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.Regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 
DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department 
of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this 
rulemaking. Please note that all comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.Regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided. Please see the discussion under the Privacy Act 
heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.Regulations.gov at any time or 
visit the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building, Ground floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gordon A. Davids, P.E., Bridge 
Engineer, Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, FRA, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493-6320); 
or Sarah Grimmer Yurasko, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20950 (telephone: (202) 
493-6390).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Supplementary Information

I. The Safety of Railroad Bridges
    A. General
    B. Regulatory History
II. Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) Overview
III. RSAC Railroad Bridge Working Group
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
V. Regulatory Impact
    A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act
    D. Environmental Impact
    E. Federalism Implications
    F. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995
    G. Energy Impact
    H. Privacy Act Statement

Background

I. The Safety of Railroad Bridges

A. General

    There are nearly 100,000 railroad bridges in the United States. 
These bridges are owned by over 600 different entities. The bridges 
vary in length, load capacity, design, and construction material. 
Everything that is shipped or transported via rail likely travels 
across one or more railroad bridge. Thus, everything from intermodal 
goods, automobiles, grain, coal, hazardous materials, and passengers is 
transported on the nation's rail system and therefore across railroad 
bridges.
    The structural integrity of bridges that carry railroad tracks is 
important to the safety of railroad employees and to the public. The 
responsibility for the safety of railroad bridges rests with the owner 
of the track carried by the bridge, together with any other party to 
whom that responsibility has been assigned by the track owner. The 
severity of a train accident is usually compounded when a bridge is 
involved, regardless of the cause of the accident.
    Beginning in 1991, FRA conducted a review of the safety of railroad 
bridges. The review was prompted by the agency's perception that the 
bridge population was aging, traffic density and loads were increasing 
on many routes, and the consequences of a bridge failure could be 
catastrophic. During the past five decades, not one fatality has been 
caused by the structural failure of a railroad bridge. Train accidents 
caused by the structural failure of railroad bridges have been 
extremely rare.
    Although the average construction date of railroad bridges predates 
most highway bridges by several decades, the older railroad bridges 
were designed to carry heavy steam locomotives. Design factors were 
generally conservative, and the bridges' functional designs permit 
repairs and reinforcements when necessary to maintain their viability. 
Railroad bridges are most often privately, rather than publicly, owned. 
Their owners seem to recognize the economic consequences of neglecting 
important maintenance. Private ownership enables the railroads to 
control the loads that operate over their bridges. Cars and locomotives 
exceeding the nominal capacity of a bridge are not operated without 
permission from the responsible bridge engineers, and then only under 
restrictions and conditions that protect the integrity of the bridge.
    Many railroad bridges display superficial signs of deterioration 
but still retain the capacity to safely carry their loads. Corrosion on 
a bridge is not a safety issue unless a critical area sees significant 
loss of material. Routine inspections are prescribed to detect this 
condition, but determination of its effect requires a detailed 
inspection and analysis of the bridge. In general, timber bridges 
continue to function safely, and masonry structures built as early as 
the 1830's remain functional and safe for their traffic. Of the few 
train accidents that involved bridges, most have not been caused by 
structural failure. FRA accident records for the 27 years 1982 through 
2008 show 58 train accidents

[[Page 41559]]

that were caused by the structural failure of railroad bridges. These 
accidents resulted in nine reportable injuries and a reported 
$26,555,878 damage to railroad facilities, cars and locomotives.

B. Regulatory History

    On April 27, 1995, FRA issued an interim statement of policy on the 
safety of railroad bridges. Published in the Federal Register at 60 FR 
20654, the interim statement included a request for comments to be 
submitted to FRA during a 60-day period following publication. On 
August 30, 2000, FRA published a final statement of agency policy for 
the safety of railroad bridges (``policy statement''). See 65 FR 52667. 
The policy statement can be found at 49 CFR part 213 appendix C. With 
the policy, FRA established criteria for railroads to use to ensure the 
structural integrity of bridges that carry railroad tracks, which 
reflected minor changes following public comment on the interim 
statement. Unlike regulations under which FRA ordinarily issues 
violations and assesses civil penalties, the policy statement contains 
guidelines for the proper maintenance of bridge structures and is 
advisory in nature.
    On October 16, 2008, President Bush signed into law the Railroad 
Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-423, Division A 
(``RSIA''). Section 417 of the RSIA directs FRA to issue, by October 
16, 2009, regulations requiring railroad track owners to adopt and 
follow specific procedures to protect the safety of their bridges. This 
NPRM is the first step to the agency's promulgation of bridge safety 
regulations per the mandate of the RSIA. In the Section-by-Section 
Analysis, below, FRA will discuss how the proposed regulatory text 
addresses each portion of the RSIA.
    Prior to the passage of the RSIA, FRA had already begun work on 
revising the policy statement. On January 13, 2009, FRA published an 
amendment to the policy statement by incorporating changes proposed by 
the Rail Safety Advisory Committee (``RSAC'') on September 10, 2008. 
RSAC developed a list of Essential Elements of Railroad Bridge 
Management Programs (``Essential Elements'') which make up the bulk of 
the amendment. The Essential Elements provide railroad track owners 
with a uniform, comprehensive set of components for recommended 
inclusion in their bridge management programs. With this information, a 
track owner may develop a single, comprehensive set of instructions, 
information and data as guidance for his employees who are responsible 
for the management, inspection, maintenance, and safety of railroad 
bridges. RSAC also recognized that, although most railroads were 
already performing these functions to varying degrees, it would be 
useful to have the recommended Essential Elements available in a 
central location so that all concerned may see the railroad's full 
program, and also to determine that no essential element is overlooked.
    All aspects of the policy statement that are not incorporated into 
the regulatory text of part 237 are now found in its appendix A.

II. The Rail Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) Overview

    In March 1996, FRA established RSAC, which provides a forum for 
developing consensus recommendations to FRA's Administrator on 
rulemakings and other safety program issues. The RSAC includes 
representation from all of the industry's major stakeholders, including 
railroads, labor organizations, suppliers and manufacturers, and other 
interested parties. A list of RSAC members follows: American 
Association of Private Railroad Car Owners (AARPCO); American 
Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO); 
American Chemistry Council; American Petrochemical Institute; American 
Public Transportation Association (APTA); American Short Line and 
Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA); American Train Dispatchers 
Association (ATDA); Association of American Railroads (AAR); 
Association of Railway Museums (ARM); Association of State Rail Safety 
Managers (ASRSM); Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen 
(BLET); Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (BMWED); 
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS); Chlorine Institute; Federal 
Transit Administration (FTA)*; Fertilizer Institute; High Speed Ground 
Transportation Association (HSGTA); Institute of Makers of Explosives; 
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; 
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW); Labor Council 
for Latin American Advancement (LCLAA)*; League of Railway Industry 
Women*; National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP); National 
Association of Railway Business Women*; National Conference of Firemen 
& Oilers; National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association; 
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak); National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)*; Railway Supply Institute (RSI); 
Safe Travel America (STA); Secretaria de Comunicaciones y Transporte*; 
Sheet Metal Workers International Association (SMWIA); Tourist Railway 
Association Inc.; Transport Canada*; Transport Workers Union of America 
(TWU); Transportation Communications International Union/BRC (TCIU/
BRC); Transportation Security Administration (TSA); and United 
Transportation Union (UTU).

*Indicates associate, non-voting membership.

    When appropriate, FRA assigns a task to RSAC, and after 
consideration and debate, RSAC may accept or reject the task. If the 
task is accepted, RSAC establishes a working group that possesses the 
appropriate expertise and representation of interests to develop 
recommendations to FRA for action on the task. These recommendations 
are developed by consensus. A working group may establish one or more 
task forces to develop facts and options on a particular aspect of a 
given task. The task force then provides that information to the 
working group for consideration. If a working group comes to unanimous 
consensus on recommendations for action, the package is presented to 
the full RSAC for a vote. If the proposal is accepted by a simple 
majority of RSAC, the proposal is formally recommended to FRA. FRA then 
determines what action to take on the recommendation. Because FRA staff 
play an active role at the working group level in discussing the issues 
and options and in drafting the language of the consensus proposal, FRA 
is often favorably inclined toward the RSAC recommendation.
    However, FRA is in no way bound to follow the recommendation, and 
the agency exercises its independent judgment on whether the 
recommended rule achieves the agency's regulatory goal, is soundly 
supported, and is in accordance with policy and legal requirements. 
Often, FRA varies in some respects from the RSAC recommendation in 
developing the actual regulatory proposal or final rule. Any such 
variations would be noted and explained in the rulemaking document 
issued by FRA. If the working group or RSAC is unable to reach 
consensus on recommendations for action, FRA moves ahead to resolve the 
issue through traditional rulemaking proceedings.

III. Railroad Bridge Working Group

    RSAC agreed with FRA on February 20, 2008, to accept the task of 
reviewing FRA's railroad bridge safety policies and

[[Page 41560]]

activities, and to make appropriate recommendations for FRA to improve 
the bridge safety program. RSAC accordingly established a Railroad 
Bridge Working Group (RBWG), composed of representatives of the various 
organizations on the RSAC and including persons with particular 
expertise in railroad bridge safety and management. The RBWG met on 
April 24-25, 2008, June 12, 2008, and August 7, 2008. On September 10, 
2008, the full RSAC voted on the RBWG's report, and recommended that 
FRA implement the RBWG's proposal of a set of ``Essential Elements of 
Railroad Bridge Management Programs,'' (Essential Elements) in FRA's 
Agency Policy on the Safety of Railroad Bridges.
    The RBWG met again on January 28-29, 2009, and February 23-24, 
2009, to recommend rule text to address the RSIA's mandate to FRA in 
Section 417 to promulgate bridge safety regulations. The RBWG reached 
consensus on proposed regulatory text which makes up the basis of this 
NPRM. However, there were four items that the RBWG was not able to 
agree upon. The RBWG could not reach consensus with regard to 
Sec. Sec.  237.111(d), 237.111(e), 237.157(a) and 237.157(b). FRA 
requests that the public comment specifically on these items.

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

Appendix C to Part 213

    FRA proposes to remove appendix C to part 213, which is FRA's 
Statement of Agency Policy on the Safety of Railroad Bridges (``policy 
statement''). As many portions of the text in the policy statement will 
be covered in part 237, it would be redundant and confusing to leave 
them in the policy statement as currently published in part 213. With 
regard to the portions of the policy statement that are advisory in 
nature, FRA is proposing to publish them in a new appendix to part 237, 
which will be discussed further below.

Section 237.1 Scope

    In this section, FRA proposes the purpose for the minimum standards 
required under this part for management of railroad bridges. Railroads 
can adopt more stringent standards as long as they are in accordance 
with this part.

Section 237.5 Application

    FRA proposes that this rule will apply to all owners of track on 
bridges which carry railroad track with certain exceptions as outlined 
or explained in following subsections. As delineated in FRA's Statement 
of Agency Policy Concerning Enforcement of the Federal Railroad Safety 
Laws at appendix A of 49 CFR part 209, FRA exercises jurisdiction over 
tourist, scenic, and excursion railroad operations whether or not they 
are conducted on the general railroad system. FRA proposes that this 
part apply to tourist railroads because the passengers on those 
railroads are entitled to the protection afforded by this rule.
    Paragraph (b). FRA proposes that this part not apply to bridges on 
track used exclusively for rapid transit operations in urban areas that 
are not connected with the general system of transportation. This is in 
accordance with appendix A of 49 CFR 209.

Section 237.7 Responsibility for Compliance

    FRA proposes that the responsibility for the safety of trains on 
any track lies with the owner of that track. Therefore, the track owner 
is responsible for complying with the bridge safety standards 
promulgated in this part. If a bridge carries tracks owned by two or 
more owners, then the track owner can choose to make an assignment of 
responsibility for compliance with this part. FRA proposes that the 
assignment process, delineated in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this 
section, be similar to the assignment process detailed in 49 CFR 213.5. 
However, FRA proposes to be able to hold the track owner or the 
assignee or both responsible for compliance with this part and subject 
to penalties under section 237.11. FRA intends that the responsibility 
for compliance with this part will follow, as closely as practicable, 
the responsibility for compliance with the Federal Track Safety 
Standards, and that where such responsibility is already assigned, it 
would not be necessary for the track owner to file an additional 
assignment of responsibility. As in part 213, FRA intends that 
``person'' means an entity of any type covered under 1 U.S.C. 1, 
including but not limited to the following: a railroad; a manager, 
supervisor, official, or other employee or agent of a railroad; any 
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad equipment, track or 
facilities; any independent contractor providing goods or services to a 
railroad; any employee of such owner, manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or 
independent contractor; and anyone held by the FRA to be responsible 
for compliance with this part.
    During meetings with the RBWG, FRA staff initially proposed holding 
the ``bridge owner'' as the party responsible for compliance with part 
237, and had defined the ``bridge owner'' as the ``owner of track to 
which this part applies.'' After reviewing RSAC's recommendation, FRA 
determined that this definition could cause confusion, as the bridge 
owner might not be the party who owned the track supported by the 
bridge. FRA has proposed instead to hold the ``track owner'' 
responsible for compliance with this part.
    Paragraph (d). FRA proposes that a common carrier by railroad which 
is directed by the Surface Transportation Board to provide service over 
the track of another railroad under 49 U.S.C. 11123 is considered the 
owner of that track for the purposes of the application of this part 
during the period the directed service order remains in effect. On rare 
occasions, such as a cessation of service by a railroad, the Surface 
Transportation Board has directed a railroad other than the track owner 
to provide service. In such cases, the designated operator shall be 
considered the owner for purposes of compliance with the bridge safety 
regulations.

Section 237.9 Definitions

    FRA proposes that the definitions in this section are only intended 
to apply to this part, and not to alter the same terminology wherever 
used outside this part for other purposes.
    Bridge modification and repair. FRA proposes that bridge 
modification means a change to the configuration of a railroad bridge 
that affects the load capacity of the bridge. FRA proposes that bridge 
repair means remediation of damage or deterioration which has affected 
the structural integrity of a railroad bridge. FRA proposes that this 
part requires that modifications and repairs to bridges be designed by 
railroad bridge engineers, and the work supervised by designated bridge 
supervisors. This definition clarifies that minor modifications and 
repairs, such as replacing a wire rope handrail with one made of pipe, 
or painting a bridge, do not need to be designed and supervised 
pursuant to this part. However, this does not exempt the track owner 
from properly supervising the personal safety of the individuals 
performing the work because that issue is addressed in other rules.
    Railroad bridge. FRA proposes to define a ``railroad bridge'' as 
all structures over openings under the track except small culverts, 
pipes, or such other structures that are located so far below the track 
that they only carry dead load from soil pressure, and are not 
subjected to bending, tension or compression stresses from passing 
trains. FRA does not intend to relieve a railroad from taking any 
action necessary to protect the safety of trains in the case of any 
structure, including

[[Page 41561]]

small culverts, by providing for their inspection and maintenance, but 
it exempts them from the specific requirements of this regulation.

Section 237.11 Penalties

    FRA proposes that this provision conform to provisions of the 
enabling legislation and stated agency policy. Consistent with FRA's 
Statement of Agency Policy Concerning Enforcement of the Federal 
Railroad Safety Laws, a penalty may be assessed against an individual 
only for a willful violation. The Administrator reserves the right to 
assess a penalty of up to $100,000 for any violation where 
circumstances warrant. See 49 CFR part 209, appendix A.

Section 237.13 Waivers

    FRA proposes that each petition for a waiver under this section 
shall be filed in the manner and contain the information required by 49 
CFR part 211, which prescribes rules of practice that apply to waiver 
proceedings. The processing of petitions for waiver of safety rules is 
found at subpart C to part 211.

Section 237.31 Scope

    It should be noted here that FRA is proposing minimum requirements 
to assure the structural integrity of railroad bridges and to protect 
the safe operation of trains over those bridges. The responsibility for 
the safety of a railroad bridge rests with the owner of the track 
supported by that bridge and the engineer who makes the critical 
decisions regarding the management and use of that bridge.

Section 237.33 Adoption of Bridge Management Programs

    Congress mandated that FRA ``promulgate a regulation requiring 
owners of track carried on one or more railroad bridges to adopt a 
bridge safety management program to prevent the deterioration of 
railroad bridges and reduce the risk of human casualties, environmental 
damage, and disruption to the Nation's railroad transportation system 
that would result from a catastrophic bridge failure.'' Public Law 110-
432, Division A, Section 417(a). FRA proposes to require track owners 
to adopt a bridge safety management program that prevents the 
deterioration of railroad bridges by preserving their capability to 
safely carry the traffic to be operated over them. FRA is proposing 
that Class I carriers and owners of track segments which are part of 
the general railroad system of transportation and which carry more than 
ten scheduled passenger trains per week implement their bridge safety 
programs by six months after the final rule's effective date. FRA 
proposes that Class II carriers which carry less than 10 scheduled 
passenger trains per week implement their bridge safety programs by 
twelve months after the final rule's effective date. Finally, FRA 
proposes that all other track owners subject to this part implement 
their bridge safety programs by 24 months after the final rule's 
effective date.
    FRA has proposed an implementation schedule which is considered 
realistic, with priorities given to railroads with the highest levels 
of freight or passenger traffic. The implementation dates apply to the 
bridge owning entity, not to specific track segments. However, it is 
reasonable to consider that the specific provisions of each program 
will be implemented in a manner that accords higher priority to 
individual track segments with high volumes of freight or passenger 
traffic.

Section 237.35 Content of Bridge Management Programs

    Certain elements of a bridge management program are essential to 
its effectiveness. Those elements are enumerated in this section. Track 
owners and individuals responsible for the safety of railroad bridges 
are encouraged to adapt these elements to the needs of their areas of 
responsibility, and to adopt additional elements not inconsistent with 
the requirements of this part.
    Paragraph (a). Congress mandated that the new regulations require 
each track owner to ``develop and maintain an accurate inventory of its 
railroad bridges, which shall identify the location of each bridge, its 
configuration, type of construction, number of spans, span lengths, and 
all other information necessary to provide for the safe management of 
the bridges.'' Public Law 110-432, Division A, Section 417(b)(1). FRA 
proposes that such an inventory be maintained. An accurate inventory of 
any property to be managed is essential so that the responsible 
individuals may schedule and track inspection, maintenance and repair 
of the property units.
    Paragraph (b). Congress mandated that the new regulations require 
that the track owner ``maintain, and update as appropriate, a record of 
the safe capacity of each bridge which carries its track and, if 
available, maintain the original design documents of each bridge and a 
documentation of all repairs, modifications, and inspections of the 
bridge.'' Public Law 110-432, Division A, Section 417(b)(3). FRA 
proposes that a record of the safe load capacity of each bridge be 
established. The operation of excessively heavy loads over a bridge 
will seriously shorten its useful life and will reduce or even 
eliminate the margin of safety between structural integrity and 
catastrophic failure. It is essential that the track owner should know 
that the loads permitted to be operated on a bridge are within the safe 
limits of the bridge.
    Paragraph (c). FRA proposes that the track owner obtain and 
maintain the design documents of each bridge, if available, and to 
document all repairs, modifications, and inspections of each bridge. 
The determination of safe load capacity requires knowledge of the 
configuration of the bridge and the materials of which it is 
constructed. Although the configuration may be determined by actual 
measurements of all of the components, that procedure can be tedious 
and expensive. Good documentation of the design and history of a bridge 
will enable rapid and accurate determination of bridge capacity when 
such calculations are needed, as well as determination of the 
maintenance and service history of a bridge to detect and correct 
possible deterioration of its components.
    Paragraph (d). Bridge inspection is absolutely essential to an 
effective bridge management program. In this paragraph, FRA proposes 
that the track owner's bridge management program contain a bridge 
inspection program. Items (1) through (6) should be addressed in the 
program to the degree that promotes effective and efficient conduct of 
the inspection program. With regard to item (1), bridge inspection can 
present certain risks that are inherent in working at heights and 
around moving vehicles. A bridge inspection program should at least 
address the unique hazards associated with the process. With regard to 
item (2), a bridge inspection program should incorporate standards for 
the procedures and required details of any different types of 
inspection that are referenced in the program, such as annual 
inspections, post-event inspections, rating inspections and 
intermediate periodic inspections. A large railroad might find it 
convenient to describe the standard procedures for various types of 
inspections in some detail, while a small railroad that normally 
conducts only annual inspections might describe only that procedure as 
well as post-event special inspections, and then issue instructions of 
particular applicability for other types of inspections that occur only 
infrequently. With regard to items (3) through (6), use of a standard 
method of describing the condition of components

[[Page 41562]]

promotes effective and efficient communication between the inspector 
and the persons who review and evaluate a bridge using information from 
the inspection.

Section 237.51 Scope

    In subpart C, FRA proposes minimum standards for incorporation in 
railroad bridge management programs for qualification and designations 
of persons who perform safety critical functions that affect the 
integrity and safety of railroad bridges. Many aspects of railroad 
bridge work differ from other fields of engineering, inspection and 
maintenance. It is essential that the individuals who are responsible 
for these safety-critical functions be qualified by education, training 
and experience to perform them correctly.

Section 237.53 Railroad Bridge Engineers

    In this section, FRA proposes the minimum standards that a railroad 
bridge engineer must meet. Congress directed FRA to ``ensure that an 
engineer who is competent in the field of railroad bridge engineering'' 
is responsible for the development of all inspection procedures, 
reviews all inspection reports, and determines whether bridges are 
being inspected according to the applicable procedures and frequency, 
and reviews any items noted by an inspector as exceptions. Section 
417(b)(7) of the RSIA. Railroad bridge engineering is based on the same 
principles of engineering as all other structural engineering work, but 
the application of many of those principles is unique to this 
particular field. The live loads carried on railroad bridges are 
generally much higher than the loads on highway bridges or other 
transportation structures. Overall configuration and details of 
construction of railroad bridges differ greatly from other classes of 
structures, to the extent that dealing with these features requires 
some experience with them as well as an understanding of the 
fundamentals of engineering.
    FRA understands that not all railroad bridge engineers will be 
faced with all aspects of railroad bridge engineering. For example, an 
engineer engaged to prescribe safe loads for short steel spans and 
timber trestles on a particular railroad might never have to perform a 
detailed analysis of a large truss bridge. The basic premise is that 
the engineer be competent to perform the functions that are encompassed 
by that individual's employment or engagement. The determination of 
qualifications by the track owner includes either employment or 
engagement of the engineer by the track owner, and designation of the 
engineer to exercise the authority called for in this part.
    Paragraph (b) of this section was added by FRA to the text 
recommended by the RSAC. FRA proposes that a railroad bridge engineer 
must also have either: (1) A bachelor's degree in engineering granted 
by a school of engineering with at least one program accredited or 
recognized by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology 
(ABET) as a professional engineering curriculum; or (2) current 
registration as a professional engineer practicing within his or her 
licensed scope of practice. FRA believes that the critical nature of 
railroad bridge engineering work called for in this proposed rule 
requires persons who meet a minimal educational or experience standard 
which is common to the engineering profession and which is necessary 
for an individual who will perform the functions of an engineer as 
called for in this proposed rule. FRA developed this paragraph from the 
U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Basic Requirements for Federal 
Service's classification of an engineer.
    In paragraph (c), FRA proposes that nothing in this part is meant 
to affect the States' authority to regulate the licensure of 
professional engineers. This section represents a minimum standard to 
be attained by engineers who perform the functions called for in this 
regulation. Recognition by FRA as a railroad bridge engineer would not 
enable a person to provide professional engineering services in 
violation of a State law or regulation. FRA does not intend to pre-empt 
or interfere with any State laws regarding the professional practice of 
engineering.
    As the RBWG did not discuss the language in paragraphs (b) and (c) 
of this section, FRA welcomes public comment on the proposed regulatory 
text.

Section 237.55 Railroad Bridge Inspectors

    In this section, FRA proposes the minimum standards that a railroad 
bridge inspector must meet. Effective inspection of bridges is 
essential to preserving their integrity and serviceability. Inspectors 
must be able to understand and carry out the inspection procedure, 
including accessing inspection points on a bridge, measuring components 
and any changes, describing conditions found in a standard, unambiguous 
manner, and detecting the development of conditions that are critical 
to the safety of the bridge. It is essential that an inspector who 
detects a potential hazard to the safe operation of trains should be 
authorized by the track owner to place appropriate restrictions on the 
operation of railroad traffic pending review as necessary by a railroad 
bridge engineer. An individual who is not competent in railroad bridge 
work should not be permitted to overrule a determination made by a 
designated bridge inspector, supervisor or engineer.

Section 237.57 Railroad Bridge Supervisors

    In this section, FRA proposes minimum standards that a railroad 
bridge supervisor must meet. Individuals who supervise and take 
responsibility for construction, repair and modification of railroad 
bridges must be competent to ensure that the work is performed in 
accordance with valid standards and any specific specifications, plans 
and instructions applicable to the work to be performed. This provision 
applies to any such individual, regardless of job title, who directly 
oversees such work and approves or restricts the movement of railroad 
traffic during the progress of the work.

Section 237.59 Designations of Individuals

    In the RSIA, Congress mandated that the bridge regulations 
designate qualified bridge inspectors or maintenance personnel to 
authorize the operation of trains on bridges following repairs, damage, 
or indications of potential structural problems. Public Law 110-432, 
Division A, Section 417(b)(8). In this section, FRA proposes that each 
track owner designate certain individuals as qualified railroad bridge 
engineers, inspectors, and supervisors, and provide a recorded basis 
for each designation in effect. The track owner must record 
designations of individuals, whether employees, consultants or 
contractors. If a consultant or contractor has several individuals 
performing the described functions under a contract or other 
engagement, then one or more individuals should be designated as being 
responsible to the track owner for the work performed under that 
engagement, with the others working under the responsible charge of 
that individual.

237.71 Scope

    In subpart D, FRA proposes to prescribe minimum standards to be 
incorporated in railroad bridge management programs to prevent the 
operation of equipment that could damage a bridge by exceeding safe 
stress levels in bridge components or by

[[Page 41563]]

extending beyond the horizontal or vertical clearance limits of the 
bridge. Protection of bridges and bridge components from overstress is 
essential to the continued integrity and serviceability of the bridge. 
It is also essential that equipment or loads that exceed the clearance 
limits of a bridge not be operated owing to the potential for severe 
damage to the bridge.

Section 237.73 Determination of Bridge Load Capacities

    Paragraph (a). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that each track 
owner determine the load capacity of each of its railroad bridges. It 
is essential that the track owner know that loads operated over a 
bridge not exceed the safe capacity of that bridge. However, once it is 
determined that a bridge has adequate capacity to carry the loads being 
operated, FRA proposes not to require that any additional effort be 
expended to precisely calculate the additional capacity of that bridge 
although that might well be useful from a planning or economic 
standpoint.
    Paragraph (b). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that the load 
capacity of each bridge be documented in the track owner's bridge 
management programs, together with the method by which the capacity was 
determined. Once the load capacity is determined, the value must be 
recorded in order for it to be useful. Examples of methods of 
determination could be the original design documents, recalculation, or 
rating inspection.
    Paragraph (c). In the RSIA, Congress mandated that a professional 
engineer competent in the field of railroad bridge engineering, or a 
qualified person under the supervision of the track owner, determine 
bridge capacity. Public Law 110-432, Division A, Section 417(b)(2). 
Load capacity determination in most instances requires the education, 
experience and training of an engineer who is familiar with railroad 
bridges and the standard practices that are unique to that class of 
structure.
    The present standard references for railroad bridge design and 
analysis are found in the ``Manual for Railway Engineering'' of the 
American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association 
(AREMA). The chapters in this Manual dealing with Timber, Concrete and 
Steel structures, and Seismic Design, are under continuous review by 
committees consisting of leading engineers in the railroad bridge 
profession, including representatives of FRA. Although bridges exist 
that were designed using different or earlier references, they can 
still be evaluated by use of the AREMA Manual.
    Paragraph (d). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that bridge load 
capacity shall be determined from existing design and modification 
records of a bridge, provided that the bridge substantially conforms to 
its records configuration. Determination of bridge load capacity 
requires information on the configuration of the bridge and the 
dimensions and material of its component parts. If the bridge is found 
to conform to the drawings of its original design and modifications, 
those drawings may serve as the basis for any rating calculation that 
might be performed, thus simplifying the process. Lacking that prior 
information, it is necessary that the configuration, dimensions and 
properties of the bridge and its components be determined by on-site 
measurement of the bridge as it currently exists.
    Paragraph (e). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that a track owner 
shall schedule the evaluation of bridges for which the load capacity 
has not already been determined. This section provides for a phase-in 
period for determination of bridge capacities. There is probably not 
sufficient engineering expertise available in the United States for 
immediate rating of all unrated railroad bridges. This will provide a 
reasonable time period for track owners to accomplish this work. It is 
intended that the unrated bridges be given relative priority for 
rating, based on the judgment of a railroad bridge engineer. This 
prioritization can be accomplished either by observation or by 
evaluation of certain critical members of a bridge, as determined by 
the engineer using professional judgment.
    Paragraph (f). FRA proposes that a new capacity must be determined 
by a railroad bridge engineer when a bridge inspection record reveals 
that the condition of a bridge or a bridge component might affect the 
load capacity of the bridge. Accurate determination of current bridge 
capacity depends on accurate information about the current 
configuration and condition of the bridge. The engineer might determine 
that a change in condition or configuration calls for a revised rating 
calculation.
    Paragraph (g). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that bridge load 
capacity may be expressed in terms of numerical values related to a 
standard system of bridge loads, but shall in any case be stated in 
terms of weight and length of individual or combined cars and 
locomotives, for the use of transportation personnel. Engineers use 
standard definitions of loading combinations for design and rating of 
bridges. Common among these standard definitions is a series of 
proportional loads known as the Cooper System. The capacity of a bridge 
and its components can be described in terms of a Cooper Rating, and 
the effect of a load on a bridge can also be related to a Cooper System 
value.
    Proper application of this system requires a full understanding of 
its use and limitations. However, the results of its application can be 
translated into terms of equipment weights and configurations that can 
be effectively applied by persons who manage regular transportation 
operations of the railroad. This enables them to determine if a given 
locomotive, car or combination can be operated on a bridge with no 
further consideration, or if the equipment must be evaluated as an 
exceptional movement.
    Paragraph (h). FRA proposes that bridge load capacity may be 
expressed in terms of both normal and maximum load conditions. Normal 
bridge ratings generally define the loads that can be operated on a 
bridge for an indefinite period without damaging the bridge. In some 
cases, mostly involving steel or iron bridges, a higher rating, up to a 
maximum rating, can be given to the bridge to permit the operation of 
heavier loads on an infrequent basis. These heavier loads should not, 
in themselves, damage the bridge, but the cumulative effect of the 
higher resulting stresses in bridge members could cause their eventual 
deterioration.
    In this paragraph, FRA also proposes that operation of equipment 
that produces forces greater than the normal capacity shall be subject 
to any restrictions or conditions that may be prescribed by a railroad 
bridge engineer. An engineer can often prescribe compensating 
conditions that will permit the movement of equipment that is heavier 
than normal. Examples include speed restrictions to reduce the impact 
factor of the rolling load, the insertion of lighter-weight spacer cars 
between the heavier cars in a train, or the installation of temporary 
bents or other supports under specific points on the bridge.

Section 237.75 Protection of Bridges from Over-Weight and Over-
Dimension Loads

    Bridges can be seriously damaged by the operation of loads that 
exceed their capacity. Movement of equipment that exceeds the clear 
space on a bridge is an obvious safety hazard. In this section, FRA 
addresses Congress' mandate in the RSIA that the track owner ``develop, 
maintain, and enforce a written procedure that will ensure that its 
bridges are not loaded beyond their

[[Page 41564]]

capacities.'' Public Law 110-432, Division A, Section 417(b)(4).
    Paragraph (a). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that each track 
owner shall issue instructions to its personnel who are responsible for 
the consist and operation of trains over its bridges to prevent the 
operation of cars, locomotives and other equipment that would exceed 
the capacity or dimensions of its bridges. Transportation personnel of 
a railroad are ultimately responsible for the movement of trains, cars 
and locomotives. It is essential that they should know and follow any 
restrictions that are placed on those movements.
    Paragraph (b). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that the 
instructions regarding weight shall be expressed in terms of maximum 
equipment weights, and either minimum equipment lengths or axle 
spacing. Transportation personnel have information on the weights and 
configuration of cars and locomotives, and they must be able to relate 
that information to any restrictions placed on the movement of that 
equipment.
    Paragraph (c). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that the 
instructions regarding dimensions shall be expressed in terms of feet 
and inches of cross section and equipment length, in conformance with 
common railroad industry practice for reporting dimensions of 
exceptional equipment in interchange in which height above top-of-rail 
is shown for each cross section measurement, followed by the width of 
the car or the shipment at that height. In the industry, a standard 
format exists for the exchange of information on dimensions of railroad 
equipment. This standard practice is practical, even if it is not 
intuitive. Use of the industry practice is necessary to avoid error and 
confusion.
    Paragraph (d). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that the 
instructions may apply to individual structures or to a defined line 
segment or groups of line segments where the published capacities and 
dimensions are within the limits of all structures on the subject line 
segments. Railroads commonly issue instructions related to equipment 
weights and dimensions to be effective on line segments of various 
lengths. It is not necessary that transportation personnel be advised 
of the capacity of every bridge as long as each bridge in the line 
segment has the capacity to safely carry the loads permitted on that 
line.

Section 237.101 Scope

    In subpart E, FRA proposes minimum standards to be incorporated 
into railroad bridge management programs to provide for an effective 
program of bridge inspections. Bridge inspection is a vital component 
in any bridge management program. A bridge with undetected or 
unreported damage or deterioration can present a serious hazard to the 
safe operation of trains. Bridge inspection and evaluation is a multi-
tiered process, unlike many other types of inspection on a railroad. 
Where track, equipment and signal inspectors usually can compare 
measurements against common standards to determine whether the 
inspected feature complies with the standards, such is not the case 
with most bridges. The evaluation of a bridge requires the application 
of engineering principles by a competent person, who is usually not 
present during the inspection. It is therefore necessary that an 
inspection report should show any conditions on the bridge that might 
lead to a reduction in capacity, initiation of repair work, or a more 
detailed inspection to further characterize the condition.

Section 237.103 Scheduling of Bridge Inspections

    Paragraph (a). In this paragraph, FRA proposes regulations to 
address Congress' mandate that the track owner ``conduct regular 
comprehensive inspections of each bridge, at least once every year, and 
maintain records of those inspections that include the date on which 
the inspection was performed, the precise identification of the bridge 
inspected, the items inspected, and accurate description of the 
condition of those items, and a narrative of any inspection item that 
is found by the inspector to be a potential problem.'' Public Law 110-
432, Division A, Section 417(b)(5). Annual inspection of bridges has 
been an industry practice for over a century, and has proven to be an 
effective tool of bridge management. Even where a bridge sees very low 
levels of railroad traffic, the potential still exists for damage from 
external sources or natural deterioration. This paragraph calls for one 
inspection per calendar year, with not more than 540 days between 
successive inspections. Both criteria apply. For example, if a bridge 
is inspected on January 2, 2009, it becomes overdue for inspection on 
June 27, 2010, 541 days later. If it is inspected on December 18, 2011, 
it becomes overdue on January 1, 2013, since it was not inspected in 
calendar year 2012.
    Paragraph (b). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that a bridge shall 
be inspected more frequently than the period referenced in paragraph 
(a), above, when a railroad bridge engineer determines that such 
inspection frequency is necessary. The responsibility for adequate 
inspection remains with the track owner, with the conditions prescribed 
by a railroad bridge engineer. The inspection regimen for every bridge 
should be determined from its condition, configuration, environment and 
traffic levels.
    Paragraph (c). FRA proposes that each bridge management program 
define requirements for the special inspection of a bridge to be 
performed whenever the bridge is involved in an event which might have 
compromised the integrity of the bridge, including flood, fire, 
earthquake, derailment, or other vehicular or vessel impact. It is 
essential that railroad traffic be protected from possible bridge 
failure caused by damage from an event caused by natural or non-
railroad agents. The track owner should have in place a means to 
receive notice of such an event, including weather and earthquakes, and 
a procedure to conduct an inspection following such an event.
    Paragraph (d). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that any railroad 
bridge that has not been in railroad service and has not been inspected 
in accordance with this section within the previous 540 days be 
inspected and the inspection report reviewed by a railroad bridge 
engineer prior to the resumption of railroad service. The inspection 
frequency requirements of this section do not apply to bridges that are 
not in railroad service, but that does not relieve a track owner from 
responsibility for any damage to outside parties that might be caused 
by the condition of the bridge. If a bridge not in service has been 
inspected within the 540 day period, the track owner may accept that 
inspection and begin railroad service, subject to any determination in 
that regard by a railroad bridge engineer. The inspection period would 
date from the last inspection, with no credit for out-of-service time.

Section 237.105 Bridge Inspection Procedures

    In this section, FRA proposes that each bridge management program 
specify the procedure to be used for inspection of individual bridges 
or classes and types of bridges. As mandated by the RSIA, FRA proposes 
that the bridge inspection procedures must be as specified by a 
railroad bridge engineer who is designated as responsible for the 
conduct and review of the inspections. Public Law 110-432, Division A, 
Section 417(b)(7)(A). In the RSIA, Congress also mandated that the 
bridge safety regulations must ``ensure that the level of detail and 
the inspection procedures are appropriate to the configuration of the 
bridge,

[[Page 41565]]

conditions found during the previous inspections, and the nature of the 
railroad traffic moved over the bridge, including car weights, train 
frequency and lengths, levels of passenger and hazardous materials 
traffic, and vulnerability of the bridge to damage.'' Accordingly, FRA 
proposes that the bridge inspection procedures must ensure that the 
level of detail and the inspection procedures are appropriate to the 
configuration of the bridge. Additionally, the bridge inspection 
procedures must be designed to detect, report and protect deterioration 
and deficiencies before they present a hazard to safe train operation. 
The responsibility for adequate inspection remains with the track 
owner, with the conditions prescribed by a railroad bridge engineer. 
The inspection regimen for every bridge should be determined from its 
condition, configuration, environment and traffic levels. The 
instructions for bridge inspection may be both general, as by bridge 
type or line segment; and specific as needed by particular 
considerations for an individual bridge.

Section 237.107 Special Inspections

    Paragraph (a). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that each bridge 
management program prescribe a procedure for protection of train 
operations and for inspection of any bridge that might have been 
damaged by a natural or accidental event, including flood, fire, 
earthquake, derailment or vehicular or vessel impact. It is essential 
that railroad traffic be protected from possible bridge failure caused 
by damage from an event caused by natural or non-railroad agents. The 
track owner should have in place a means to receive notice of such an 
event, including weather and earthquakes, and a procedure to conduct an 
inspection following such an event.
    Paragraph (b). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that each bridge 
management program provide for the detection of scour or deterioration 
of bridge components that are submerged or subject to water flow. The 
condition of bridge components located under water is usually not 
evident from above. Means to determine their condition might be as 
simple as using measuring rods from the surface, or might call for 
periodic or special diving inspection. Advanced technology might also 
provide devices that can be used to determine underwater conditions.

Section 237.109 Conduct of Bridge Inspections

    In this section, FRA proposes that bridge inspections be conducted 
under the direct supervision of a designated bridge inspector, who 
shall be responsible for the accuracy of the results and the conformity 
of the inspection to the bridge management program. Bridge inspections 
can often require more than one person for safety and efficiency. This 
provision permits others to assist the designated inspector, who 
remains responsible for the results of the inspection.

Section 237.111 Bridge Inspection Records

    In this section, FRA proposes that each track owner to which this 
part applies keep a record of each inspection required to be performed 
on those bridges under this part. A bridge inspection has little value 
unless it is recorded and reported to the individuals who are 
responsible for the ultimate determination of the safety of the bridge. 
Bridge inspectors may use a variety of methods to record their findings 
as they move about the bridge. These include notebooks, voice 
recordings, having another individual transcribe notes, and 
photographs. These notes and other items are usually compiled into a 
prescribed report form at the end of the day or at the conclusion of 
the inspection. In paragraph (c), FRA delineates the essential elements 
that must be addressed and reported in any bridge inspection.
    Paragraph (d). In this paragraph, FRA proposes that an initial 
report of each bridge inspection be placed in the location designated 
by the bridge management program within 14 calendar days of the 
completion of the field portion of the inspection. The initial report 
must include the information delineated in paragraph (c)(1) through 
(c)(5). The RBWG did not reach consensus on this item. FRA drafted this 
provision with the intent that the actual conduct of the inspection 
should be reported and recorded, showing the fact that the bridge was 
actually inspected on a certain date, the type of inspection performed, 
by whom it was performed, and whether or not any critical conditions 
were detected. Inspection and reporting procedures vary widely among 
different railroads and circumstances. In many cases, especially on 
larger railroads, an inspector would prepare the report before leaving 
the bridge. The reports might be forwarded by mail, by electronic 
means, or by hand delivery. They might be forwarded daily, weekly, or 
even less frequently. In other circumstances, a consulting engineer 
might be engaged by a small railroad to inspect all of the bridges on 
all or part of the line, and the final report might be prepared by the 
engineering firm after all of the inspections are completed. Similarly, 
a large railroad might begin a comprehensive inspection and evaluation 
of a large structure that will take several months to complete.
    FRA recognizes the wide range of time periods required for these 
various inspections and reporting procedures, so this provision was 
recommended as a means for the track owner to track inspection 
progress, bridge by bridge, with a simple line item showing:
    (1) The identification of the bridge inspected.
    (2) The date of completion of the inspection.
    (3) The identification of the inspector.
    (4) The type of inspection performed.
    (5) An indication on the report as to whether any item noted 
thereon requires expedited or critical review by a railroad bridge 
engineer, and any restrictions placed at the time of the inspection.
    These five items can usually be listed on a single line of a 
report, which might include all of the bridges inspected by one 
individual in a week or two. The report could be transmitted to the 
track owner by U.S. Mail or electronically. FRA does not anticipate 
that the initial or summary report include all of the data called for 
in the bridge management program, together with any narrative 
descriptions necessary for the correct interpretation of the report. 
This information would be included in the complete inspection report. 
As consensus was not reached by the RBWG, FRA particularly requests 
comments on this issue.
    Paragraph (e). The RBWG did not reach consensus on paragraph (e). 
In this paragraph, FRA proposes that a complete report of each bridge 
inspection shall be placed in the location designated in the bridge 
management program within 45 days of the completion of the field 
portion of the inspection. FRA stipulates that a bridge inspection is 
not complete until the report of the inspection is filed and available 
to the persons who are responsible for the management of the bridges 
inspected. This time period does not include the time used by a 
consultant or in-house engineering group to complete an analysis of the 
results of the inspection, and it is not expected that the analysis 
need be completed within that time period. In cases where a detailed 
analysis is required, FRA intends that the inspection report on which 
the analysis is based would be separated from the analysis and filed 
within the required time frame. As consensus was not reached by the 
RBWG, FRA requests comments with regard to this issue.

[[Page 41566]]

    Paragraph (f). FRA proposes that each bridge inspection program 
shall specify the retention period and location for bridge inspection 
records. There are several good reasons for retaining bridge inspection 
reports over the period of several years or inspection cycles. First, a 
comparison of successive reports can reveal any accelerating rates of 
deterioration or degradation of bridge components. Second, an audit or 
review of the effectiveness of a bridge inspection program requires 
comparison of previous inspection reports with the actual condition of 
a bridge included in the audit. The practice of comparing previous 
inspection reports with actual bridge conditions has been followed by 
FRA for more than a decade when evaluating railroad bridge management 
programs. It is provides a valuable factor in determining the 
effectiveness of a railroad's program.

Section 237.113 Review of Bridge Inspection Reports

    The RSIA requires that an engineer who is competent in the field of 
railroad bridge engineering review all inspection reports and determine 
whether bridges are being inspected according to the applicable 
procedures and frequencies, and review any items noted by an inspector 
as exceptions. Public Law 110-432, Division A, Section 417(b)(7). In 
this section, FRA proposes that responsible railroad bridge supervisors 
and railroad bridge engineers review bridge inspection reports. Bridge 
inspection is usually a multi-tiered procedure. The inspector reports 
on the conditions noted in the inspection, but an engineer will 
necessarily evaluate those noted conditions and determine what, if any, 
further action is required.
    FRA does not intend that a railroad bridge engineer must review 
every inspection report, so long as the responsible management 
personnel keep track of the conduct of inspections to see that they are 
performed in accordance with the schedule and other requirements of 
this rule and the railroad's program. It should be a simple matter for 
the inspector to indicate on a report whether or not the report would 
require higher-level or engineering review. That could provide that the 
engineering staff would review the reports that indicate problems or 
issues for them to resolve, and would relieve the engineers from 
reviewing a majority of the reports that do not indicate an issue 
needing their review. Section 237.155 audits of inspections, which 
follow, would include a provision for sampling of routine inspection 
reports to assure that the inspectors are properly identifying reports 
that require higher-level review.

Section 237.131 Scope

    In subpart F, FRA proposes minimum standards to be incorporated in 
railroad bridge management programs to provide for adequate design and 
effective supervision of bridge modification and repair which will 
materially modify the capacity of the bridge or the stresses in any 
primary load carrying component of the bridge. This section provides 
for correct design and adequate supervision of repair and modification 
of bridges where the work could materially affect the capacity of the 
bridge, or its continued integrity. FRA does not intend that minor 
repairs that do not affect the capacity of the bridge must be designed 
by an engineer, but the supervision of that work should be performed by 
a person who is competent to assure that the work does not 
inadvertently compromise the integrity of the bridge. For instance, arc 
welding handrails to the members of a through truss might appear to 
some to be a minor repair, but it could seriously compromise the 
structural integrity of the bridge.

Section 237.133 Design

    In this section, FRA proposes that each repair or modification to a 
bridge pursuant to this part shall be designed by a railroad bridge 
engineer. Design of entire railroad bridges, modifications and repairs 
which materially modify the capacity of the bridge or the stresses in 
any primary load-carrying component of the bridge require the 
intelligent application of the principles of engineering and can only 
be performed by an engineer with training and experience in the field 
of railroad bridges. Railroads have typically issued standard 
instructions for the performance of common maintenance repairs, such as 
replacement or upgrading of components of timber trestles. This section 
specifically permits such a practice.

Section 237.135 Supervision of Repairs and Modifications

    In this section, FRA proposes that each repair or modification 
pursuant to this part shall be performed under the immediate 
supervision of a railroad bridge supervisor as defined in Sec.  237.57 
of this part and who is designated and authorized by the track owner to 
supervise the particular work to be performed. Modifications and 
repairs which materially modify the capacity of the bridge or the 
stresses in any primary load-carrying component of the bridge must be 
performed according to the specific or general specifications and 
instructions issued by a railroad bridge engineer. Particularly when 
trains are permitted to pass over a bridge which is being repaired or 
modified, the supervisor at the bridge must be able to make the 
necessary determination to either