Rail Transit Roadway Worker Protection, 20605-20628 [2024-06251]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
in particular small businesses, to
comment on the IRFA. Comments must
be filed by the deadlines for comments
on the FNPRM indicated on the first
page of this document and must have a
separate and distinct heading
designating them as responses to the
IRFA.
10. OPEN Government Data Act. The
OPEN Government Data Act requires
agencies to make ‘‘public data assets’’
available under an open license and as
‘‘open Government data assets,’’ i.e., in
machine-readable, open format,
unencumbered by use restrictions other
than intellectual property rights, and
based on an open standard that is
maintained by a standards organization.
This requirement is to be implemented
‘‘in accordance with guidance by the
Director’’ of the OMB. The term ‘‘public
data asset’’ means ‘‘a data asset, or part
thereof, maintained by the Federal
Government that has been, or may be,
released to the public, including any
data asset, or part thereof, subject to
disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA).’’ A ‘‘data asset’’
is ‘‘a collection of data elements or data
sets that may be grouped together,’’ and
‘‘data’’ is ‘‘recorded information,
regardless of form or the media on
which the data is recorded.’’ We
delegate authority, including the
authority to adopt rules, to the Bureau,
in consultation with the agency’s Chief
Data Officer and after seeking public
comment to the extent it deems
appropriate, to determine whether to
make publicly available any data assets
maintained or created by the
Commission within the meaning of the
OPEN Government Act pursuant to the
rules adopted herein, and if so, to
determine when and to what extent
such information should be made
publicly available. Such data assets may
include assets maintained by a CLA or
other third-party, to the extent the
Commission’s control or direction over
those assets may bring them within the
scope of the OPEN Government Act, as
interpreted in the light of guidance to be
issued by OMB.1 In doing so, the Bureau
shall take into account the extent to
which such data assets are subject to
disclosure under the FOIA.
11. Ex Parte Rules—Permit-ButDisclose. The proceeding this Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking initiates
shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
Persons making ex parte presentations
must file a copy of any written
presentation or a memorandum
summarizing any oral presentation
1 OMB
has not yet issued final guidance.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
within two business days after the
presentation (unless a different deadline
applicable to the Sunshine period
applies). Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with section
1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules. In
proceedings governed by § 1.49(f) of the
Commission’s rules or for which the
Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
12. Comment Filing Procedures.
Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. Comments may
be filed using the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121 (1998).
13. Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act. Consistent with the
Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act, Public Law 118–9, a
summary of this document will be
available on https://www.fcc.gov/
proposed-rulemakings.
Legal Basis
14. The proposed action is authorized
pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(n), 302,
303(r), 312, 333, and 503, of the
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20605
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),
154(n), 302a, 303(r), 312, 333, 503; and
the IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act
of 2020, 15 U.S.C. 278g–3a through
278g–3e.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
15. An Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Act (IRFA) Analysis for the rules
proposed in the FNPRM was prepared
and can be found as Exhibit B of the
FCC’s Second Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
FCC 24–5, adopted January 26, 2024, at
this link: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/
attachments/FCC-24-26A1.pdf.
Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–06249 Filed 3–22–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
49 CFR Part 671
[Docket No. FTA–2023–0024]
RIN 2132–AB41
Rail Transit Roadway Worker
Protection
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) is proposing
minimum safety standards for rail
transit roadway worker protection
(RWP) to ensure the safe operation of
public transportation systems and to
prevent accidents, incidents, fatalities,
and injuries to transit workers who may
access the roadway in the performance
of work. This NPRM would apply to rail
transit agencies (RTAs) covered by the
State Safety Oversight (SSO) program,
SSO agencies (SSOAs), and rail transit
workers who access the roadway to
perform work. It would set minimum
standards for RWP program elements,
including an RWP manual and track
access guide; requirements for on-track
safety and supervision, job safety
briefings, good faith safety challenges,
and reporting unsafe acts and
conditions and near-misses;
development and implementation of
risk-based redundant protections for
workers; and establishment of RWP
training and qualification and RWP
compliance monitoring activities. RTAs
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20606
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
would be expected to comply with these
Federal standards as a baseline and use
their existing Safety Management
System (SMS) processes to determine
any additional mitigations appropriate
to address the level of RWP risk
identified. SSOAs would oversee and
enforce implementation of the RWP
program requirements.
DATES: Comments should be filed by
May 24, 2024. FTA will consider
comments received after that date to the
extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by docket number FTA–
2023–0024 by any of the following
methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for sending comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: 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.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. All comments received will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Background
documents and comments received may
also be viewed at the U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
SE, Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. EST, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program matters, contact Ms. Margaretta
‘‘Mia’’ Veltri, Office of Transit Safety
and Oversight, FTA, telephone at (202)
366–5094 or margaretta.veltri@dot.gov.
For legal matters, contact Ms. Emily
Jessup, Attorney Advisor, FTA,
telephone at 202–366–8907 or emily.
jessup@dot.gov. Office hours are from
8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of Regulatory
Action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
B. Statutory Authority
II. Background Informing FTA’s Proposals
A. Rail Transit Industry Safety
Performance
B. Recommendations From the National
Transportation Safety Board
C. Safety Risk Analysis and Report on Rail
Transit Roadway Worker Protection
D. Transit Worker Safety Request for
Information
E. Summary of Major Provisions
F. Summary of Economic Analysis
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of Regulatory
Action
The Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) has adopted the principles and
methods of Safety Management System
(SMS) as the basis for enhancing the
safety of public transportation in the
United States. As part of its internal
SMS, FTA established a Safety Risk
Management (SRM) program to
proactively address safety concerns
impacting the transit industry and to
systematically apply FTA’s statutory
oversight authority to improve the safety
of the nation’s transit infrastructure
through the Public Transportation
Safety Program.
The process follows a five-step
approach: (1) identify safety concerns;
(2) assess safety risk; (3) develop
mitigation; (4) implement mitigation;
and (5) monitor safety performance. As
a result of the first two steps, FTA may
develop and advance appropriate
mitigations to address a safety hazard,
such as proposed safety regulations,
general or special directives, safety
advisories, or technical assistance and
training activities.
In 2019, FTA began piloting the SRM
process to focus on high-priority safety
risks and identified the RWP safety
concern as the second topic for analysis.
Through the SRM process, FTA
conducted a review of the existing
approaches to RWP used by the rail
transit industry. This review shows that
on a national level, these approaches do
not adequately protect transit workers
from rail transit vehicles and other
roadway hazards. As a result, FTA has
determined that a Federal baseline RWP
program is an appropriate mitigation
and is proposing this regulation to
reduce fatalities and serious injury
events involving rail transit workers that
occupy the rail roadway during hours of
operation.
This NPRM would require RTAs
covered by the SSO program under 49
CFR part 674 (Part 674) to implement a
minimum, baseline RWP program to
provide a standardized and consistent
approach to protecting roadway workers
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
industry-wide, overseen and enforced
by SSOAs. Using the Federal standards
as a baseline, FTA would expect RTAs
to use their existing documented safety
risk management processes to assess the
associated safety risk and, based on the
results of the safety risk assessment,
identify the specific safety risk
mitigations or strategies necessary to
address the safety risk.
This NPRM would prohibit the use of
individual rail transit vehicle detection
as a sole form of protection for workers
on the roadway. It would set
requirements for RTAs to conduct a
safety risk assessment to identify and
establish redundant protections for each
category of work roadway workers
perform on the roadway or track.
Redundant protections may include
procedures, such as foul time and
advance warning systems, and also
physical protections to stop trains in
advance of workers, such as derailers
and shunts. The safety risk assessment
and redundant protections would be
reviewed and approved by the SSOA,
along with other elements of the RTA’s
RWP program.
The safety risk assessment would be
consistent with the RTA’s Agency
Safety Plan and the SSOA’s Program
Standard. RTAs may supplement the
safety risk assessment with engineering
assessments, inputs from the Safety
Assurance process established under 49
CFR 673.27, the results of safety event
investigations, and other safety risk
management strategies and approaches.
To ensure effective implementation
and oversight of the RWP program and
redundant protections, this NPRM also
would specify RWP training and
compliance monitoring activities,
supplemented by near-miss reporting
and SSOA oversight and auditing.
B. Statutory Authority
Congress directed FTA to establish a
Public Transportation Safety Program in
the Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act (Pub. L. 112–141)
(MAP–21), which was reauthorized by
the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114–
94). The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
enacted as the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117–58), continues
FTA’s authority to regulate public
transportation systems that receive
Federal financial assistance under
Chapter 53. Title 49 U.S.C. 5329(f)(7)
authorizes FTA to issue rules to carry
out the public transportation safety
program.
Title 49 U.S.C. 5329(b)(2) directs FTA
to develop and implement a National
Public Transportation Safety Plan (NSP)
that includes minimum safety standards
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
to ensure the safe operation of public
transportation systems. In 2017, FTA
published its first iteration of the
National Safety Plan which was
intended to be FTA’s primary tool for
communicating with the transit industry
about its safety performance (82 FR
5628). Subsequently, on May 31, 2023,
FTA published a second iteration of the
NSP (88 FR 34917). While the NSP
currently contains only voluntary
standards, as FTA’s safety program has
matured, it is now appropriate for FTA
to propose required minimum standards
for RWP. Pursuant to the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), FTA is
proposing these minimum standards for
public notice and comment through the
rulemaking process.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background Informing FTA’s
Proposals
A. Rail Transit Industry Safety
Performance
Rail transit employees and contractors
who work on the roadway, also known
as roadway workers, face numerous onthe-job hazards. Working on the
roadway exposes workers to moving rail
transit vehicles and electrified system
components. Weather, including rain,
snow, and heat can create conditions
that cause slips, trips, and falls;
hypothermia; and heat stroke.
Surrounding automobile traffic can limit
the ability to hear trains and warnings
from watchpersons. Tight clearances,
restricted visibility, varying distances
from the track to places of safety, and
the potential need to clear between rail
transit vehicles make tunnels, bridges
and aerial structures, locations with
more than two tracks, and shared-use
roadway (e.g., streets with mixed traffic)
make roadways particularly challenging
work environments. Adjacent
construction and public utilities pose
additional safety challenges. Faster
trains, more frequent headways, and
shorter non-revenue maintenance
windows all increase worker exposure
to the risk of being struck by a train or
electrocuted.
RTAs manage these risks using a
variety of RWP programs, including
systems and approaches designed to
safeguard roadway workers through
rules and procedures, training and
supervision, communication protocols
and technology, and on-track protection.
Many existing RWP programs
implemented by RTAs use elements
from the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) RWP regulations
contained in 49 CFR part 214, subpart
C—Roadway Worker Protection,
modified to address the RTA’s unique
operating conditions and requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
SSOAs typically review implementation
of these RWP programs as part of their
triennial audits of the RTAs in their
jurisdictions.
Notwithstanding the use of RWP
programs throughout the rail transit
industry, roadway workers continue to
be killed and seriously injured in
roadway safety events. For example, in
October 2022, two roadway workers on
the Port Authority Transit Corporation
(PATCO) roadway were struck and
killed by a PATCO revenue service
vehicle traveling through a closeclearance area. Preliminary information
indicates the track was not taken out-ofservice as expected, and the incident is
currently under investigation by the
National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) (investigation number
RRD23FR001). Roadway worker events
continue to comprise the majority of
transit worker fatalities for RTAs.
This NPRM follows FTA’s review of
safety events involving roadway
workers, dating back to 2008, including
information reported to the National
Transit Database (NTD) and State Safety
Oversight Reporting Tool (SSOR);
investigations completed by NTSB,
including 12 recommendations issued
by NTSB to FTA since 2012 regarding
needed improvements in the RWP
programs administered in the U.S. rail
transit industry; data and information
submitted in response to FTA’s request
for information (RFI) on transit worker
safety (86 FR 53143); and analysis
completed as part of FTA’s internal
Safety Risk Management process.
FTA’s review is also informed by
older information on accidents
involving roadway workers collected
from the NTD and the SSO program
dating back to 1994 and the results of
an inventory of RWP practices used in
the rail transit industry, collected in
2014 in response to FTA’s Safety
Advisory 14–1: Inventory of Practice
and Analysis (https://www.transit.
dot.gov/oversight-policy-areas/safetyadvisory-14-1-right-way-workerprotection-december-2013). Finally,
FTA considered recommendations from
the Transit Advisory Committee for
Safety (TRACS),1 voluntary safety
standards developed by the American
Public Transportation Association
1 The Transit Advisory Committee for Safety
(TRACS) was established in 2009 by the U.S.
Transportation Secretary to improve transit safety.
TRACS provides information, advice, and
recommendations on transit safety and other issues
as determined by the Secretary of Transportation
and the FTA Administrator. TRACS’s membership
reflects the geographic, size, and issue diversity
across the transit industry and includes members
from large and small bus and rail operators, state
safety oversight agencies, academia, non-profit
organizations, and labor unions.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20607
(APTA), and the results of research
conducted by the Transit Cooperative
Research Program (TCRP) (see: https://
www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/
166925.aspx) and FTA’s Office of
Research, Demonstration and
Innovation (https://www.transit.dot.gov/
research-innovation/fta-standardsdevelopment-program-rail-transitroadway-worker-protection-report).
FTA’s review finds that, dating back
to 1994, 52 rail transit workers have
been killed and over 200 workers have
experienced major injuries resulting
from safety events on the roadway,
primarily resulting from collisions with
rail transit vehicles, falls and
electrocution. More detailed data
covering the almost 15-year period
between January 1, 2008 and October
31, 2022 is available from the NTD.
During this time, 22 workers have been
killed and 120 workers seriously injured
in accidents on the roadway. This
equates to approximately 1.5 workers
killed per year and just over eight
workers seriously injured per year.
To ensure FTA’s analysis of existing
RWP practices compares reasonably
similar RWP programs and outcomes,
this analysis, dating back to 2008, which
supports the cost benefit statement for
this proposed NPRM, does not include
incidents occurring in the State of
California, where roadway workers have
been protected by General Order 175–A,
‘‘Rules and Regulations Governing
Roadway Worker Protection provided
by Rail Transit Agencies and Rail Fixed
Guideway Systems’’ since 2016. While
there is evidence that dozens more
workers are injured less seriously each
year in incidents on the roadway, the
NTD does not provide sufficient detail
on these incidents to support
substantive analysis.
Based on this review, FTA finds that
existing programs used in the rail transit
industry do not adequately mitigate the
risks of placing workers on the roadway.
FTA agrees with NTSB that weaknesses
in current programs leave all RTAs ‘‘at
risk for roadway worker fatalities and
serious injuries’’ (see https://
www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/
RecLetters/R-13-039-040.pdf). Further,
FTA believes that SSOAs can do more
to oversee and enhance the safety of
roadway workers in their jurisdictions,
in accordance with the SSOAs’
authority under 49 CFR part 674.
Many of the safety events in FTA’s
review primarily or tangentially involve
RWP protections that rely solely on the
ability of the roadway worker to detect
oncoming rail transit vehicles. This
approach is vulnerable to human error,
such as miscalculating sight distance
and generally underestimating the time
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20608
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
needed for workers to clear tracks. In
many of the events reviewed by FTA,
the roadway workers were not
sufficiently aware of the immediate
hazards they faced when working on the
rail transit roadway. Many of these
events were caused by roadway
workers’ lack of awareness of the
presence or speed of approaching trains;
lack of train visibility in curves or aerial
structures; and the time required to
move to a place of safety. Contributing
to many of these events were the train
operators’ lack of awareness regarding
the roadway workers’ locations and
insufficient time to slow and stop the
trains before striking those workers.
FTA’s review confirms that reliance
on the roadway worker to detect rail
transit vehicles lacks safety redundancy
and does not provide sufficient physical
or procedural protections to ensure
worker safety. Physical redundant
protections are technological or
mechanical interventions that
physically stop a train from striking a
roadway worker, such as a derailer or
shunt in the signal system. Procedural
redundant protections are rules-based
interventions that rely on worker
training and compliance, such as the
use of foul time to clear the track for
workers.
FTA’s review of these safety events
also found that weaknesses in job safety
briefings contributed to these events,
placing roadway workers in situations
where they may not have recognized the
hazards of their work sites or the
requirements of protection. Also,
insufficient training and poor work
scheduling practices left workers
vulnerable to errors of judgement and
fatigue that contributed to poor
decision-making on the roadway.
While FTA’s review finds that the
majority of RWP fatalities and serious
injuries have happened on heavy rail
transit systems, other rail systems,
including light rail and automated
guideways, have also experienced fatal
RWP accidents and serious injuries.
Further, while most of these agencies
have top train speeds in excess of 45
miles per hour, the conditions that make
these events possible are present at all
RTAs nationwide—even those agencies
that provide service at slower speeds,
with single rail cars, or more limited
track configurations.
B. Recommendations From the National
Transportation Safety Board
Since 2008, NTSB has issued 12
safety recommendations to FTA based
on its investigation of rail transit RWP
safety events. These recommendations
focus on the need for Federal regulation,
minimum RWP requirements,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
enhancements in job safety briefings,
and RWP training programs for the rail
transit industry. NTSB also has
recommended that RTAs use redundant
protection when workers are on the
roadway. A discussion of roadway
worker safety events that occurred on
the roadway follows below, along with
the relevant NTSB recommendation and
associated FTA action.
On January 26, 2010, a hi-rail
vehicle—a truck or automobile that can
be operated on either highways or
rails—struck and fatally injured two
technicians who were working on the
roadway replacing equipment between
the tracks at the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
(WMATA). On June 1, 2012, following
its investigation at WMATA, NTSB
recommended that FTA, ‘‘Issue
guidelines to advise transit agencies and
state oversight agencies on how to
effectively implement, oversee, and
audit the requirements of [the SSO
program] using industry best practices,
industry voluntary standards, and
appropriate elements from 49 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 214, Subpart
C—Roadway Worker Protection [sic].
(R–12–34).’’
To address this recommendation, FTA
sent each RTA a package of RWP
materials and guidance, including the
results of FTA-sponsored research with
the TCRP of the Transportation
Research Board (TRB) at the National
Academies of Science regarding RWP
and rules compliance. FTA also
provided updates on joint technology
demonstration projects with the
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority (MARTA) and the Maryland
Transit Administration (MTA) to
support the piloting and testing of
technology to help alert workers to the
presence of trains and train operators to
the presence of workers on the tracks.
Finally, FTA re-issued an awareness
video, developed in collaboration with
WMATA, New York City Transit, and
Transport Workers Union Local 100 in
response to earlier RWP-related worker
accidents, called ‘‘A Knock at Your
Door’’ (https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=31XyWpQCWRc). This video is
designed to reinforce the dangers and
challenges of working on the rail transit
right-of-way and now is used by RTAs
in their track safety training programs.
In response to a December 19, 2013,
safety event resulting in two roadway
worker fatalities on the Bay Area Rapid
Transit (BART) system, NTSB issued
two urgent safety recommendations to
FTA, citing concerns that the current
RWP programs in place in the rail
transit industry may not be effective.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NTSB recommended that FTA
immediately:
• Issue a directive to all rail transit
properties requiring redundant
protection for roadway workers, such as
positive train control, secondary
warning devices, or shunting (R–13–39);
and
• Issue a directive to require transit
properties to review their wayside
worker rules and procedures and revise
them as necessary to eliminate any
authorization that depends solely on the
roadway worker to provide protection
from trains and moving equipment (R–
13–40).
To respond initially to these urgent
safety recommendations, on December
31, 2013, FTA issued Safety Advisory
14–1: Right-of-Way Worker Protection to
provide guidance to SSOAs and RTAs
on redundant protections for workers.
Safety Advisory 14–1 also requested
information from RTAs and SSOAs
regarding RWP program elements and
level of implementation in the rail
transit industry, as well as assessments
from each RTA documenting the safety
hazards and mitigations in place at their
agencies to protect workers on the
roadway.
FTA’s Safety Advisory 14–1 also
included RWP best practices developed
from the findings of 28 investigations of
rail transit roadway worker fatalities
from 2002 through 2013. Effective
practices in flagging and redundant
protection, roadway work scheduling,
communication rules, and other
practices were detailed in the advisory.
Methods for improving existing
practices, such as rules compliance
testing, job safety briefings and training,
were also detailed to assist transit
agencies in improving their RWP
processes and procedures.
In addition, FTA provided new
resources to assist the SSO program and
States in conducting activities such as
audits, investigations, and inspections
related to Safety Advisory 14–1.
Beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, FTA
established its grant program for SSOAs
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(6) and
issued approximately $22 million per
year to States to fund staffing and
training for SSO program managers,
staff, and contractors. FTA has
continued to provide technical
assistance and training to SSOA staff
through the Transportation Safety
Institute, the National Transit Institute,
and a 2018 SSOA workshop session,
including sessions focused on oversight
of RWP program elements.
Further, on September 24, 2014,
NTSB released its Special Investigation
Report on Railroad and Rail Transit
Roadway Worker Protection (SIR 14–
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
03). In this report, NTSB identified and
discussed the circumstances of 15
railroad and rail transit worker deaths in
2013 and issued eight additional safety
recommendations to FTA, including
five directly related to proposals in this
NPRM:
• Require initial and recurring
training for roadway workers in hazard
recognition and mitigation. Such
training should include recognition and
mitigation of the hazards of tasks being
performed by coworkers (R–14–36);
• With assistance from the FRA and
OSHA, establish roadway worker
protection rules, including requirements
for job briefings (R–14–38);
• Once the action specified in Safety
Recommendation R–14–38 is
completed, update the state safety
oversight program to ensure that rail
transit systems are meeting the safety
requirements for roadway workers (R–
14–39);
• Establish a national inspection
program that specifically includes
roadway worker activities (R–14–40);
and
• Revise 49 CFR part 659 to require
all federally funded rail transit
properties to comply with 29parts 1904,
1910, and 1926 (R–14–41).
To respond to these
recommendations, FTA has worked
with the rail transit industry, SSOAs,
and through its internal safety program
regulatory processes to focus action on
needed improvements in RWP safety.
Through guidance, technical assistance,
training, research projects, and now
proposed regulation, transit worker
safety, including RWP safety, has been
a major focus for FTA’s safety program.
On October 30, 2015, FTA staff
participated in developing the APTA
Standard for On-Track System Safety
Requirements, APTA RT–OP–S–21–15,
as part of a cooperative agreement with
the Center for Urban Transportation
Research. This voluntary standard
addresses RWP programs by providing
minimum safety requirements for key
elements noted in NTSB’s Special
Investigation Report on Railroad and
Rail Transit Roadway Worker
Protection.
This standard augments existing
APTA voluntary standards that address
RWP by focusing specifically on the use
and movement of on-track equipment,
which includes hi-rail vehicles and
equipment. This voluntary standard
encourages RTAs to equip all existing
and new on-track equipment with
certain minimum design features such
as automatic change-of-direction alarms;
back up alarms which provide audible
signals; and alarms that are
distinguishable from surrounding
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
ambient noise, all of which will serve as
secondary warning systems. This
standard also encourages RTAs to
develop operating procedures and
guidance for the use of on-track
equipment in work zone areas and along
the right-of-way.
Additionally, in response to
recommendation R–14–038 and to
further address recommendations R–13–
039 and R–13–040, FTA contributed to
the development of APTA’s 2016
Roadway Worker Protection Program
Requirements Standard, APTA RT–OP–
S–016–11. This voluntary standard
encourages adherence to clear rules and
procedures, appropriate training,
certification and retraining, and regular
monitoring of right-of-way safety
compliance. It also defines minimum
elements in an RTA’s on-track safety
program and emphasizes opportunities
for redundant protection and the use of
advanced worker warning technology.
In January 2017, FTA issued its National
Public Transportation Safety Plan,
which encouraged the adoption of these
voluntary APTA standards.
C. Safety Risk Analysis and Report on
Rail Transit Roadway Worker Protection
In 2019, FTA initiated a safety risk
analysis of the hazards associated with
RWP. FTA conducted this analysis to
determine additional mitigations for
RWP risks as the agency worked to
maintain vigilance in the protection of
transit workers. FTA used the results of
this safety risk assessment to support
the drafting of this NPRM.
In 2021, as part of FTA’s Standards
Development Program, FTA issued
Report No. 0212 on Rail Transit
Roadway Worker Protection. This report
summarized research that reviewed
existing standards and best practices.
The report also developed use cases, a
risk assessment matrix, and high-level
concepts of operations for rail transit
RWP. The research report provided
tools and resources that RTAs may use
to address the safety risks of roadway
workers performing tasks on and
adjacent to rail tracks. By overlaying
emerging technologies with existing
policies and procedures, this report
demonstrated that risk can be reduced
for roadway workers.
As discussed in this report, the use of
a hazard/risk assessment matrix that
incorporates human factors and risk
analyses and considers several use
cases, and the use of secondary RWP
protection devices, may help agencies to
improve RWP. It also demonstrated that
while available RWP technologies
provide additional warning to roadway
workers and train crews, they are not a
primary protection source. Only through
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20609
overlaying these technologies with
existing procedures and practices can
RTAs enhance RWP and reduce safety
risk for workers.
D. Transit Worker Safety Request for
Information
In September 2021, FTA published a
request for information in the Federal
Register to solicit information from the
public related to transit worker safety to
inform the regulatory process (86 FR
53143). FTA asked for comment on
current RWP practices in the industry,
including redundant protections and
training, and on minimum requirements
the public expected to see if FTA
pursued Federal requirements for transit
RWP programs. FTA received comments
suggesting that classroom and field
training should be required, RWP
program requirements should be
responsive to modal differences and
differences in operating characteristics,
and suggestions for specific technology
or practices to improve safety (Docket
FTA–2021–0012). The section-bysection analysis below identifies where
FTA proposals are responsive to these
comments.
E. Summary of Major Provisions
This NPRM would establish
minimum safety standards to protect
transit workers who may access the
roadway in the performance of work.
The NPRM proposes that each RTA
would adopt and implement an RWP
program to improve transit worker
safety that is consistent with Federal
and State safety requirements and
approved by the SSOA. The RWP
program would be documented in a
dedicated RWP manual, which would
include: (1) terminology, abbreviations,
and acronyms used to describe the RWP
program activities and requirements; (2)
RWP program elements; (3) a definition
of RTA and transit worker
responsibilities for the RWP program;
(4) training, qualification, and
supervision required for transit workers
to access the roadway, by labor category
or type of work performed; and (5)
processes and procedures to provide
adequate on-track safety for all transit
workers who may access the roadway in
the performance of their work,
including safety and oversight
personnel.
The RWP manual also would include
or incorporate by reference a track
access guide to support on-track safety.
The track access guide would be based
on a physical survey of the track
geometry and condition of the transit
system.
The RTA would be required to
completely review and update its RWP
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20610
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
manual not less than every two years.
This includes updates to reflect current
conditions, lessons learned in
implementing the RWP program as
described in the manual, and
information provided by the SSOA and
FTA. RTAs would be required to
conduct a review within two years of
the SSOA’s initial approval of the RWP
manual and not less than every two
years thereafter.
FTA’s proposed rules for Public
Transportation Agency Safety Plans
(PTASP) would also require rail transit
agencies to include or incorporate by
reference in their Agency Safety Plans
(ASPs) the policies and procedures
regarding rail transit workers on the
roadway. The ASP, and any updates to
the ASP, will require approval by a joint
labor-management Safety Committee.
The joint labor-management Safety
Committee may also, as part of its
statutory responsibilities, identify RWP
related safety deficiencies and identify
and recommend risk-based mitigations
or strategies to address RWP hazards
identified in the agency’s safety risk
assessment.
The NPRM would prohibit the use of
any protections that rely solely on the
roadway worker to detect rail transit
vehicles. Each RTA would be required
to conduct a safety risk assessment to
identify redundant protections for all
workers to be included in the RWP
program and manual. Protections would
be based on the category of work being
performed. Tasks demanding more
attention from roadway workers,
including the use of tools and
equipment, based on the results of the
safety risk assessment, likely would
require RTAs to implement greater
levels of protection.
In addition, the NPRM would require
comprehensive job safety briefings, a
good faith safety challenge provision,
and required reporting of near misses.
Formal training and qualification
programs would be required for all
workers who access the roadway. RTAs
also would adopt a program for RWP
program compliance auditing and
monitoring.
SSOAs would be responsible for
approving, overseeing, and enforcing
implementation of the requirements in
the NPRM for each RTA in their
jurisdiction, including the RWP Manual
and supporting training and
qualification programs.
F. Summary of Economic Analysis
This proposed rule, which sets
minimum safety standards for RWP
programs, would benefit roadway
workers by reducing their risk of
fatalities and injuries. To estimate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
benefits, FTA analyzed national transit
worker safety data from 2008 to 2020
and identified accidents that would
have been prevented if agencies had
implemented the protections in the
proposed rule. On average, the rule
would prevent an estimated 1.4
fatalities and 3.9 injuries per year,
resulting in annual safety benefits of
$14.2 million in 2021 dollars. To meet
the safety standards, RTAs and SSOAs
would incur an estimated $2.0 million
in start-up costs plus $11.3 million in
ongoing annual costs. The largest
ongoing annual costs are for redundant
worker protections ($5.9 million) and
roadway worker protection training
($4.5 million).
Table ES–1 summarizes the potential
effects of the proposed rule over a tenyear analysis period from 2023 to 2032.
In 2021 dollars, the rule would have
annualized net benefits of $2.6 million
at a 2 percent discount rate, discounted
to 2023.
TABLE ES–1—SUMMARY OF
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
[2021 Dollars, discounted to 2023]
Annualized value
(2% discount rate)
Item
Benefits ...........................
Costs ...............................
Net Benefits ....................
$13,414,248
10,848,469
2,565,779
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
Subpart A—General
671.1 Purpose and Applicability
FTA proposes that this regulation
would apply to RTAs that receive
Federal financial assistance under 49
U.S.C. chapter 53 and to all SSOAs that
oversee the safety of rail fixed guideway
public transportation systems. It also
specifies that this regulation would not
apply to rail systems that are subject to
the safety oversight of the Federal
Railroad Administration.
FTA also proposes to specify that this
regulation applies to transit workers
who access any rail fixed guideway
public transportation system in the
performance of their work. FTA is
proposing this applicability to
encompass the RTAs and SSOAs in its
SSO program and to establish
protections for individuals under the
RTA’s purview as they access the
roadway.
671.3 Policy
FTA proposes that section 671.3(a)
will explain that this regulation
establishes minimum safety standards
for rail transit RWP. FTA proposes that
each RTA and SSOA may prescribe
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
additional or more stringent rules that
are consistent with this part.
FTA further proposes that section
671.3(b) will explain that FTA has
adopted the use of SMS as the basis for
enhancing the safety of public
transportation. Safety Risk Management
and Safety Assurance, as required in
part 673 of this chapter, form the basis
of a transit agency’s safety risk
identification, assessment, mitigation,
and monitoring programs. As such, FTA
also proposes that any activities
conducted to carry out this Part must be
integrated into the RTA’s SMS required
under part 673 of this chapter.
671.5 Definitions
FTA proposes definitions for terms
used in this part to establish a standard
RWP vocabulary.
This section also includes definitions
of terms used throughout FTA’s safety
program. Some of these terms are
included in FTA’s PTASP NPRM, which
was issued on April 26, 2023 (88 FR
25336). FTA’s intent is for terms to have
the same meaning across the safety
program, and FTA will reconcile
overlapping terms in the appropriate
rulemakings. Readers should refer,
specifically, to the definitions of
‘‘Accountable Executive,’’ ‘‘Equivalent
Entity,’’ ‘‘Near-miss,’’ ‘‘Rail Fixed
Guideway Public Transportation
System,’’ ‘‘Rail Transit Agency,’’
‘‘Roadway,’’ ‘‘Safety event,’’ ‘‘State
Safety Oversight Agency,’’ and ‘‘Transit
Worker.’’
FTA is proposing definitions for this
part that are not found in other parts of
the FTA safety program. FTA is
proposing to define ‘‘roadway worker
protection’’ to mean the policies,
processes, and procedures implemented
by an RTA to prevent safety events for
transit workers who must access the
roadway in the performance of their
work. FTA is proposing ‘‘roadway
worker’’ to mean a transit worker whose
duties involve inspection, construction,
maintenance, repairs, or providing ontrack safety such as flag persons and
watchpersons on or near the roadway or
right-of-way or with the potential of
fouling track. FTA is proposing to
define ‘‘fouling a track’’ to mean the
placement of an individual or an item
of equipment in such proximity to a
track that the individual or equipment
could be struck by a moving rail transit
vehicle or on-track equipment and to
further explain that any time an
individual or equipment is within the
track zone, it is fouling the track.
FTA is proposing to define ‘‘ample
time’’ to mean the time necessary for a
roadway worker to be clear of the track
zone or in a place of safety 15 seconds
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
before a rail transit vehicle moving at
the maximum authorized speed on that
track could arrive at the location of the
roadway worker. As with the other
requirements of this proposed
regulation, FTA anticipates that some
RTAs will exceed FTA’s minimum
requirements. In this case, FTA is
proposing minimum ample time of 15
seconds to provide a baseline of safety
that includes clearing the track zone or
being in a place of safety. It is FTA’s
intent with this proposal to ensure that
roadway workers receive adequate time
to move sufficiently clear of moving
vehicles or equipment determined not
only by the amount of time needed to
move physically off the tracks but also
by the amount of time needed in that
specific location to be sufficiently clear
of moving vehicles.
FTA is proposing to define ‘‘place of
safety’’ to mean a place an individual or
individuals can safely occupy outside
the track zone, sufficiently clear of any
rail transit vehicle, including any ontrack equipment, moving on any track.
FTA is proposing to define ‘‘track zone’’
to mean an area identified by transit
workers where a person or equipment
could be struck by the widest
equipment that could occupy the track
and typically is an area within six feet
of the outside rail on both sides of any
track.
FTA is also proposing to define
‘‘individual rail transit vehicle
detection’’ to mean a process by which
a lone worker acquires on-track safety
by visually detecting approaching rail
transit vehicles and leaving the track in
ample time. FTA is proposing to define
‘‘on-track safety’’ to mean a state of
freedom from the danger of being struck
by a moving rail transit vehicle or other
equipment as provided by operating and
safety rules that govern track occupancy
by roadway workers, other transit
workers, rail transit vehicles, and ontrack equipment.
Finally, FTA is proposing to define
‘‘minor tasks’’ to mean those tasks
performed without the use of tools
during the execution of which a
roadway worker or other transit worker
can visually assess their surroundings at
least every five seconds for approaching
rail transit vehicles and that can be
performed without violating ample
time. This definition is part of FTA’s
proposal to identify appropriate
redundant protections for individuals
engaged in tasks that require varying
levels of attention. FTA is proposing to
define ‘‘redundant protection’’ to mean
at least one additional protection
beyond individual rail transit vehicle
detection to ensure on-track safety for
roadway workers and that redundant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
protections may be procedural,
physical, or both.
FTA is also proposing definitions for
‘‘equivalent protection,’’ ‘‘flag person,’’
‘‘foul time protection,’’ ‘‘job safety
briefing,’’ ‘‘lone worker,’’ ‘‘maximum
authorized speed,’’ ‘‘qualified,’’ ‘‘rail
transit vehicle approach warning,’’
‘‘roadway maintenance machine,’’
‘‘roadway work group,’’ ‘‘roadway
worker in charge,’’ ‘‘RWP manual,’’
‘‘sight distance,’’ ‘‘track access guide,’’
‘‘watchperson,’’ ‘‘working limits,’’ and
‘‘work zone.’’
Subpart B—RWP Program and Manual
This subpart proposes minimum
requirements for the RWP program,
which must be adopted and
implemented by each RTA. This subpart
also proposes minimum requirements
for the RWP manual. Similar to the
relationship between the Agency Safety
Plan and the SMS required by the
PTASP regulation, the RWP manual
documents the mechanisms by which
the RTA will carry out its RWP program.
671.11 RWP Program
Section 671.11(a) proposes that each
RTA must adopt and implement an
RWP program designed to improve
transit worker safety and that this
program must be consistent with
Federal and state requirements.
Section 671.11(b) proposes that the
RWP program must include an RWP
manual, described further in proposed
section 671.13, and all of the RWP
program elements described in
proposed subpart D of this part.
Section 671.11(c) proposes that each
RTA must submit its RWP manual and
subsequent updates to its SSOA for
review and approval, as described in
proposed section 671.25.
671.13 RWP Manual
Section 671.13(a) proposes that the
RTA establish and maintain a separate,
dedicated manual. The creation of this
document as a separate, dedicated
manual reflects FTA’s expectation that
this manual will be a critical safety
component of an RTA’s rail program.
This proposal also reflects FTA’s belief
that separation from other manuals or
documents will grant the RTA greater
flexibility and responsiveness in
updating and amending the RWP
manual as needed.
Section 671.13(b) proposes that the
RWP manual must include the
terminology, abbreviations, and
acronyms used by the RTA to describe
its RWP program activities and
requirements. This proposal reflects
FTA’s expectation that RTAs will
continue use of, or, as necessary, create
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20611
standard terminology, abbreviations,
and acronyms used throughout the
agency in relation to RWP.
Section 671.13(c) proposes the list of
required elements that must be
documented in the RWP manual. The
proposed required elements of the
manual include all elements of the RWP
program required in subpart D of this
part and a definition of RTA and transit
worker responsibilities as described in
subpart C of this part. FTA also
proposes that the RWP manual must
document the training, qualification,
and supervision the RTA requires for
transit workers to access the track zone,
by labor category or type of work
performed. Finally, FTA proposes to
require the RWP manual to document
the processes and procedures for all
transit workers who may access the
track zone in the performance of their
work, including safety and oversight
personnel. In addition, FTA proposes
that procedures for SSOA personnel to
access the roadway must conform with
the SSOA’s risk-based inspection
program. By requiring an RWP manual
to contain certain elements, FTA’s
intent is to ensure that all critical
elements of an RWP program are
documented in one manual. FTA
expects this to reduce the potential for
conflicting RWP program directions and
provide a single authoritative source of
RWP program information.
Section 671.13(d) proposes that the
RWP manual must include or
incorporate by reference a track access
guide to support on-track safety. FTA
believes that a track access guide is a
critical element of on-track safety, as
discussed in each subsection below. As
FTA proposes that this guide must be
based on a physical survey of the track
geometry and condition of the track
system, FTA is proposing flexibility for
RTAs to choose to maintain this track
access guide separately from their RWP
manual to allow frequent updates as the
condition of the track system changes.
FTA proposes in section 671.13(d)(1)
that the track access guide includes
locations with limited, close, or no
clearance, including locations that have
size or access limitations. Locations
with size or access limitations may
include but are not limited to, alcoves,
recessed spaces, or other designated
places or areas of refuge or safety. FTA
understands that, although areas of
refuge or safety should not be used in
a way that limits access, such as being
used to store or otherwise house tools,
equipment, or materials, RTAs may use
some of these areas to store or ‘‘stage’’
items used to repair, maintain, or
inspect the roadway. FTA proposes
including these areas in the physical
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20612
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
survey to ensure roadway workers are
aware of any such areas with access
limitations.
Section 671.13(d)(2) proposes that the
track access guide must also identify
locations with increased rail vehicle or
on-track equipment braking
requirements.
Sections 671.13(d)(2), (3), (4), and (5)
propose that the track access guide must
identify areas with limited visibility,
including locations with reduced rail
transit operator visibility due to weather
conditions; curves with limited or no
visibility; locations with limited or no
visibility due to obstructions or
topography; and all portals with
restricted views. Finally, section
671.13(d)(6) and (7) propose that the
track access guide must identify
locations with heavy outside noise or
other environmental conditions that
impact on-track safety and any other
locations with access considerations.
In section 671.13(e), FTA proposes to
require that the RTA must completely
review and update its RWP manual at
least every two years. FTA proposes that
this includes updates to reflect current
conditions, lessons learned in
implementing the RWP program as
described in the manual, and
information provided by the SSOA and
FTA. FTA proposes that this review and
update occur within two years after the
SSOA’s initial approval of the RWP
manual and not at least every two years
thereafter.
FTA proposes a review and update
cycle of not less than every two years to
ensure that RWP manuals reflect current
RTA conditions, policies and
procedures, and lessons learned. This
cycle is intended to balance the critical
nature of this document and effort to
review and update the same. As the
track access guide must be included or
incorporated by reference in the RWP
manual, FTA’s proposal includes the
requirement that this complete review
and update will include the track access
guide, regardless of whether the guide is
maintained as a separate document from
the RWP manual. Further, in section
671.13(f), FTA requires RTAs to update
both the RWP manual and the track
access guide as soon as is practicable
when a change in RTA conditions
means either document does not reflect
current conditions.
Section 671.13(g) proposes that the
RTA must distribute the RWP manual to
all transit workers who access the
roadway and that the RTA distribute the
revised manual to all transit workers
who access the roadway after each
revision. For RTAs that decide to
maintain the track access guide
separately from the RWP manual, this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
proposal includes the requirement that
those RTAs distribute the track access
guide to all transit workers who access
the roadway and distribute the revised
track access guide to all transit workers
after each revision. FTA’s intent is to
ensure that this safety critical
information is disseminated to those
workers who access the roadway.
Subpart C—Responsibilities
FTA is proposing RWP
responsibilities for three distinct
entities: the RTA, transit workers, and
the SSOA.
671.21 Rail Transit Agency
Section 671.21 specifies
responsibilities for the RTA, including
establishing procedures and
requirements for equipment and
protection.
Section 671.21(a) proposes general
requirements for the RTA, the intent of
each is described below. Section
671.21(a)(1) proposes to require the RTA
to establish procedures to provide
ample time and determine appropriate
sight distance based on maximum
authorized track speeds. FTA’s
proposed definition for terms used in
this part can be found in proposed
section 671.5. As previously noted, it is
FTA’s intent with this proposal to
ensure that roadway workers receive
adequate time to move sufficiently clear
of moving vehicles or equipment
determined not only by the amount of
time needed to move physically off the
tracks but also by the amount of time
needed in that specific location to be
sufficiently clear of moving vehicles.
FTA’s proposals reflect the
expectation that RTAs include
considerations for roadway work group
size when making these determinations,
to ensure ample time for all workers to
be sufficiently clear of moving vehicles.
For example, if the nearest place of
safety is not sufficiently large to allow
the entire roadway work group to be
sufficiently clear of moving vehicles, the
RTA must include additional time for
members of the workgroup to access
another location clear of moving
vehicles.
Section 671.21(a)(2) proposes to
prohibit the use of individual rail transit
vehicle detection as the only form of
protection in the track zone. This
proposed prohibition reflects FTA’s
determination that a lone worker may
not be able to reliably detect
approaching rail transit vehicles or
equipment in ample time and, further,
that the safety risk associated with the
practice of individual rail transit vehicle
detection as the only form of protection
in the track zone is unacceptable. This
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proposed prohibition also reflects
public input to a September 2021
Request for Information (RFI) on transit
worker safety mitigations including
potential minimum safety standards for
RWP programs. Respondents generally
agreed that the use of individual
detection of rail transit vehicles as the
only method of RWP program did not
adequately address all hazards for
workers.
Sections 671.21(a)(3) and (4) propose
that the RTA must establish procedures
to provide job safety briefings to all
transit workers who enter a track zone
to perform work whenever a rule
violation is observed. This is responsive
both to FTA’s determination that job
safety briefings are a critical component
of roadway safety and to RFI
respondents’ assertion that poor quality
job safety briefings at different
operational and organizational levels
may contribute to safety risk for workers
on the roadway.
Section 671.21(a)(5) proposes that the
RTA must establish procedures to
provide transit workers with the right to
challenge and refuse in good faith any
assignment based on on-track safety
concerns and resolve such challenges
and refusals promptly and equitably.
This is often called a ‘‘good faith safety
challenge’’ or ‘‘good faith challenge.’’
FTA’s proposed good faith challenge
process described in section 671.37 is
modelled on and generally consistent
with the existing FRA good faith
challenge. FTA understands that many
RTAs already implement a version of
this procedure and that their version
may encompass more than just on-track
safety concerns. FTA is not proposing
that these RTAs to revise their existing
procedure and process, as long as they
meet the minimums specified here.
Section 671.21(a)(6) proposes that the
RTA must establish procedures to
require the reporting of unsafe acts,
unsafe conditions, and near-misses on
the roadway to the Transit Worker
Safety Reporting Program. This proposal
creates additional safety reporting
requirements for an RTA’s Transit
Worker Safety Reporting Program
established under FTA’s existing PTASP
regulation (49 CFR 673.23(b)). FTA
proposes that an RTA’s Transit Worker
Safety Reporting program must include
mandatory reporting of three major
categories of safety concerns on the
roadway (unsafe acts, unsafe conditions,
and near-misses). This proposed
expansion of an RTA’s safety reporting
program reflects the safety critical
nature of information related to RWP.
Section 671.21(a)(7) proposes to
require the RTA to ensure that all transit
workers who must enter a track zone to
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
perform work understand, are qualified
in, and comply with the RWP program.
This proposal reflects industry practice
and is intended to ensure that the RWP
program is sufficiently broad in
application to address all transit
workers who may access a track zone.
Section 671.21(b) requires the RTA to
establish requirements for on-track
safety, including equipment and
protection. This proposal reflects
industry practice. Section 671.21(b)(1)
proposes to require the RTA to establish
requirements for equipment transit
workers must have in order to access the
roadway or track zone. In deference to
the specific equipment different job
functions may require, FTA specifies
that the RTA must establish these
requirements by labor category. FTA’s
intent is to ensure that RTAs establish
minimum basic requirements for
equipment and to encourage RTAs to
consider which positions at their agency
may require additional equipment and
address those requirements accordingly.
Section 671.21(b)(2) proposes to
require RTAs to establish requirements
for credentials that transit workers must
display while on the roadway or in the
track zone. FTA’s examples include a
badge, wristband, or RWP card, but
RTAs may identify alternate forms of
credentialing. FTA proposes that RTAs
must also establish a requirement for
display of credentials such that they are
visible when on the roadway or in the
track zone. A physical indication of an
individual’s qualification to access the
roadway or the track zone is reflective
of industry best practices.
Section 671.21(b)(3) proposes to
require the RTA to establish
requirements for on-track safety,
including protections for emergency
response personnel who must access the
roadway or the track zone. FTA is
proposing this to support the safety of
emergency personnel who need to
access the roadway or track zone in the
performance of their job duties.
Section 671.21(b)(4) proposes to
require the RTA to establish protections
for multiple roadway work groups
within a common area in a track zone.
This proposal is responsive to NTSB
recommendations. FTA’s proposal
reflects its expectation that these
protections include, at a minimum,
information such as, when multiple
work groups are present, who is
considered the roadway worker in
charge, whether one job safety briefing
is sufficient or multiple job safety
briefings must occur, and how track
access is granted and released.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
671.23
Transit Worker
Section 671.23 proposes
responsibilities for the transit worker.
FTA is proposing specific
responsibilities for transit workers in
part to respond to common industry
observations that, when regulations
apply only directly to the transit agency,
some transit agencies experience
difficulty ensuring compliance from the
workforce. FTA is also proposing
specific responsibilities for transit
workers as a reflection of the key role
the individual transit worker plays in
ensuring on-track safety. This approach
is consistent with FRA’s requirement for
individual roadway workers in 49 CFR
214.313.
Section 671.23(a) proposes to require
transit workers to follow the
requirements of the RTA’s RWP
program as it applies to their position
and labor category.
Section 671.23(b) proposes to prohibit
transit workers from fouling the track
until they have received appropriate
permissions and redundant protections
have been established as specified in the
RWP manual.
Section 671.23(c) proposes to require
transit workers to understand the
protections that they will use for their
on-track safety while performing the
specific task that requires access to the
roadway or track zone. Further, transit
workers must acknowledge these
protections in writing before they access
the roadway or track zone.
Section 671.23(d) proposes to permit
a transit worker to refuse to foul the
track if the worker makes a good faith
determination that the instructions to be
applied at a job location do not comply
with the RTA’s RWP program or are
otherwise unsafe. This proposal is the
companion to proposed section
671.21(a)(5), which requires RTAs to
provide transit workers the right to
challenge and refuse in good faith any
assignment based on on-track safety
concerns.
Similarly, section 671.23(e) proposes
to require transit workers to report
unsafe acts and conditions and nearmisses related to the RWP program as
part of the RTA’s Transit Worker Safety
Reporting Program. This proposal is the
companion to proposed section
671.21(a)(6).
671.25
State Safety Oversight Agency
Section 671.25 proposes
responsibilities for the SSOA. FTA
proposes to require the SSOA to fulfill
these responsibilities for every RTA
under their jurisdiction. Although not
explicitly stated in this text, SSOAs who
oversee an RTA that operates in a
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20613
location that places the RTA under the
jurisdiction of two or more SSOAs must
work cooperatively with the other
SSOA(s) having jurisdiction as required
under 49 CFR 674.15.
Section 671.25(a) proposes to require
the SSOA to review and approve the
RWP manual and any subsequent
updates for each RTA within their
jurisdiction. This is reflective of the
SSOA’s primary safety oversight
responsibility for such RTAs.
Section 671.25(a)(1) proposes to
require that SSOA approve RWP
program elements within 90 calendar
days of receipt of the program. FTA’s
proposal reflects its expectation that this
amount of time will allow SSOAs to
complete full and detailed reviews of all
program elements commensurate to the
critical role the RWP program plays in
ensuring transit worker safety. FTA
encourages SSOAs and RTAs to
collaborate early and often in the
development of the initial RWP program
to ensure that (1) the SSOA and RTA
can meet their deadlines and (2) the
RWP program developed is sufficient to
ensure transit worker safety.
Section 671.25(a)(2) proposes to
require the SSOA to submit all
approved RWP program elements for
each RTA in its jurisdiction, and any
subsequent updates, to FTA within 30
calendar days of when the SSOA
approves those elements. FTA is
proposing this to ensure it can validate
these safety critical elements.
Section 671.25(b) proposes to require
the SSOA to update its Program
Standard to explain the role of the
SSOA in overseeing the RTA’s
execution of its RWP program. FTA
believes that, as a key safety element of
an SSOA’s oversight program, the RWP
program must be reflected in the
SSOA’s Program Standard. FTA
encourages SSOAs and RTAs to work
collaboratively on this update in
conjunction with the recommended
collaboration on the initial RWP
program. FTA is proposing this
approach to help SSOAs leverage RTA
experience and vice versa, ultimately
reducing the need for a prolonged RWP
program review and revision process
and strengthening both the RWP
program and the SSOA’s RWP program
oversight.
Section 671.25(c)(1) proposes that the
SSOA conduct an annual audit of the
RTA’s compliance with its RWP
program. FTA’s proposal includes the
requirement that the audit include all
required RWP program elements and be
conducted for each RTA the SSOA
oversees. FTA expects SSOAs to
conduct these audits independently
from any analogous RTA internal audit
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20614
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
or compliance process. The proposal is
responsive to NTSB recommendations
to require SSOAs to ensure RTAs meet
the safety requirements for roadway
workers.
Section 671.25(c)(2) proposes to
require the SSOA to issue a report with
any findings and recommendations
arising from the audit. FTA proposes
that this report must include, at a
minimum, (1) an analysis of the
effectiveness of the RWP program; (2)
recommendations for improvements, if
necessary or appropriate; and (3)
corrective action plan(s), if necessary or
appropriate. FTA also proposes that the
RTA must be given an opportunity to
comment on any findings and
recommendations. In making this
proposal, FTA expects the SSOA to
exercise judgment and incorporate
changes to the findings or
recommendations when presented with
errors of fact or other reasonable
requests from the RTA. FTA believes
these audit reports will be a valuable
tool for communicating the results of
the SSOA’s audit in a form that supports
communication of these results to the
RTA and, ultimately, resolution of any
findings and incorporation of any
recommendations as appropriate.
Regarding the proposed requirement
that SSO audit reports of the RWP
program include corrective action plans
if necessary or appropriate, FTA
proposes that SSOAs and RTAs will
follow processes established in part 674
for requiring, developing, approving,
and executing corrective action plan(s)
related to the RWP program audit.
FTA proposes that the analysis of the
effectiveness of the RWP program
included in the report must include a
review of (1) all RWP-related events
over the period covered by the audit; (2)
all RWP-related reports made to the
Transit Worker Safety Reporting
Program over the period covered by the
audit; (3) all documentation of instances
where a transit worker(s) has challenged
and refused in good faith any
assignment based on on-track safety
concerns and documentation on the
resolution; (4) an assessment of the
adequacy of the track access guide
required in section 671.13(d), including
whether the guide reflects current track
geometry and conditions; (5) a review of
training and qualification records for
transit workers who must enter a track
zone to perform work; (6) a
representative sample of written job
safety briefing confirmations as
described in sections 671.33(b)(2) and
(3); and (7) a review of the RWP
compliance monitoring program as
described in section 671.43.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
Subpart D—Required RWP Program
Elements
observed violations of on-track safety
procedures.
FTA is proposing the following
minimum RWP program element
requirements: roadway worker in
charge, job safety briefings,
requirements for lone workers, good
faith safety challenges, risk-based
redundant protections, an RWP training
and qualification program, and an RWP
compliance monitoring program.
671.33 Job Safety Briefing
Section 671.33 proposes specific
requirements for job safety briefings.
This proposal is responsive to NTSB
safety recommendations about
establishing requirements for job safety
briefings and is consistent with FRA
requirements.
Section 671.33(a) reiterates the
proposed requirements that the RTA
must ensure the roadway worker in
charge provides any roadway worker
who must foul a track with a job safety
briefing prior to fouling the track, every
time the roadway worker fouls the track.
Section 671.33(b) proposes the
required minimum elements, as
appropriate, of the job safety briefing
that the roadway worker in charge must
provide. FTA proposes the ‘‘as
appropriate’’ language because not all of
the elements may be relevant to each
rail transit system. This proposal
includes (1) a discussion of the nature
of the work to be performed and the
characteristics of the work, and includes
work plans for instances where multiple
roadway worker groups are working
within a single area. FTA expects this to
also include any relevant information
for multiple roadway worker groups
working in adjacent areas; (2) a
discussion of the established working
limits; (3) identification of any hazards
involved in performing the work; (4)
information on how track safety is being
provided for each track identified to be
fouled and identification and location of
key personnel, such as a watchperson
and the roadway worker in charge; (5)
instructions for each on-track safety
procedure to be followed, including
appropriate flags and flag placement,
placement; (6) roles and responsibilities
for communication for all transit
workers involved in the work,
responsive to NTSB recommendations;
(7) safety information about any
adjacent track and identification of the
roadway maintenance machines or ontrack equipment that may foul adjacent
tracks; (8) information on how to access
the roadway worker in charge and
instructions for alternative procedures
in the event that the roadway worker in
charge becomes inaccessible to members
of the roadway work group; (9) personal
protective equipment required for the
work to be performed; (10) designated
place(s) of safety; and (11) the means for
determining how ample time will be
provided.
FTA’s intent is that the proposed
discussion of the nature and
characteristics of the work includes any
relevant information for multiple
671.31
Roadway Worker in Charge
Section 671.31(a) proposes that the
RTA must designate one roadway
worker in charge for each roadway work
group whose duties require fouling a
track. FTA proposes that the roadway
worker in charge must be qualified
under the training and qualification
program specified in proposed section
671.41 and is responsible for the ontrack safety for all members of the
roadway work group. This means that
FTA expects the individual assigned as
the roadway worker in charge to serve
only the function of maintaining ontrack safety for all members of their
roadway work group and to perform no
other unrelated job function. RTAs may
designate a general roadway worker in
charge or may designate a roadway
worker in charge specifically for a
particular work situation.
Section 671.31(b) proposes that the
RTA must ensure the roadway worker in
charge provides a job safety briefing to
all roadway workers before any member
of the roadway work group fouls a track.
Additionally, FTA proposes that the
roadway worker in charge must provide
an updated job safety briefing before the
on-track safety procedures change
during the work period and
immediately after any observed
violation of on-track safety procedures
before track zone work continues.
FTA understands that emergencies
may occur such that roadway workers in
charge may not be able to provide
updated job safety briefings of changes
to on-track safety. Therefore, FTA
proposes section 671.31(b)(2) to specify
that, in the event of an emergency, any
roadway worker who cannot receive the
updated job safety briefing in advance of
a change to on-track safety procedures,
must be removed from the roadway and
must not return until on-track safety is
re-established, and they have been given
an updated job safety briefing.
FTA’s proposals regarding job safety
briefings largely reflect industry practice
and propose explicitly requiring
updated job safety briefings to address
common situations where the on-track
safety procedures change during a work
period and to immediately respond to
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
roadway worker groups working in
adjacent areas. The proposals that the
job safety briefing include instructions
for each on-track safety procedure to be
followed and the role and
responsibilities for communication for
all transit workers involved in the work
are responsive to NTSB
recommendations.
Section 671.33(b)(10) proposes that
the job safety briefing must identify
designated place(s) of safety. FTA
intends that the identified designated
place(s) of safety will be sufficient for
the number of transit workers in the
roadway work group. This proposal
reflects FTA’s understanding that such
designated places of safety must be
accessible and clear of debris, tools,
equipment, or any other material that
hinders the ability to access and occupy
the space. While not part of the
proposal, FTA’s expectation is that,
where multiple work groups occupy
overlapping or adjacent work locations,
the associated roadway workers in
charge coordinate to ensure their job
safety briefings identify designated
place(s) of safety sufficient for the
combined number of transit workers in
the roadway work group.
Section 671.33(c) proposes that, to
complete a job safety briefing, the
roadway worker in charge must confirm
that each roadway worker understands
the on-track safety procedures and
instructions, each roadway worker
acknowledges the briefing and accepts
the required personal protective
equipment in writing, and the roadway
worker in charge verifies in writing each
roadway worker’s understanding and
written acknowledgment of the briefing.
Section 671.33(d) proposes that, if
there is any change in the scope of work
or roadway work group after the initial
job safety briefing, or if a violation of
on-track safety is observed, a follow-up
job safety briefing must be conducted.
This follow-up safety briefing must be
completed before any member of the
work group reenters the roadway.
671.35 Lone Worker
FTA proposes section 671.35 to
address common industry and NTSB
concerns and recommendations about
the practice of permitting a single
person to foul the track. Specifically,
FTA proposes to allow RTAs to
authorize lone workers to perform
limited duties that require fouling a
track only under the following
circumstances: (1) the lone worker must
be qualified as both as a roadway
worker in charge and as a lone worker
following the RTA’s RWP training and
qualification program; (2) the lone
worker may perform only routine
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
inspection or minor tasks and move
from one location to another, may only
access locations defined in the track
access guide as appropriate for lone
workers, and may not use power tools;
and (3) the lone worker may not use
individual rail transit vehicle detection
as the only form of on-track safety. The
proposal that lone workers may not use
individual rail transit vehicle detection
is a form of on-track safety is responsive
to NTSB recommendations on lone
workers. These proposed restrictions
reflect the exponential increase in safety
risk presented by workers fouling the
track as individuals rather than as part
of a roadway work group while
respecting that certain job functions
may be performed safely under these
restrictions as a lone worker.
Section 671.35(b) proposes that each
lone worker must communicate with a
supervisor or other designated transit
worker to receive an on-track safety
briefing consistent with proposed
section 671.33(b) prior to fouling the
track. FTA proposes that this briefing
must include a discussion of the
planned work activities and the
procedures they will use to establish ontrack safety. FTA also proposes that the
lone worker must acknowledge and
document the job safety briefing in
writing.
671.37 Good Faith Safety Challenge
Section 671.37(a) proposes that the
RTA must document its procedures that
it provides to roadway workers the right
to challenge and refuse in good faith any
RWP assignment they believe is unsafe
or would violate the RTA’s RWP
program. FTA proposes in section
671.37(b) that this written procedure
must include methods or processes to
ensure prompt and equitable resolution
of any challenges and refusals made.
Section 671.37(c) proposes that the
written procedure must require the
roadway worker to provide a
description of the safety concern
regarding on-track safety and that the
roadway worker issuing a good faith
safety challenge must remain clear of
the roadway or track zone until the
challenge and refusal is resolved. This
process reflects common industry
practice and provides a mechanism for
transit workers, who often are the most
familiar with the particular needs and
hazards related to their specific job
tasks, to appropriately address unsafe
situations.
671.39 Risk-Based Redundant
Protections
Section 671.39(a) proposes
requirements for RTAs to identify and
provide redundant protections for each
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20615
category of work roadway workers
perform on the roadway or track. This
section also proposes to require the
establishment of redundant protections
to ensure on-track safety for multiple
roadway work groups within a common
area. This proposal is responsive to
NTSB recommendations for FTA to
require the use of redundant
protections.
Section 671.39(b) proposes that the
RTA must use the appropriate Safety
Risk Management of its SMS established
in part 673 to assess safety risk and
establish mitigations in the form of
redundant protections. This section
proposes that the RTA must use the
methods and processes established
under part 673 to establish redundant
protections for each category of work
performed by roadway workers on the
rail transit system, including workers, to
the extent that lone workers are
permitted under the agency’s RWP
program. This proposal reflects FTA’s
adoption of the principles of SMS as the
mechanism for ensuring transit safety.
In section 671.39(b)(1), FTA proposes
that this safety risk assessment must be
consistent with the RTA’s Agency
Safety Plan and the SSOA’s Program
Standard. In section 671.39(b)(2), FTA is
proposing that RTAs may supplement
the safety risk assessment with
engineering assessments, inputs from
the Safety Assurance process
established in part 673, the results of
safety event investigations, and other
safety risk management strategies and
approaches.
Section 671.39(b)(3) proposes that the
RTA must review and update the safety
risk assessment at least every two years.
This proposal is intended to ensure that
the safety risk assessment reflects
current conditions, lessons learned from
safety events, actions the RTA has taken
to address reports of unsafe acts and
conditions and near-misses, and the
results of the agency’s monitoring of
redundant protection effectiveness.
Section 671.39(b)(4) proposes that the
SSOA may identify and require the RTA
to implement alternate redundant
protections based on the RTA’s unique
operating characteristics and
capabilities. These redundant
protections may supplant or be
implemented alongside the RTA’s
identified redundant protections.
Section 671.39(c) proposes that the
RTA must identify redundant
protections for roadway workers
performing different categories of work
on the roadway and within track zones.
This flexibility is intended to reflect the
wide range of activities conducted on
the roadway and to provide the
opportunity for RTAs to ‘‘right size’’
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20616
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
protections based on the safety risk
associated with different categories of
work. This proposal would require
RTAs to establish and layer redundant
protections commensurate with the
work being performed. FTA proposes
that RTAs, at a minimum, identify
redundant protections for the following
categories of work, as appropriate: (1)
roadway workers moving from one track
zone to another; (2) roadway workers
performing minor tasks; (3) roadway
workers conducting visual inspections;
(4) roadway workers using hand tools,
machines, or equipment to test track
system components or conduct nonvisual inspections; (5) roadway workers
using hand tools, machines, or
equipment in performing maintenance,
construction, or repairs; and (6) lone
workers, to the extent that lone workers
are permitted by the RTA’s RWP
program, accessing the roadway or track
zone or performing visual inspections or
minor tasks.
Section 671.39(d)(1) proposes that
redundant protections may be
procedural or physical. FTA has
proposed definitions for each kind of
protection as it is likely that RTAs will
use a mix of procedural and physical
redundant protections to ensure ontrack safety. Allowing both physical and
procedural redundant protections is
responsive to RFI respondents, the
majority of whom recommended that
FTA allow both physical and redundant
protections for workers on the roadway.
Section 671.39(d)(2) proposes
example redundant protections. FTA is
not proposing an explicit set of
redundant protections; rather, FTA
proposes that RTAs and SSOAs may use
any of the redundant protections listed
in this paragraph or identify, using the
agency’s Safety Risk Management
process, redundant protections suitable
to the specific circumstance under
which they will be used.
Section 671.39(d)(3) proposes that
redundant protections for lone workers
must include, at a minimum, foul time
or an equivalent protection approved by
the SSOA.
671.41 RWP Training and
Qualifications
Section 671.41(a) proposes the general
requirement for an RTA to adopt an
RWP training program. This proposal is
responsive to NTSB recommendations.
Section 671.41(a)(1) proposes that the
training program must address all
transit workers responsible for on-track
safety by position. This proposal
includes, but is not limited to, roadway
workers, operation control center
personnel, rail transit vehicle operators,
operators of on-track equipment and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
roadway maintenance machines, and
any other transit workers who play a
role in providing on-track safety or
fouling a track for the performance of
work as transit workers who must be
addressed by the RWP training program.
Section 671.41(a)(2) proposes that a
transit worker must complete the RWP
training program for the relevant
position before the RTA may assign that
transit worker to perform the duties of
a roadway worker; to oversee or
supervise access to the track zone from
the operations control center; or to
operate vehicles, on-track equipment,
and roadway maintenance machines on
the rail transit system.
Section 671.41(a)(3) proposes that the
RWP training program must address
RWP hazard recognition and mitigation.
This proposal is responsive to an NTSB
recommendation to require initial and
recurring training for roadway workers
in hazard recognition and mitigation.
This section also specifies that the
training program must address lessons
learned through the results of
compliance testing, near-miss reports,
reports of unsafe acts or conditions, and
feedback received on the training
program.
Section 671.41(a)(4) proposes that the
RWP training program must include
both initial and refresher training by
position and that refresher training must
occur every two years at a minimum.
Section 671.41(a)(5) proposes that the
RTA must review and update its RWP
program not less than every two years.
FTA proposes that this includes
incorporating lessons learned in
implementing the RWP program and
information provided by the SSOA and
FTA. FTA also proposes that the review
and update process must include an
opportunity for roadway worker
involvement, to ensure potentially
valuable safety information from
workers executing tasks on the roadway
can be collected and incorporated into
the safety training program.
Section 671.41(b) proposes the
required elements of the RWP training
program. FTA is proposing these
elements based on industry best
practices and best practices for adult
learners.
Section 671.41(b)(1) proposes that the
RWP training program must include
interactive training that provides the
opportunity for workers to ask the RWP
trainer questions and for workers and
trainers to raise and discuss RWP issues.
FTA proposes that the initial training
must include experience in a
representative field setting such that the
initial training may not be classroomonly. FTA also proposes that both the
initial and refresher training must
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
include worker demonstrations and
trainer assessments of the worker’s
ability to comply with RWP
instructions.
Section 671.41(c) proposes minimum
contents for the RWP training program.
FTA proposes that the RWP training
program include at a minimum: (1) how
to interpret and use the RTA’s RWP
manual; (2) how to use the RTA’s good
faith challenge process; (3) how to make
reports on unsafe acts, unsafe
conditions, and near misses through the
RTA’s Transit Worker Safety Reporting
Program and the mandatory duty to
make such reports; (4) track zone
recognition and an understanding of the
space around the tracks within which
on-track safety is required, including
use of the track access guide; (5) the
functions and responsibilities of all
transit workers involved in on-track
safety, by position; (6) proper
compliance with on-track safety
instructions; (7) signals and directions
given by watchpersons, and the proper
procedures to implement upon
receiving a rail transit vehicle approach
warning from a watchperson; (8) the
hazards associated with working on or
near rail transit tracks, including
traction power, if applicable; (9) rules
and procedures for redundant
protections identified under section
671.37 and how they are applied to
RWP; and (10) how to safely cross rail
transit tracks in yards and on the
mainline. These minimum proposed
elements reflect industry best practice
and provide a baseline for safety on the
roadway.
Section 671.41(d) proposes
specialized minimum training and
qualifications for transit workers with
additional responsibilities for on-track
safety. FTA is proposing additional
training for transit workers serving the
function of watchpersons, flag persons,
lone workers, roadway workers in
charge, and any other transit workers
with responsibilities for establishing,
supervising, and monitoring on track
safety. FTA proposes that this training
must cover the content and application
of the additional RWP program
requirements carried out by the relevant
position(s). FTA also proposes that this
additional training must also address
the relevant physical characteristics of
the RTA’s system where on-track safety
may be established.
Similar to the general RWP training
program, FTA proposes that this
specialized training must include
demonstration and assessment of the
transit worker’s ability to perform these
additional responsibilities. FTA
proposes that refresher training on these
additional responsibilities must occur at
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
least every two years. This proposal
reflects the critical safety role these
transit workers have in establishing,
supervising, and monitoring on track
safety.
Section 671.41(e) proposes that the
RTA must ensure that those transit
workers providing RWP training are
qualified and have active RWP
certification at the RTA. This proposal
is intended to ensure that RTAs are
providing effective RWP training.
Section 671.41(e) further proposes that,
at a minimum, the RTA must consider:
(1) a trainer’s experience and knowledge
of effective training techniques in the
chosen learning environment; (2) a
trainer’s experience with the RTA RWP
program; (3) a trainer’s knowledge of the
RTA RWP rules, operations, and
operating environment, including
applicable operating rules; and (4) a
trainer’s knowledge of the training
requirements specified in this part.
FTA’s intent with this proposal is to
ensure that trainers providing RWP
program training have the capacity to
deliver effective training in the learning
environment used at the agency; are
experienced with the specifics of the
RTA’s individual RWP program, the
RTA’s rules, operations, and operating
environment; and are knowledgeable
about FTA’s requirements for RWP
program training.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
671.43 RWP Compliance Monitoring
Program
Section 671.43 proposes that the RTA
must develop and implement a program
to monitor its own compliance with the
requirements specified in its RWP
program. This monitoring program is
consistent with Safety Assurance
principles and is intended to ensure
consistent and effective RWP program
implementation. FTA proposes that this
program must include, at a minimum,
inspections, observations, and audits
consistent with the safety performance
monitoring and measurement practices
established in the RTA’s Agency Safety
Plan and the SSOA’s Program Standard.
Section 671.43(b)(1) further proposes
that the RTA must provide monthly
reports to the SSOA documenting the
RTA’s compliance with and sufficiency
of the RWP program and section
671.43(b)(2) specifies that the RTA must
provide an annual briefing to the
Accountable Executive and the Board of
Directors, or equivalent entity, regarding
the performance of the RWP program
and any identified deficiencies
requiring corrective action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
Subpart E—Recordkeeping
671.51 Recordkeeping
FTA proposes recordkeeping
requirements related to the RWP
program in keeping with the
recordkeeping requirements established
in part 673, which requires transit
agencies to maintain document related
to SMS implementation and the results
of SMS processes and activities. As
discussed above, an RWP program is a
key element of Safety Risk Management
and Safety Assurance in an RTA’s SMS.
Section 671.51(a) proposes that the
RTA must maintain the documents that
set forth its RWP program, documents
related to the implementation of its
RWP program, and documentation of
the results from the procedures,
processes, assessments, training, and
activities specified in this part for the
RWP program.
Section 671.51(b) proposes that the
RTA must maintain records of its
compliance with this requirement,
including transit worker RWP training
and refresher training records, for a
minimum of three years after the
individual record is created.
Finally, Section 671.51(c) specifies
that the RTA must make these
documents available upon request by
FTA or other Federal entity, or an SSOA
having jurisdiction.
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’), as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563 (‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review’’) and Executive
Order 14094 (‘‘Modernizing Regulatory
Review’’), directs Federal agencies to
assess the benefits and costs of
regulations, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
when possible, and to consider
economic, environmental, and
distributional effects. It also directs the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to review significant regulatory
actions, including regulations with
annual economic effects of $200 million
or more. OMB has determined that the
proposed rule is not significant within
the meaning of Executive Order 12866
and has not reviewed it under that
order.
Overview and Need for Regulation
FTA has determined that unsafe
practices and conditions place rail
transit workers at risk of being killed or
seriously injured while performing work
on the roadway. According to data
collected by FTA, roadway worker
accidents have caused more transit
worker fatalities than any other type of
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20617
safety event. Since 1994, 52 rail transit
workers have been killed and over 200
workers have experienced major injuries
from roadway safety events, primarily
from collisions with rail transit vehicles,
falls, and electrocution. From January 1,
2008, to October 31, 2022, 22 workers
have been killed and 120 workers
seriously injured in roadway accidents.
Currently, there are no Federal
regulations or standards governing rail
transit worker RWP, despite
recommendations from NTSB and
TRACS.
The proposed rule would establish
RWP program standards for rail transit
agencies in all states. The rule would
establish minimum baseline standards
and require risk-based redundant
protections, defined as protections
outside of the employee’s individual
ability to detect a train and move to a
place of safety, such as shunts or
derailers, for rail transit roadway
workers occupying the rail roadway
during hours of operations. The rule
would require transit agencies to do the
following:
1. Set minimum standards for RWP
program elements, including an RWP
manual and track access guide.
2. Meet requirements for on-track
safety and supervision, job safety
briefings, good faith safety challenges,
and reporting unsafe acts and
conditions and near-misses.
3. Develop and implement risk-based
redundant protections for workers.
4. Establish RWP training,
qualification, and compliance
monitoring activities.
The proposed rule would apply to
RTAs in the SSO program, SSOAs, and
rail transit workers who access the
roadway to perform work. SSOAs would
oversee and enforce FTA’s RWP
program requirements.
Baseline and Analytical Approach
FTA considered three regulatory
options while developing the proposed
rule. The key distinction between the
three options is the use of redundant
protections.
Option 1: FTA would require RTAs to
perform a risk analysis to determine
what types of redundant protections
must be used in addition to the baseline
RWP program.
Option 2: FTA would establish
requirements for an RWP program but
would not mandate the use of
redundant protections.
Option 3: FTA would mandate the use
of standard physical redundant
protections to protect workers when
accessing the roadway in additions to
the baseline RWP program.
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20618
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
To assess the effects of the three
regulatory options, FTA analyzed
roadway worker injuries and fatalities
outside California from January 1, 2008,
to September 19, 2020 (12.7 years). The
analysis excludes California because the
state established RWP safety standards
in 2016.2 Agencies reported 97 injuries
and 20 fatalities, for an annual average
of 7.6 injuries and 1.6 fatalities. FTA
used the annual averages as a baseline
rate for fatalities and injuries in the
absence of the proposed rule.
To estimate benefits and costs of the
proposed rule, FTA used a ten-year
analysis period from 2023–2032. All
dollar amounts listed are in 2020
dollars. To estimate labor costs
associated with meeting requirements,
FTA used occupational wage data from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of May
2020 for the ‘‘Urban Transit Systems’’
industry (North American Industry
Classification System code 485100).3
FTA used median hourly wages as a
basis for the estimated labor costs,
multiplied by 1.62 to account for
employer benefits.4
Benefits
Transit subject-matter experts
working with FTA reviewed injuries
and fatalities reported in the NTD to
determine if the regulatory options
would have prevented them. FTA then
calculated the average annual number of
preventable injuries and fatalities to
estimate the benefits of each regulatory
option. One source of uncertainty for
the analysis is that FTA does not have
information on the RWP programs or
protections that agencies may have
adopted after the accidents. As a result,
the analysis may slightly overestimate
the benefits (and the associated costs) of
the regulatory options.
Table 1 compares the average number
of preventable injuries and fatalities for
each regulatory option. Option 1 would
result in an average annual reduction of
2.37 injuries and 1.18 fatalities. Option
2 results in an average annual reduction
of 1.34 injuries and 0.87 fatalities.
Option 3 results in an average annual
reduction of 3.87 injuries and 1.42
fatalities.
TABLE 1—AVERAGE ANNUAL PREVENTABLE INJURIES AND FATALITIES, 2008 TO 2020
Item
Option 1
Preventable Injuries ...................................................................................................
Preventable Fatalities ................................................................................................
To determine the monetized values
for prevented fatalities and injuries,
FTA used DOT’s value of $11.6 million
for a fatality and the KABCO Scale value
of $210,000 for an injury with ‘‘Severity
Unknown.’’ 5
Option 2
2.37
1.18
Over the 10-year analysis period, the
undiscounted benefits for Option 1 are
$142.3 million, and the annualized
benefits are $13.7 million at a 2 percent
discount rate, discounted to 2023 (Table
2). For Option 2, the undiscounted
Option 3
1.34
0.87
3.87
1.42
benefits are $103.5 million, with
annualized benefits of $10 million. For
Option 3, the undiscounted benefits are
$173 million, with annualized benefits
of $16.6 million.
TABLE 2—BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED RULE
[2023–2032]
Benefits
(2023 to 2032)
Undiscounted .............................................................................................................
Annualized (2% Discount Rate) ................................................................................
Costs
Agencies are expected to incur startup and ongoing costs to implement
RWP requirements. While some costs
vary by regulatory option, many of the
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
$142,311,760
13,678,562
$103,532,044
9,951,177
$172,931,886
16,621,673
costs are fixed. Table 3 summarizes
costs of the provisions over the 10-year
analysis period. The largest fixed cost is
for the Roadway Worker Protection
Training program, which has estimated
costs of $46 million. The largest
difference in costs among the regulatory
options stems from the Minimum
Controls and Limitations (redundant
worker protections) requirement, which
has costs ranging from $0 for Option 2
to $118 million for Option 3.
TABLE 3—TEN-YEAR COSTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE
[2023–2032]
Requirement
Option 1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
RWP Program ............................................................................................................
RWP Manual ..............................................................................................................
Rail System Responsibilities .....................................................................................
2 Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California (2016). ‘‘General Order No. 175–A: Rules
and Regulations Governing Roadway Worker
Protection Provided by Rail Transit Agencies and
Rail Fixed Guideway Systems.’’ https://docs.cpuc.
ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M159/K905/
159905345.pdf.
3 Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). ‘‘May 2020
National Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates: United States: NAICS 485000—Transit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
$911,728
51,656
152,466
and Ground Passenger Transportation.’’ https://
www.bls.gov/oes/2020/may/naics3_485000.htm.
4 Multiplier derived using Bureau of Labor
Statistics data on employer costs for employee
compensation in December 2022 (https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.htm). Employer
costs for state and local government workers
averaged $57.60 an hour, with $35.69 for wages and
$21.95 for benefit costs. To estimate full costs from
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Option 2
$911,728
51,656
152,466
Option 3
$911,728
51,656
152,466
wages, one would use a multiplier of $57.60/$21.95,
or 1.62.
5 U.S. Department of Transportation (2022).
‘‘Departmental Guidance on Valuation of a
Statistical Life in Economic Analysis.’’ https://
www.transportation.gov/office-policy/
transportation-policy/revised-departmentalguidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-ineconomic-analysis.
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20619
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—TEN-YEAR COSTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE—Continued
[2023–2032]
Requirement
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Employee Responsibilities .........................................................................................
Job Safety Briefing ....................................................................................................
Minimum Controls and Limitations ............................................................................
Roadway Worker Protection Training ........................................................................
Risk Assessment for Redundant Protections ............................................................
Employee Injury and Illness Program & Records .....................................................
Near Miss Reporting Program & Records .................................................................
Recordkeeping ...........................................................................................................
5,165,600
2,418
59,138,560
46,041,229
118,910
356,730
2,616,020
258,280
5,165,600
2,418
0
46,065,170
0
356,730
2,616,020
258,280
5,165,600
2,418
118,277,120
46,065,170
118,91
356,730
2,616,020
258,280
Total Costs .........................................................................................................
114,813,598
55,508,069
176,976,098
RWP Programs
RTAs would incur costs to develop
and implement programs for ROW
workers if they do not already have
formal standalone programs. FTA
estimates that 33 of the 55 RTAs outside
California (60 percent) already have
formal standalone programs, based on
industry responses to FTA Safety
Advisory 14–1,6 and that 26 of the 33
RTAs already monitor the effectiveness
of the programs.
For the remaining 22 RTAs (40
percent), FTA estimates that an RTA
would need an average of 96 labor hours
to develop and implement a formal
standalone RWP program, plus 40 hours
per year to monitor the program’s
effectiveness. The 40-hour estimate also
applies to the 5 RTAs that already have
programs but do not monitor their
effectiveness. FTA assumes that the
work is performed by a First-Line
Supervisor of Mechanics, Installers, and
Repairers with a median wage rate of
$58.70 per hour. The program
requirements have estimated one-time
costs of $232,452 and annual recurring
costs of $67,928 (Table 4).
TABLE 4—RWP PROGRAM COSTS
[Options 1–3]
Requirement
RWP Program
RWP Program
SSOA Review
RWP Program
One-time costs
Recurring costs
Establishment ......................................................................................................................
Effectiveness Monitoring .....................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................
Response to SSOA Comments ..........................................................................................
$51,656
0
129,140
51,656
..............................
$67,928
..............................
..............................
Total ......................................................................................................................................................
232,452
67,928
RWP Training Programs
The proposed rule would require
agencies to establish initial and
refresher training for roadway workers.
FTA subject matter experts estimated
resources needed for transit agencies to
develop and implement the programs.
FTA assumes that initial training and
refresher trainings for roadway workers
require 4.5 hours to complete per
employee, training for all RTA
employees requires 1 hour, and training
for lone workers requires 8 hours. The
resources needed for initial and
refresher training are the same for each
regulatory option.
FTA estimates that 90 percent of
RTAs have already developed initial
training programs for roadway workers
and 79 percent of RTAs have already
developed refresher training for
roadway workers. FTA estimates that an
RTA would need 60 hours to develop an
initial or refresher training if it has not
already. FTA assumes that no agencies
have developed training for all
employees or training for lone workers.
The training has estimated one-time
costs of $560,000 and annual recurring
costs of $4.5 million for all three
regulatory options. Table 5 shows
estimated costs by regulatory option for
RWP training in the first year and
subsequent years; Table 6 shows
estimated costs by occupation.
TABLE 5—RWP TRAINING PROGRAM COSTS
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
[Options 1–3]
Requirement
Workers
Total required hours
Total costs,
initial
Total costs,
annual
Development of Initial Training ................................................................
Development of Recurring Training .........................................................
Initial Training for Roadway Workers ......................................................
Refresher Training for Roadway Workers ...............................................
Training for All Employees .......................................................................
Training for Lone Workers .......................................................................
....................
....................
31,974
31,974
50,132
5,500
60 hours per RTA ......
60 hours per RTA ......
143,882 .....................
143,882 .....................
50,132 .......................
44,000 .......................
$11,623
24,407
524,915
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
$1,102,322
1,881,946
1,563,760
6 Federal Transit Administration (December
2013). ‘‘FTA Safety Advisory 14–1: Right-of Way
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
Worker Protection.’’ https://www.transit.dot.gov/
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
oversight-policy-areas/safety-advisory-14-1-rightway-worker-protection-december-2013.
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20620
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—RWP TRAINING PROGRAM COSTS—Continued
[Options 1–3]
Requirement
Total ..................................................................................................
Total costs,
initial
Workers
Total required hours
....................
....................................
Total costs,
annual
560,945
4,548,028
TABLE 6—RWP TRAINING PROGRAM COSTS BY OCCUPATION
[Options 1–3]
Fully
loaded
wage rate
Occupation
Total
required
hours,
initial
Hours per
worker
Workers
Total
required
hours,
annual
Total
costs,
initial
Total
costs,
annual
49–9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General ............
53–4041 Subway and Streetcar Operators ............................
00–0000 All Occupations ........................................................
49–9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General (Lone
Workers) ................................................................................
$35.54
37.20
37.54
13,824
18,150
50,132
4.5
4.5
1
62,209
81,674
....................
62,209
81,674
50,132
$221,090
303,825
....................
$928,577
1,276,067
1,881,946
35.54
5,500
8
....................
44,000
....................
1,563,760
Total ...................................................................................
....................
87,606
....................
143,882
238,014
524,915
4,548,028
Redundant Worker Protections
The major cost driver for redundant
worker protections is the number of fulltime equivalent (FTE) employees
needed to establish worker controls and
access limitations. Option 1 requires
RTAs to do a risk assessment to
determine the types of redundant
protections to use, Option 2 does not
require redundant protections, and
Option 3 requires all RTAs to use
standard physical redundant
protections.
Table 7 lists annual estimated costs
for the additional FTEs needed under
each regulatory option. The number of
FTEs needed is derived from
information in California’s Public
Utilities Commission General Order
Number 175–A. FTA assumes a labor
rate of $35.54 per hour for Maintenance
and Repair Workers, General for this
requirement. For Option 1, FTA
assumes 80 additional FTEs (at 2080
hours per FTE) for an annual total of
166,400 hours and $5,913,856 in
recurring costs. Option 3 assumes 160
additional FTEs for a total of 332,800
required hours, annually and
$11,827,712 in recurring costs.
TABLE 7—REDUNDANT WORKER PROTECTIONS, ESTIMATED COSTS
[2023–2032]
Regulatory option
FTEs
Option 1 .......................................................................................................
Option 2 .......................................................................................................
Option 3 .......................................................................................................
Other Costs
Additional cost elements for each
regulatory option include:
• Developing an RWP manual
• Establishing rail fixed guideway
public transportation system
responsibilities
• Establishing employee responsibilities
Required hours
80
0
160
• Conducting job safety briefings
• Conducting risk assessment for
redundant protections
• Establishing employee injury and
illness program and maintaining
records
• Establishing a near miss reporting
program and maintaining records
2,080
0
2,080
Labor rate
Annual costs
$35.54
0
35.54
$5,913,856
0
11,827,712
• Other recordkeeping
FTA assumes that each option has the
same staffing requirements and costs for
the additional cost elements, unless
stated otherwise. A breakdown of the
costs is listed in Table 8.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 8—ADDITIONAL RWP REQUIREMENTS, OPTIONS 1–3
Requirement
One-time costs
Recurring costs
RWP Manual ................................................................................................................................................
Rail System Responsibilities .......................................................................................................................
Employee Responsibilities ...........................................................................................................................
Job Safety Briefing ......................................................................................................................................
Risk Assessment for Redundant Protections (Options 1 and 3) ................................................................
Employee Injury and Illness Program and Records ....................................................................................
Near Miss Reporting Program and Records ...............................................................................................
Recordkeeping .............................................................................................................................................
$51,656
95,564
..............................
..............................
118,910
..............................
951,280
..............................
..............................
$5,690
516,560
242
..............................
35,673
166,474
25,828
Total ......................................................................................................................................................
1,217,410
750,467
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Summary of Costs
Option 1 has one-time costs of $2.0
million and annual costs of $11.3
million. Option 2 has one-time costs of
$1.9 million and $5.4 million. Finally,
Table 9 summarizes undiscounted
costs for the three regulatory options.
20621
Option 3 has one-time costs of $2.0
million and $17.2 million in annual
costs.
TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF COSTS BY REGULATORY OPTION, 2023–2032
Regulatory option
One-time costs
Option 1 .....................................................................................................................
Option 2 .....................................................................................................................
Option 3 .....................................................................................................................
Table 10 shows estimated discounted
costs for each regulatory option over the
10-year analysis period at a 2 percent
$2,010,807
1,915,917
2,034,827
discount rate, discounted to 2023.
Option 1 has annualized costs of $11.1
million, Option 2 has annualized costs
Annual costs
$11,280,279
5,366,415
17,194,127
Total costs
(undiscounted)
$114,813,598
55,580,068
173,976,098
of $5.4 million, and Option 3 has
annualized costs of $16.7 million.
TABLE 10—DISCOUNTED COSTS (2023–2032), 2% DISCOUNT RATE
Requirement
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
RWP Program ............................................................................................................
RWP Manual ..............................................................................................................
Rail System Responsibilities .....................................................................................
Employee Responsibilities .........................................................................................
Job Safety Briefing ....................................................................................................
Minimum Controls and Limitations ............................................................................
Roadway Worker Protection Training ........................................................................
Risk Assessment for Redundant Protections ............................................................
Employee Injury and Illness Program & Records .....................................................
Near Miss Reporting Program & Records .................................................................
Recordkeeping ...........................................................................................................
$805,517
48,677
139,180
4,459,866
2,088
51,058,933
39,795,269
112,051
307,923
2,333,712
222,993
$805,517
48,677
139,180
4,459,866
2,088
0
39,795,269
0
307,923
2,333,712
222,993
$805,517
48,677
139,180
4,459,866
2,088
102,117,867
39,795,269
112,051
307,923
2,333,712
222,993
Total Costs .........................................................................................................
Annualized Costs ................................................................................................
99,286,280
11,053,197
48,173,861
5,359,021
150,367,799
16,739,923
Net Benefits
Table 11 shows the estimated net
benefits for each regulatory option at a
2 percent discount rate, discounted to
2023. Option 1 has annualized net
benefits of $2.6 million, Option 2 has
annualized net benefits of $4.6 million,
and Option 3 has annualized net
benefits of ¥$120,000.
Option 2, which would prevent an
annual average of 1.34 injuries and 0.87
fatalities, yielded the highest net
benefit. Option 1 prevents more
fatalities and injuries (2.37 injuries and
1.18 fatalities) while also yielding a
positive net benefit. While Option 3
would prevent the most fatalities and
injuries, it does not have a positive net
benefit due to the costs of the required
physical redundant protections.
TABLE 11—NET BENEFITS
Annualized
benefits
Regulatory option
Option 1 .....................................................................................................................
Option 2 .....................................................................................................................
Option 3 .....................................................................................................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Sensitivity Analysis
The net benefits for each regulatory
option primarily depend on the
estimated number of fatalities they
would prevent. FTA conducted a
sensitivity analysis to understand how
changes to the estimates would affect
the relative net benefits of the three
options.
If the redundant worker protections
that agencies would adopt in Option 1
would prevent more fatalities and
injuries than estimated, then the net
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
$13,678,562
9,951,177
16,621,673
benefits of Option 1 would increase
relative to Option 2. The protections
would need to prevent an additional
0.18 fatalities (for an annual average of
1.36 fatalities) for Option 1 to have the
same net benefits as Option 2 at a 2
percent discount rate. Similarly, for
Option 3, the redundant worker
protections would need to prevent an
additional .42 fatalities (for an annual
average of 1.84 fatalities) for Option 3 to
have the same net benefits as Option 2
at a 2 percent discount rate.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Annualized
costs
$11,053,197
5,359,021
16,733,623
Annualized net
benefits
(2% discount rate)
$2,625,365
4,592,156
¥111,950
Regulatory Alternatives
FTA selected the requirements of
Option 1 for the proposed rule because
it would prevent more roadway worker
safety events than Option 2 while
maintaining net positive benefits. Many
current rail transit RWP programs have
provisions that allow roadway workers
onto the track to perform work without
protections beyond their own ability to
detect oncoming trains and clear the
tracks before their arrival. FTA’s
internal safety risk management process
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20622
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
identified the lack of redundant
protections as the most significant
contributor to rail transit roadway
worker safety events. Similarly, NTSB,
TRACS, and many commenters
responding to FTA’s RFI on Rail Transit
Worker Safety also support the use of
redundant protections.7 Because no two
RTAs are the same, Option 1 would
provide rail transit agencies the
flexibility to determine the types of
procedural and physical redundant
protections to incorporate. Option 1
would also provide a clear role for
SSOAs to approve RWP programs and to
ensure overall program effectiveness.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal
agencies to assess the impact of a
regulation on small entities unless the
agency determines that the regulation is
not expected to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The proposed rule would create new
RWP program requirements for RTAs
and SSOAs. Under the Act, publicsector organizations and local
governments qualify as small entities if
they serve a population of less than
50,000. RTAs do not qualify as small
entities because they all operate in
urbanized areas with populations of
more than 50,000, and SSOAs do not
qualify because they are state agencies.
FTA has therefore determined that the
proposed rule would not have a
significant effect on a substantial
number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
FTA has determined that this rule
would not impose unfunded mandates,
as defined by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule does not include a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more in any one year,
adjusted for inflation, by State, local,
and tribal governments in the aggregate
or by the private sector. The threshold
in 2023 dollars is $183 million after
adjusting for inflation using the gross
domestic product implicit price
deflator. Additionally, the definition of
‘‘Federal mandate’’ in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act excludes financial
assistance of the type in which State,
local, or tribal governments have
authority to adjust their participation in
the program in accordance with changes
made in the program by the Federal
7 Federal
Transit Administration (2021). ‘‘Request
for Information on Transit Worker Safety.’’ https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/09/24/
2021-20744/request-for-information-on-transitworker-safety.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
government. The Federal Transit Act
permits this type of flexibility.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism
Assessment)
Executive Order 13132 requires
agencies to assure meaningful and
timely input by State and local officials
in the development of regulatory
policies that may have a substantial
direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. This action has
been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in
Executive Order 13132 dated August 4,
1999, and FTA determined this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
or sufficient federalism implications on
the States. FTA also determined this
action will not preempt any State law or
regulation or affect the States’ ability to
discharge traditional State governmental
functions.
Executive Order 12372
(Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing
Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to
this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501,
et seq.) (PRA), and the White House
Office of Management and Budget’s
(OMB) implementing regulation at 5
CFR 1320.8(d), FTA is seeking approval
from OMB for a new information
collection that is associated with a
notice of proposed rulemaking. FTA is
seeking approval from OMB for the
information collection request
abstracted below.
• Type of Collection: Operators of rail
public transportation systems.
• Respondents to Collection: RTAs in
the SSO program, SSOAs, and rail
transit workers who access the roadway
to perform work.
• Type of Review: OMB Clearance.
New information collection request.
• Summary of the Collection: The
collection of information includes: (1)
Each RTA would adopt and implement
an RWP program to improve transit
worker safety that is consistent with
Federal and State safety requirements
and approved by the SSOA; they would
be required to review and update their
program manual not less than every two
years; (2) Require implementation of
comprehensive job safety briefings and
reporting of near-misses; (3)
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Documenting formal training and
qualification programs for all workers
who access the roadway; (4) Program
compliance auditing and monitoring; (5)
Periodic request for information; and (6)
Ensuring compliance of SSOAs
responsibility to approve, oversee and
enforce RWP requirements (7)
submission of RWP programs and
updates to FTA.
• Frequency: Bi-Annual, Periodic.
FTA seeks public comment to
evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of FTA’s
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
whether the estimation of the burden of
the proposed information collection is
accurate, including the validity of the
methodologies and assumptions used;
ways in which the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information can be
enhanced; and whether the burden can
be minimized, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
National Environmental Policy Act
Federal agencies are required to adopt
implementing procedures for the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) that establish specific criteria
for, and identification of, three classes
of actions: (1) Those that normally
require preparation of an Environmental
Impact Statement, (2) those that
normally require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment, and (3)
those that are categorically excluded
from further NEPA review (40 CFR
1507.3(b)). This rule qualifies for
categorical exclusions under 23 CFR
771.118(c)(4) (planning and
administrative activities that do not
involve or lead directly to construction).
FTA has evaluated whether the rule will
involve unusual or extraordinary
circumstances and has determined that
it will not.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of
Private Property)
FTA has analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights. FTA does not believe this rule
affects a taking of private property or
otherwise has taking implications under
Executive Order 12630.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of
Children)
FTA has analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. FTA certifies
that this action will not cause an
environmental risk to health or safety
that might disproportionately affect
children.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
FTA has analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, and believes that it will
not have substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes; will not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments; and
will not preempt tribal laws. Therefore,
a tribal summary impact statement is
not required.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
FTA has analyzed this action under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. FTA has
determined that this action is not a
significant energy action under that
order and is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,
a Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
Executive Orders 14096 and 12898
(Environmental Justice)
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing
Our Nation’s Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All) (Apr. 21,
2023) (which builds upon Executive
Order 12898) and DOT Order 5610.2(a)
(77 FR 27534, May 10, 2012; see:
https://www.transportation.gov/
transportation-policy/environmentaljustice/department-transportationorder-56102a) require DOT agencies to
make achieving environmental justice
(EJ) part of their mission consistent with
statutory authority by identifying,
analyzing, and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionate and
adverse human health or environmental
effects, including those related to
climate change and cumulative impacts
of environmental and other burdens on
communities with EJ concerns. All DOT
agencies seek to advance these policy
goals and to engage in this analysis as
appropriate in rulemaking activities. On
August 15, 2012, FTA’s Circular 4703.1
became effective, which contains
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
guidance for recipients of FTA financial
assistance to incorporate EJ principles
into plans, projects, and activities. (See:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulationsand-guidance/fta-circulars/
environmental-justice-policy-guidancefederal-transit).
FTA has evaluated this action under
its environmental justice policies and
FTA has determined that this action
will not cause disproportionate and
adverse human health and
environmental effects on communities
with EJ concerns.
Regulation Identifier Number
A Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
is assigned to each regulatory action
listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. The RIN number contained in the
heading of this document can be used
to cross-reference this rule with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 671
Mass transportation, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
■ For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, and under the authority of 49
U.S.C. 5329 and the delegations of
authority at 49 CFR 1.91, FTA proposes
to amend Chapter VI of Title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations, by adding part
671, as set forth below:
PART 671—RAIL TRANSIT ROADWAY
WORKER PROTECTION
Subpart A—General
Sec.
671.1 Purpose and Applicability.
671.3 Policy.
671.5 Definitions.
Subpart B—Roadway Worker Protection
(RWP) Program and Manual
671.11 RWP Program.
671.13 RWP Manual.
Subpart C—Responsibilities
671.21 Rail Transit Agency.
671.23 Transit Worker.
671.25 State Safety Oversight Agency.
Subpart D—Required RWP Program
Elements
671.31 Roadway Worker in Charge.
671.33 Job Safety Briefing.
671.35 Lone Worker.
671.37 Good Faith Safety Challenge.
671.39 Risk-Based Redundant Protections.
671.41 RWP Training and Qualification
Program.
671.43 RWP Compliance Monitoring
Program.
Subpart E—Recordkeeping
671.51 Recordkeeping.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20623
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5329, 49 CFR 1.91.
Subpart A—General
§ 671.1
Purpose and Applicability.
(a) The purpose of this part is to set
forth the applicability of the rail transit
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP)
regulation.
(b) This part applies to rail transit
agencies (RTA) that receive Federal
financial assistance authorized under 49
U.S.C. Chapter 53; and to State Safety
Oversight Agencies (SSOA) that oversee
the safety of rail fixed guideway public
transportation systems. This part does
not apply to rail systems that are subject
to the safety oversight of the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA).
(c) This part applies to transit workers
who access any rail fixed guideway
public transportation systems in the
performance of work.
§ 671.3
Policy.
(a) This part establishes minimum
safety standards for rail transit Roadway
Worker Protection (RWP) to ensure the
safe operation of public transportation
systems and to prevent accidents,
incidents, fatalities, and injuries to
transit workers who may access the
roadway in the performance of work.
Each RTA and SSOA may prescribe
additional or more stringent operating
rules, safety rules, and other special
instructions that are consistent with this
part.
(b) The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has adopted the
principles and methods of Safety
Management Systems (SMS) as the basis
for enhancing the safety of public
transportation in the United States.
Activities conducted to carry out these
RWP safety standards must be
integrated into the RTA’s SMS,
including the Safety Risk Management
process, specified in § 673.25 of this
chapter, and the Safety Assurance
process, specified in § 673.27 of this
chapter.
§ 671.5
Definitions.
As used in this part:
Accountable Executive means a
single, identifiable person who has
ultimate responsibility for carrying out
the Public Transportation Agency Safety
Plan of a transit agency; responsibility
for carrying out the transit agency’s
Transit Asset Management Plan; and
control or direction over the human and
capital resources needed to develop and
maintain both the transit agency’s
Public Transportation Agency Safety
Plan, in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5329(d), and the transit agency’s Transit
Asset Management Plan in accordance
with 49 U.S.C. 5326.
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
20624
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Ample time means the time necessary
for a roadway worker to be clear of the
track zone or in a place of safety 15
seconds before a rail transit vehicle
moving at the maximum authorized
speed on that track could arrive at the
location of the roadway worker.
Equivalent entity means an entity that
carries out duties similar to that of a
Board of Directors, for a recipient or
subrecipient of FTA funds under 49
U.S.C. chapter 53, including sufficient
authority to review and approve a
recipient or subrecipient’s Public
Transportation Agency Safety Plan.
Equivalent protection means
alternative designs, materials, or
methods that the RTA can demonstrate
to the SSOA will provide equal or
greater safety for roadway workers than
the means specified in this part.
Flag person means a roadway worker
designated by the RTA to direct or
restrict the movement of rail transit
vehicles or equipment past a point on a
track to provide on-track safety for
roadway workers, while engaged solely
in performing that function.
Foul time protection is a method of
establishing working limits in which a
roadway worker is notified by the
control center that no rail transit
vehicles will be authorized to operate
within a specific segment of track until
the roadway worker reports clear of the
track.
Fouling a track means the placement
of an individual or an item of
equipment in such proximity to a track
that the individual or equipment could
be struck by a moving rail transit
vehicle or on-track equipment. Any time
an individual or equipment is within
the track zone, it is fouling the track.
Individual rail transit vehicle
detection means a process by which a
lone worker acquires on-track safety by
visually detecting approaching rail
transit vehicles or equipment and
leaving the track in ample time.
Job safety briefing means a meeting
addressing the requirements of this part
that is conducted prior to commencing
work by the Roadway Worker in Charge,
typically at the job site, to notify
roadway workers or other transit
workers about the hazards related to the
work to be performed and the
protections to eliminate or protect
against those hazards. Alternatively,
briefings can be conducted virtually for
those individuals who are working
remotely on the job site (e.g., remote
drone operators).
Lone worker means an individual
roadway worker who is not afforded ontrack safety by another roadway worker,
who is not a member of a roadway work
group, and who is not engaged in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
common task with another roadway
worker.
Maximum authorized speed means
the highest speed permitted for the
movement of rail transit vehicles
established by the rail transit vehicle
control system, service schedule, and
operating rules. This speed is used
when calculating ample time.
Minor tasks mean those tasks
performed without the use of tools
during the execution of which a
roadway worker or other transit worker
can visually assess their surroundings at
least every five (5) seconds for
approaching rail transit vehicles and
that can be performed without violating
ample time.
Near-miss means a narrowly avoided
safety event.
On-track safety means a state of
freedom from the danger of being struck
by a moving rail transit vehicle or other
equipment as provided by operating and
safety rules that govern track occupancy
by roadway workers, other transit
workers, rail transit vehicles, and ontrack equipment.
Place of safety means a space an
individual or individuals can safely
occupy outside the track zone,
sufficiently clear of any rail transit
vehicle, including any on-track
equipment, moving on any track.
Qualified means a status attained by
a roadway worker or other transit
worker who has successfully completed
required training, including refresher
training, for; has demonstrated
proficiency in; and is authorized by the
RTA to perform the duties of a
particular position or function.
Rail fixed guideway public
transportation system means any fixed
guideway system or any such system in
engineering or construction, that uses
rail, is operated for public
transportation, is within the jurisdiction
of a State, and is not subject to the
jurisdiction of the Federal Railroad
Administration, or any such system in
engineering or construction. These
systems include but are not limited to
rapid rail, heavy rail, light rail,
monorail, trolley, inclined plane,
funicular, and automated guideway.
Rail transit agency (RTA) means any
entity that provides services on a rail
fixed guideway public transportation
system.
Rail transit vehicle means any rolling
stock used on a rail fixed guideway
public transportation system, including
but not limited to passenger and
maintenance vehicles.
Rail transit vehicle approach warning
means a method of establishing on-track
safety by warning roadway workers of
the approach of rail transit vehicles in
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ample time for them to move to or
remain in a place of safety in
accordance with the requirements of
this part.
Redundant protection means at least
one additional protection beyond
individual rail transit vehicle detection
to ensure on-track safety for roadway
workers. Redundant protections may be
procedural, physical, or both.
Roadway means land on which rail
transit tracks and support infrastructure
have been constructed to support the
movement of rail transit vehicles.
Roadway maintenance machine
means a device which is used on or near
rail transit track for maintenance, repair,
construction or inspection of track,
bridges, roadway, signal,
communications, or electric traction
systems. Roadway maintenance
machines may have road or rail wheels
or may be stationary.
Roadway worker means a transit
worker whose duties involve inspection,
construction, maintenance, repairs, or
providing on-track safety such as flag
persons and watchpersons on or near
the roadway or right-of-way or with the
potential of fouling track.
Roadway work group means two or
more roadway workers organized to
work together on a common task.
Roadway Worker in Charge means a
roadway worker who is qualified under
this part to establish on-track safety.
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP)
means the polices, processes, and
procedures implemented by an RTA to
prevent safety events for transit workers
who must access the roadway in the
performance of their work.
RWP manual means the entire set of
the RTA’s on-track safety rules and
instructions maintained together,
including operating rules and other
procedures concerning on-track safety
protection and on-track safety measures,
designed to prevent roadway workers
from being struck by rail transit vehicles
or other on-track equipment.
Safety event means an unexpected
outcome resulting in injury or death;
damage to or loss of the facilities,
equipment, rolling stock, or
infrastructure of a public transportation
system; or damage to the environment.
Sight distance means mean the length
of roadway visible ahead for a roadway
worker.
State Safety Oversight Agency (SSOA)
means an agency established by a State
that meets the requirements and
performs the functions specified by 49
U.S.C. 5329(e) and 49 CFR part 674.
Track access guide means a document
that describes the physical
characteristics of the RTA’s track
system, including track areas with close
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
or no clearance, curves with blind spots
or restricted sight lines, areas with loud
noise, and potential environmental
conditions that require additional
consideration in establishing on-track
safety.
Track zone means an area identified
by transit workers where a person or
equipment could be struck by the
widest equipment that could occupy the
track, and typically is an area within six
feet of the outside rail on both sides of
any track.
Transit worker means any employee,
contractor, or volunteer working on
behalf of the RTA or SSOA.
Transit Worker Safety Reporting
Program means the process required
under § 673.23 of this chapter that
allows transit workers to report safety
concerns, including transit worker
assaults, near-misses, and unsafe acts
and conditions to senior management,
provides protections for transit workers
who report safety conditions to senior
management, and describes transit
worker behaviors that may result in
disciplinary action.
Watchperson means a roadway
worker qualified to provide warning to
roadway workers of approaching rail
transit vehicles or track equipment
whose sole duty is to look out for
approaching rail transit vehicles and
track equipment and provide at least 15
seconds advanced warning plus time to
clear based on the maximum authorized
track speed for the work location to
transit workers before the arrival of rail
transit vehicles.
Working limits means a segment of
track with explicit boundaries upon
which rail transit vehicles and on-track
equipment may move only as
authorized by the roadway worker
having control over that defined
segment of track.
Work zone means the immediate area
where work is being performed within
the track zone.
Subpart B—Roadway Worker
Protection (RWP) Program and Manual
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 671.11
RWP program.
(a) Each RTA must adopt and
implement an approved RWP program
to improve transit worker safety that is
consistent with Federal and State safety
requirements and meets the minimum
requirements of this part.
(b) The RWP program must include:
(1) An RWP manual as described in
§ 671.13.
(2) All of the RWP program elements
described in Subpart D.
(c) Each RTA must submit its RWP
manual and subsequent updates to its
SSOA for review and approval as
described in § 671.25.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
§ 671.13
RWP manual.
(a) Each RTA must establish and
maintain a separate, dedicated manual
documenting its RWP program.
(b) The RWP manual must include the
terminology, abbreviations, and
acronyms used to describe the RWP
program activities and requirements.
(c) The RWP manual must document:
(1) All elements of the RWP program
in Subpart D.
(2) A definition of RTA and transit
worker responsibilities as described in
Subpart C—Responsibilities.
(3) Training, qualification, and
supervision required for transit workers
to access the track zone, by labor
category or type of work performed.
(4) Processes and procedures,
including any use of roadway workers
to provide adequate on-track safety, for
all transit workers who may access the
track zone in the performance of their
work, including safety and oversight
personnel. Procedures for SSOA
personnel to access the roadway must
conform with the SSOA’s risk-based
inspection program.
(d) The RWP manual must include or
incorporate by reference a track access
guide to support on-track safety. The
track access guide must be based on a
physical survey of the track geometry
and condition of the transit system and
include, at a minimum:
(1) Locations with limited, close, or
no clearance, including locations (such
as alcoves, recessed spaces, or other
designated places or areas of refuge or
safety) with size or access limitations.
(2) Locations subject to increased rail
vehicle or on-track equipment braking
requirements or reduced rail transit
vehicle operator visibility due to
precipitation or other weather
conditions.
(3) Curves with no or limited
visibility.
(4) Locations with limited or no
visibility due to obstructions or
topography.
(5) All portals with restricted views.
(6) Locations with heavy outside
noise or other environment conditions
that impact on-track safety.
(7) Any other locations with access
considerations.
(e) Following initial approval of the
RWP manual by its SSOA, not less than
every two years, the RTA must review
and update its RWP manual to reflect
current conditions and lessons learned
in implementing the RWP program and
information provided by the SSOA and
FTA.
(f) The RTA must update its RWP
manual and track access guide as
necessary and as soon as practicable
upon any change to the system which
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20625
conflicts with any element of either
document.
(g) The RWP manual must be
distributed to all transit workers who
access the roadway and redistributed
after each revision.
Subpart C—Responsibilities
§ 671.21
Rail transit agency.
(a) In General. Each RTA must
establish procedures to:
(1) Provide ample time and determine
the appropriate sight distance based on
maximum authorized track speeds.
(2) Ensure that individual rail transit
vehicle detection is never used as the
only form of protection in the track
zone.
(3) Provide job safety briefings to all
transit workers who must enter a track
zone to perform work.
(4) Provide job safety briefings to all
transit workers whenever a rule
violation is observed.
(5) Provide transit workers with the
right to challenge and refuse in good
faith any assignment based on on-track
safety concerns and resolve such
challenges and refusals promptly and
equitably.
(6) Require the reporting of unsafe
acts, unsafe conditions, and near-misses
on the roadway as part of the Transit
Worker Safety Reporting Program and
described in § 673.23(b) of this chapter.
(7) Ensure all transit workers who
must enter a track zone to perform work
understand, are qualified in, and
comply with the RWP program.
(b) Equipment and protections. Each
RTA must establish the requirements for
on-track safety, including:
(1) Equipment that transit workers
must have to access the roadway or a
track zone by labor category, including
personal protective equipment such as
high-reflection vests, safety shoes, and
hard hats.
(2) Credentials (e.g., badge, wristband,
RWP card) for transit workers to enter
the roadway or track zone by labor
category and how to display them so
they are visible.
(3) Protections for emergency
response personnel who must access the
roadway or the track zone.
(4) Protections for multiple roadway
work groups within a common work
area in a track zone.
§ 671.23
Transit worker.
(a) RWP program. Each transit worker
must follow the requirements of the
RTA’s RWP program by position and
labor category.
(b) Fouling the track. A transit worker
may only foul the track once they have
received appropriate permissions and
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20626
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
redundant protections have been
established as specified in the RWP
manual.
(c) Acknowledgement of protections
providing on-track safety. A transit
worker must understand and
acknowledge in writing the protections
providing on-track safety measures for
their specific task before accessing the
roadway or track zone.
(d) Refusal to foul the track. A transit
worker may refuse to foul the track if
the transit worker makes a good faith
determination that that they believe any
RWP assignment is unsafe or would
violate the RTA’s RWP program.
(e) Reporting. A transit worker must
report unsafe acts and conditions and
near-misses related to the RWP program
as part of the RTA’s Transit Worker
Safety Reporting Program.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 671.25
State safety oversight agency.
(a) Review and approve RWP program
elements. The SSOA must review and
approve the RWP manual and any
subsequent updates for each RTA
within its jurisdiction within the
following deadlines:
(1) Initial approval of the RWP
program elements must be completed
within 90 calendar days of receipt of the
program, and
(2) The SSOA also must submit all
approved RWP program elements for
each RTA in its jurisdiction, and any
subsequent updates, to FTA within 30
calendar days of approving them.
(b) RWP program oversight. The
SSOA must update its program standard
to explain the role of the SSOA in
overseeing an RTA’s execution of its
RWP program.
(c) Annual RWP program audit.
(1) The SSOA must conduct an
annual audit of the RTA’s compliance
with its RWP program, including all
required RWP program elements, for
each RTA that it oversees.
(2) The SSOA must issue a report
with any findings and recommendations
arising from the audit, which must
include, at minimum:
(i) An analysis of the effectiveness of
the RWP program, including, at a
minimum, a review of:
(A) All RWP-related events over the
period covered by the audit.
(B) All RWP-related reports made to
the Transit Worker Safety Reporting
Program over the period covered by the
audit.
(C) All documentation of instances
where a transit worker(s) challenged
and refused in good faith any
assignment based on on-track safety
concerns and documentation of the
resolution for any such instance during
the period covered by the audit.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
(D) An assessment of the adequacy of
the track access guide, including
whether the guide reflects current track
geometry and conditions.
(E) A review of all training and
qualification records for transit workers
who must enter a track zone to perform
work.
(F) A representative sample of written
job safety briefing confirmations as
described in § 671.33.
(G) The compliance monitoring
program described in § 671.43.
(ii) Recommendations for
improvements, if necessary or
appropriate.
(iii) Corrective action plan(s), if
necessary or appropriate, must be,
developed and executed consistent with
requirements established in part 674.
(3) The RTA must be given an
opportunity to comment on any findings
and recommendations.
Subpart D—Required RWP Program
Elements
§ 671.31
Roadway worker in charge.
(a) On-track safety and supervision.
The RTA must designate one roadway
worker in charge for each roadway work
group whose duties require fouling a
track.
(1) The roadway worker in charge
must be qualified under the RTA’s
training and qualification program as
specified in § 671.41.
(2) The roadway worker in charge
may be designated generally or may be
designated specifically for a particular
work situation.
(3) The roadway worker in charge is
responsible for the on-track safety for all
members of the roadway work group.
(4) The roadway worker in charge
must serve only the function of
maintaining on-track safety for all
members of the roadway work group
and perform no other unrelated job
function while designated for duty.
(b) Communication. The RTA must
ensure that the roadway worker in
charge provides a job safety briefing to
all roadway workers before any member
of a roadway work group fouls a track,
following the requirements specified in
§ 671.33.
(1) The roadway worker in charge
must provide the job safety briefing to
all members of the roadway work group
before the on-track safety procedures
change during the work period, or
immediately following an observed
violation of on-track safety procedures
before track zone work continues.
(2) In the event of an emergency, any
roadway worker who cannot be notified
in advance of changes to on-track safety,
must be warned immediately to leave
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the roadway and must not return until
on-track safety is re-established, and a
job safety briefing is completed.
§ 671.33
Job safety briefing.
(a) General. The RTA must ensure the
roadway worker in charge provides any
roadway worker who must foul a track
with a job safety briefing prior to fouling
the track, every time the roadway
worker fouls the track.
(b) Elements. The job safety briefing
must include, at a minimum, the
following, as appropriate:
(1) A discussion of the nature of the
work to be performed and the
characteristics of the work, including
work plans for multiple roadway worker
groups within a single work area.
(2) Working limits.
(3) The hazards involved in
performing the work, as described in
Federal Railroad Administration and the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration’s guidance on hazard
identification as part of a job safety
briefing.
(4) Information on how on-track safety
is to be provided for each track
identified to be fouled and
identification and location of key
personnel such as a watchperson and
the roadway worker in charge.
(5) Instructions for each on-track
safety procedure to be followed,
including appropriate flags and proper
flag placement.
(6) Communication roles and
responsibilities for all transit workers
involved in the work.
(7) Safety information about any
adjacent track, defined as track next to
or adjoining the track zone where ontrack safety has been established, and
identification of roadway maintenance
machines or on-track equipment that
will foul such tracks.
(8) Information on the accessibility of
the roadway worker in charge and
alternative procedures in the event the
roadway worker in charge is no longer
accessible to members of the roadway
work group.
(9) Required personal protective
equipment.
(10) Designated place(s) of safety of a
sufficient size to accommodate all
roadway workers within the work area.
(11) The means for determining ample
time.
(c) Confirmation and written
acknowledgement. A job safety briefing
is complete only after:
(1) The roadway worker in charge
confirms that each roadway worker
understands the on-track safety
procedures and instructions.
(2) Each roadway worker
acknowledges the briefing and the
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
requirement to use the required
personal protective equipment in
writing.
(3) The roadway worker in charge
confirms in writing that they attest to
each roadway worker’s understanding of
the briefing and has received written
acknowledgement of the briefing from
each worker.
(d) Follow-up briefings. If there is any
change in the scope of work or roadway
work group after the initial job safety
briefing, or if a violation of on-track
safety is observed, a follow-up job safety
briefing must be conducted.
§ 671.35
Lone worker.
(a) On-track safety and supervision.
The RTA may authorize lone workers to
perform limited duties that require
fouling a track.
(1) The lone worker must be qualified
as a roadway worker in charge and lone
worker under the RTA’s training and
qualification program as specified in
§ 671.41.
(2) The lone worker may perform
routine inspection or minor tasks and
move from one location to another. The
lone worker may not use power tools
and may only access locations defined
in the track access guide as appropriate
for lone workers, i.e., no loud noises, no
restricted clearances, etc.
(3) The lone worker may not use
individual rail transit vehicle detection,
where the lone worker is solely
responsible for seeing approaching
trains and clearing the track before the
trains arrive, as the only form of ontrack safety.
(b) Communication. Each lone worker
must communicate prior to fouling the
track with a supervisor or another
designated employee to receive an ontrack safety job briefing consisting of the
elements in § 671.33(b), including a
discussion of their planned work
activities and the procedures that they
intend to use to establish on-track
safety. The lone worker must
acknowledge and document the job
safety briefing in writing consistent with
§ 671.33(c).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 671.37
Good faith safety challenge.
(a) Written procedure. Each RTA must
document its procedures that provide to
every roadway worker the right to
challenge and refuse in good faith any
RWP assignment they believe is unsafe
or would violate the RTA’s RWP
program.
(b) Prompt and equitable resolution.
The written procedure must include
methods or processes to achieve prompt
and equitable resolution of any
challenges and refusals made.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
(c) Requirements. The written
procedure must include a requirement
that the roadway worker provide a
description of the safety concern
regarding on-track safety and must
remain clear of the roadway or track
zone until the challenge and refusal is
resolved.
§ 671.39 Risk-based redundant
protections.
(a) General requirements.
(1) Each RTA must identify and
provide redundant protections for each
category of work roadway workers
perform the roadway or track.
(2) Redundant protections must be
established to ensure on-track safety for
multiple roadway work groups within a
common work area.
(b) Safety risk assessment to
determine redundant protections. Each
RTA must assess the risk associated
with transit workers accessing the
roadway using the methods and
processes established under § 673.25(c)
of this chapter. The RTA must use the
methods and processes established
under § 673.25(d) of this chapter to
establish redundant protections for each
category of work performed by roadway
workers on the rail transit system and
must include lone workers.
(1) The safety risk assessment must be
consistent with the RTA’s Agency
Safety Plan and the SSOA’s Program
Standard.
(2) The safety risk assessment may be
supplemented by engineering
assessments, inputs from the safety
assurance process established under
§ 673.27 of this chapter, the results of
safety event investigation, and other
safety risk management strategies or
approaches.
(3) The RTA must review and update
the safety risk assessment at least every
two years to include current conditions
and lessons learned from safety events,
actions taken to address reports of
unsafe acts and conditions, and nearmisses, and results from compliance
monitoring regarding the effectiveness
of the redundant protections.
(4) The SSOA may also identify and
require the RTA to implement alternate
redundant protections based on the
RTA’s unique operating characteristics
and capabilities.
(c) Categories of work requiring
redundant protections. Redundant
protections must be identified for
roadway workers performing different
categories of work on the roadway and
within track zones, which may include
but are not limited to categories such as:
(1) Roadway workers moving from
one track zone location to another.
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20627
(2) Roadway workers performing
minor tasks.
(3) Roadway workers conducting
visual inspections.
(4) Roadway workers using hand
tools, machines, or equipment in
conducting testing of track system
components or non-visual inspections.
(5) Roadway workers using hand
tools, machines, or equipment in
performing maintenance, construction,
or repairs.
(6) Lone workers accessing the
roadway or track zone or performing
visual inspections or minor tasks.
(d) Types of redundant protections.
(1) Redundant protections may be
procedural or physical.
(i) Procedural protections alert rail
transit vehicle operators to the presence
of roadway workers and use radio
communications, personnel, signage, or
other means to direct rail transit vehicle
movement.
(ii) Physical protections physically
control the movement of rail transit
vehicles into or through a work zone.
(2) Redundant protections may
include:
(i) Approaches consistent with the
Federal Railroad Administration rules
governing redundant protections.
(ii) Rail transit vehicle approach
warning.
(iii) Foul time.
(iv) Exclusive track occupancy,
defined as a method of establishing
working limits, as part of on-track
safety, in which movement authority of
rail transit vehicles and other
equipment is withheld by the control
center or restricted by flag persons and
provided by a roadway worker in
charge.
(v) Warning signs, flags, or lights.
(vi) Flag persons.
(vii) Lock outs from the rail transit
vehicle control systems or lining and
locking track switches or otherwise
physically preventing entry and
movement of rail transit vehicles.
(viii) Secondary warning devices and
alert systems.
(ix) Shunt devices and portable trip
stops to reduce the likelihood of rail
transit vehicles from entering work zone
with workers.
(x) Restricting work to times when
propulsion power is down with
verification that track is out of service,
and when barriers are placed that
physically prevent rail transit vehicles,
including on-track equipment, from
entering the work zone.
(xi) Use of walkways in tunnels and
on elevated structures to reduce
roadway worker time in the track zone.
(xii) Speed restrictions.
(3) Redundant protections for lone
workers must include, at a minimum,
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
20628
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 58 / Monday, March 25, 2024 / Proposed Rules
foul time or an equivalent protection
approved by the SSOA.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 671.41 RWP training and qualification
program.
(a) General. Each RTA must adopt an
RWP training program.
(1) The RWP training program must
address all transit workers responsible
for on-track safety, by position,
including roadway workers, operations
control center personnel, rail transit
vehicle operators, operators of on-track
equipment and roadway maintenance
machines, and any others with a role in
providing on-track safety or fouling a
track for the performance of work.
(2) The RWP training program must
be completed for the relevant position
before an RTA may assign a transit
worker to perform the duties of a
roadway worker, to oversee or supervise
access to the track zone from the
operations control center, or to operate
vehicles, on-track equipment, and
roadway maintenance machines on the
rail transit system.
(3) The RWP training program must
address RWP hazard recognition and
mitigation, and lessons learned through
the results of compliance testing, nearmiss reports, reports of unsafe acts or
conditions, and feedback received on
the training program.
(4) The RWP training program must
include initial and refresher training, by
position. Refresher training must occur
every two years at a minimum.
(5) The RTA must review and update
its RWP training program not less than
every two years, to reflect lessons
learned in implementing the RWP
program and information provided by
the SSOA and FTA. The RTA must
provide an opportunity for roadway
worker involvement in the RWP training
program review and update process.
(b) Required elements. The RWP
training program must include
interactive training with the opportunity
to ask the RWP trainer questions and
raise and discuss RWP issues.
(1) Initial training must include
experience in a representative field
setting.
(2) Initial and refresher training must
include demonstrations and
assessments to ensure the ability to
comply with RWP instructions given by
transit workers performing, or
responsible for, on-track safety and RWP
functions.
(c) Minimum contents for RWP
training. The RWP training program
must address the following minimum
contents:
(1) How to interpret and use the
RTA’s RWP manual.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Mar 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
(2) How to challenge and refuse in
good faith RWP assignments.
(3) How to report unsafe acts, unsafe
conditions, and near-misses after they
occur, and the mandatory duty to make
such reports.
(4) Recognition of the track zone and
understanding of the space around
tracks within which on-track safety is
required, including use of the track
access guide.
(5) The functions and responsibilities
of all transit workers involved in ontrack safety, by position.
(6) Proper compliance with on-track
safety instructions given by transit
workers performing or responsible for
on-track safety functions.
(7) Signals and directions given by
watchpersons, and the proper
procedures upon receiving a rail transit
vehicle approach warning from a
watchperson.
(8) The hazards associated with
working on or near rail transit tracks to
include traction power, if applicable.
(9) Rules and procedures for
redundant protections identified under
671.37 and how they are applied to
RWP.
(10) Requirements for safely crossing
rail transit tracks in yards and on the
mainline.
(d) Specialized training and
qualification for transit workers with
additional responsibilities for on-track
safety. The RWP training program must
include additional training for
watchpersons, flag persons, lone
workers, roadway workers in charge,
and other transit workers with
responsibilities for establishing,
supervising, and monitoring on-track
safety.
(1) This training must cover the
content and application of the
additional RWP program requirements
carried out by these positions and must
address the relevant physical
characteristics of the RTA’s system
where on-track safety may be
established.
(2) This training must include
demonstrations and assessments to
confirm the transit worker’s ability to
perform these additional
responsibilities.
(3) Refresher training on additional
responsibilities for on-track safety, by
position, must occur every two years at
a minimum.
(e) Competency and qualification of
training personnel. Each RTA must
ensure that transit workers providing
RWP training are qualified and have
active RWP certification at the RTA to
provide effective RWP training, and at a
minimum must consider the following:
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
(1) A trainer’s experience and
knowledge of effective training
techniques in the chosen learning
environment.
(2) A trainer’s experience with the
RTA RWP program.
(3) A trainer’s knowledge of the RTA
RWP rules, operations, and operating
environment, including applicable
operating rules.
(4) A trainer’s knowledge of the
training requirements specified in this
part.
§ 671.43 RWP compliance monitoring
program.
(a) General. Each RTA must adopt a
program for monitoring its compliance
with the requirements specified in its
RWP program.
(b) Required elements. The RWP
compliance monitoring program must
include inspections, observations, and
audits, consistent with safety
performance monitoring and
measurement requirements in the RTA’s
Agency Safety Plan described in
§ 673.27 of this chapter and the SSOA’s
Program Standard.
(1) The RTA must provide monthly
reports to the SSOA documenting the
RTA’s compliance with and sufficiency
of the RWP program.
(2) The RTA must provide an annual
briefing to the Accountable Executive
and the Board of Directors, or equivalent
entity, regarding the performance of the
RWP program and any identified
deficiencies requiring corrective action.
Subpart E—Recordkeeping
§ 671.51
Recordkeeping.
(a) Each RTA must maintain the
documents that set forth its RWP
program, documents related to the
implementation of the RWP program
and results from the procedures,
processes, assessments, training, and
activities specified in this part for the
RWP program.
(b) Each RTA must maintain records
of its compliance with this requirement,
including records of transit worker RWP
training and refresher training, for a
minimum of three years after they are
created.
(c) These documents must be made
available upon request by the FTA or
other Federal entity, or a SSOA having
jurisdiction.
Veronica Vanterpool,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024–06251 Filed 3–22–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–57–P
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 58 (Monday, March 25, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20605-20628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06251]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
49 CFR Part 671
[Docket No. FTA-2023-0024]
RIN 2132-AB41
Rail Transit Roadway Worker Protection
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is proposing minimum
safety standards for rail transit roadway worker protection (RWP) to
ensure the safe operation of public transportation systems and to
prevent accidents, incidents, fatalities, and injuries to transit
workers who may access the roadway in the performance of work. This
NPRM would apply to rail transit agencies (RTAs) covered by the State
Safety Oversight (SSO) program, SSO agencies (SSOAs), and rail transit
workers who access the roadway to perform work. It would set minimum
standards for RWP program elements, including an RWP manual and track
access guide; requirements for on-track safety and supervision, job
safety briefings, good faith safety challenges, and reporting unsafe
acts and conditions and near-misses; development and implementation of
risk-based redundant protections for workers; and establishment of RWP
training and qualification and RWP compliance monitoring activities.
RTAs
[[Page 20606]]
would be expected to comply with these Federal standards as a baseline
and use their existing Safety Management System (SMS) processes to
determine any additional mitigations appropriate to address the level
of RWP risk identified. SSOAs would oversee and enforce implementation
of the RWP program requirements.
DATES: Comments should be filed by May 24, 2024. FTA will consider
comments received after that date to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by docket number FTA-2023-
0024 by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for sending comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery/Courier: 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.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Background
documents and comments received may also be viewed at the U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington,
DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program matters, contact Ms.
Margaretta ``Mia'' Veltri, Office of Transit Safety and Oversight, FTA,
telephone at (202) 366-5094 or [email protected]. For legal
matters, contact Ms. Emily Jessup, Attorney Advisor, FTA, telephone at
202-366-8907 or [email protected]. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of Regulatory Action
B. Statutory Authority
II. Background Informing FTA's Proposals
A. Rail Transit Industry Safety Performance
B. Recommendations From the National Transportation Safety Board
C. Safety Risk Analysis and Report on Rail Transit Roadway
Worker Protection
D. Transit Worker Safety Request for Information
E. Summary of Major Provisions
F. Summary of Economic Analysis
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of Regulatory Action
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has adopted the principles
and methods of Safety Management System (SMS) as the basis for
enhancing the safety of public transportation in the United States. As
part of its internal SMS, FTA established a Safety Risk Management
(SRM) program to proactively address safety concerns impacting the
transit industry and to systematically apply FTA's statutory oversight
authority to improve the safety of the nation's transit infrastructure
through the Public Transportation Safety Program.
The process follows a five-step approach: (1) identify safety
concerns; (2) assess safety risk; (3) develop mitigation; (4) implement
mitigation; and (5) monitor safety performance. As a result of the
first two steps, FTA may develop and advance appropriate mitigations to
address a safety hazard, such as proposed safety regulations, general
or special directives, safety advisories, or technical assistance and
training activities.
In 2019, FTA began piloting the SRM process to focus on high-
priority safety risks and identified the RWP safety concern as the
second topic for analysis. Through the SRM process, FTA conducted a
review of the existing approaches to RWP used by the rail transit
industry. This review shows that on a national level, these approaches
do not adequately protect transit workers from rail transit vehicles
and other roadway hazards. As a result, FTA has determined that a
Federal baseline RWP program is an appropriate mitigation and is
proposing this regulation to reduce fatalities and serious injury
events involving rail transit workers that occupy the rail roadway
during hours of operation.
This NPRM would require RTAs covered by the SSO program under 49
CFR part 674 (Part 674) to implement a minimum, baseline RWP program to
provide a standardized and consistent approach to protecting roadway
workers industry-wide, overseen and enforced by SSOAs. Using the
Federal standards as a baseline, FTA would expect RTAs to use their
existing documented safety risk management processes to assess the
associated safety risk and, based on the results of the safety risk
assessment, identify the specific safety risk mitigations or strategies
necessary to address the safety risk.
This NPRM would prohibit the use of individual rail transit vehicle
detection as a sole form of protection for workers on the roadway. It
would set requirements for RTAs to conduct a safety risk assessment to
identify and establish redundant protections for each category of work
roadway workers perform on the roadway or track. Redundant protections
may include procedures, such as foul time and advance warning systems,
and also physical protections to stop trains in advance of workers,
such as derailers and shunts. The safety risk assessment and redundant
protections would be reviewed and approved by the SSOA, along with
other elements of the RTA's RWP program.
The safety risk assessment would be consistent with the RTA's
Agency Safety Plan and the SSOA's Program Standard. RTAs may supplement
the safety risk assessment with engineering assessments, inputs from
the Safety Assurance process established under 49 CFR 673.27, the
results of safety event investigations, and other safety risk
management strategies and approaches.
To ensure effective implementation and oversight of the RWP program
and redundant protections, this NPRM also would specify RWP training
and compliance monitoring activities, supplemented by near-miss
reporting and SSOA oversight and auditing.
B. Statutory Authority
Congress directed FTA to establish a Public Transportation Safety
Program in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (Pub.
L. 112-141) (MAP-21), which was reauthorized by the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94). The Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (Pub. L. 117-58), continues FTA's authority to regulate public
transportation systems that receive Federal financial assistance under
Chapter 53. Title 49 U.S.C. 5329(f)(7) authorizes FTA to issue rules to
carry out the public transportation safety program.
Title 49 U.S.C. 5329(b)(2) directs FTA to develop and implement a
National Public Transportation Safety Plan (NSP) that includes minimum
safety standards
[[Page 20607]]
to ensure the safe operation of public transportation systems. In 2017,
FTA published its first iteration of the National Safety Plan which was
intended to be FTA's primary tool for communicating with the transit
industry about its safety performance (82 FR 5628). Subsequently, on
May 31, 2023, FTA published a second iteration of the NSP (88 FR
34917). While the NSP currently contains only voluntary standards, as
FTA's safety program has matured, it is now appropriate for FTA to
propose required minimum standards for RWP. Pursuant to the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), FTA is proposing these
minimum standards for public notice and comment through the rulemaking
process.
II. Background Informing FTA's Proposals
A. Rail Transit Industry Safety Performance
Rail transit employees and contractors who work on the roadway,
also known as roadway workers, face numerous on-the-job hazards.
Working on the roadway exposes workers to moving rail transit vehicles
and electrified system components. Weather, including rain, snow, and
heat can create conditions that cause slips, trips, and falls;
hypothermia; and heat stroke. Surrounding automobile traffic can limit
the ability to hear trains and warnings from watchpersons. Tight
clearances, restricted visibility, varying distances from the track to
places of safety, and the potential need to clear between rail transit
vehicles make tunnels, bridges and aerial structures, locations with
more than two tracks, and shared-use roadway (e.g., streets with mixed
traffic) make roadways particularly challenging work environments.
Adjacent construction and public utilities pose additional safety
challenges. Faster trains, more frequent headways, and shorter non-
revenue maintenance windows all increase worker exposure to the risk of
being struck by a train or electrocuted.
RTAs manage these risks using a variety of RWP programs, including
systems and approaches designed to safeguard roadway workers through
rules and procedures, training and supervision, communication protocols
and technology, and on-track protection. Many existing RWP programs
implemented by RTAs use elements from the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) RWP regulations contained in 49 CFR part 214,
subpart C--Roadway Worker Protection, modified to address the RTA's
unique operating conditions and requirements. SSOAs typically review
implementation of these RWP programs as part of their triennial audits
of the RTAs in their jurisdictions.
Notwithstanding the use of RWP programs throughout the rail transit
industry, roadway workers continue to be killed and seriously injured
in roadway safety events. For example, in October 2022, two roadway
workers on the Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO) roadway were
struck and killed by a PATCO revenue service vehicle traveling through
a close-clearance area. Preliminary information indicates the track was
not taken out-of-service as expected, and the incident is currently
under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
(investigation number RRD23FR001). Roadway worker events continue to
comprise the majority of transit worker fatalities for RTAs.
This NPRM follows FTA's review of safety events involving roadway
workers, dating back to 2008, including information reported to the
National Transit Database (NTD) and State Safety Oversight Reporting
Tool (SSOR); investigations completed by NTSB, including 12
recommendations issued by NTSB to FTA since 2012 regarding needed
improvements in the RWP programs administered in the U.S. rail transit
industry; data and information submitted in response to FTA's request
for information (RFI) on transit worker safety (86 FR 53143); and
analysis completed as part of FTA's internal Safety Risk Management
process.
FTA's review is also informed by older information on accidents
involving roadway workers collected from the NTD and the SSO program
dating back to 1994 and the results of an inventory of RWP practices
used in the rail transit industry, collected in 2014 in response to
FTA's Safety Advisory 14-1: Inventory of Practice and Analysis (https://www.transit.dot.gov/oversight-policy-areas/safety-advisory-14-1-right-way-worker-protection-december-2013). Finally, FTA considered
recommendations from the Transit Advisory Committee for Safety
(TRACS),\1\ voluntary safety standards developed by the American Public
Transportation Association (APTA), and the results of research
conducted by the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) (see:
https://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/166925.aspx) and FTA's Office
of Research, Demonstration and Innovation (https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/fta-standards-development-program-rail-transit-roadway-worker-protection-report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Transit Advisory Committee for Safety (TRACS) was
established in 2009 by the U.S. Transportation Secretary to improve
transit safety. TRACS provides information, advice, and
recommendations on transit safety and other issues as determined by
the Secretary of Transportation and the FTA Administrator. TRACS's
membership reflects the geographic, size, and issue diversity across
the transit industry and includes members from large and small bus
and rail operators, state safety oversight agencies, academia, non-
profit organizations, and labor unions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FTA's review finds that, dating back to 1994, 52 rail transit
workers have been killed and over 200 workers have experienced major
injuries resulting from safety events on the roadway, primarily
resulting from collisions with rail transit vehicles, falls and
electrocution. More detailed data covering the almost 15-year period
between January 1, 2008 and October 31, 2022 is available from the NTD.
During this time, 22 workers have been killed and 120 workers seriously
injured in accidents on the roadway. This equates to approximately 1.5
workers killed per year and just over eight workers seriously injured
per year.
To ensure FTA's analysis of existing RWP practices compares
reasonably similar RWP programs and outcomes, this analysis, dating
back to 2008, which supports the cost benefit statement for this
proposed NPRM, does not include incidents occurring in the State of
California, where roadway workers have been protected by General Order
175-A, ``Rules and Regulations Governing Roadway Worker Protection
provided by Rail Transit Agencies and Rail Fixed Guideway Systems''
since 2016. While there is evidence that dozens more workers are
injured less seriously each year in incidents on the roadway, the NTD
does not provide sufficient detail on these incidents to support
substantive analysis.
Based on this review, FTA finds that existing programs used in the
rail transit industry do not adequately mitigate the risks of placing
workers on the roadway. FTA agrees with NTSB that weaknesses in current
programs leave all RTAs ``at risk for roadway worker fatalities and
serious injuries'' (see https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/R-13-039-040.pdf). Further, FTA believes that SSOAs can do
more to oversee and enhance the safety of roadway workers in their
jurisdictions, in accordance with the SSOAs' authority under 49 CFR
part 674.
Many of the safety events in FTA's review primarily or tangentially
involve RWP protections that rely solely on the ability of the roadway
worker to detect oncoming rail transit vehicles. This approach is
vulnerable to human error, such as miscalculating sight distance and
generally underestimating the time
[[Page 20608]]
needed for workers to clear tracks. In many of the events reviewed by
FTA, the roadway workers were not sufficiently aware of the immediate
hazards they faced when working on the rail transit roadway. Many of
these events were caused by roadway workers' lack of awareness of the
presence or speed of approaching trains; lack of train visibility in
curves or aerial structures; and the time required to move to a place
of safety. Contributing to many of these events were the train
operators' lack of awareness regarding the roadway workers' locations
and insufficient time to slow and stop the trains before striking those
workers.
FTA's review confirms that reliance on the roadway worker to detect
rail transit vehicles lacks safety redundancy and does not provide
sufficient physical or procedural protections to ensure worker safety.
Physical redundant protections are technological or mechanical
interventions that physically stop a train from striking a roadway
worker, such as a derailer or shunt in the signal system. Procedural
redundant protections are rules-based interventions that rely on worker
training and compliance, such as the use of foul time to clear the
track for workers.
FTA's review of these safety events also found that weaknesses in
job safety briefings contributed to these events, placing roadway
workers in situations where they may not have recognized the hazards of
their work sites or the requirements of protection. Also, insufficient
training and poor work scheduling practices left workers vulnerable to
errors of judgement and fatigue that contributed to poor decision-
making on the roadway.
While FTA's review finds that the majority of RWP fatalities and
serious injuries have happened on heavy rail transit systems, other
rail systems, including light rail and automated guideways, have also
experienced fatal RWP accidents and serious injuries. Further, while
most of these agencies have top train speeds in excess of 45 miles per
hour, the conditions that make these events possible are present at all
RTAs nationwide--even those agencies that provide service at slower
speeds, with single rail cars, or more limited track configurations.
B. Recommendations From the National Transportation Safety Board
Since 2008, NTSB has issued 12 safety recommendations to FTA based
on its investigation of rail transit RWP safety events. These
recommendations focus on the need for Federal regulation, minimum RWP
requirements, enhancements in job safety briefings, and RWP training
programs for the rail transit industry. NTSB also has recommended that
RTAs use redundant protection when workers are on the roadway. A
discussion of roadway worker safety events that occurred on the roadway
follows below, along with the relevant NTSB recommendation and
associated FTA action.
On January 26, 2010, a hi-rail vehicle--a truck or automobile that
can be operated on either highways or rails--struck and fatally injured
two technicians who were working on the roadway replacing equipment
between the tracks at the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority (WMATA). On June 1, 2012, following its investigation at
WMATA, NTSB recommended that FTA, ``Issue guidelines to advise transit
agencies and state oversight agencies on how to effectively implement,
oversee, and audit the requirements of [the SSO program] using industry
best practices, industry voluntary standards, and appropriate elements
from 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 214, Subpart C--Roadway Worker
Protection [sic]. (R-12-34).''
To address this recommendation, FTA sent each RTA a package of RWP
materials and guidance, including the results of FTA-sponsored research
with the TCRP of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) at the
National Academies of Science regarding RWP and rules compliance. FTA
also provided updates on joint technology demonstration projects with
the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) and the
Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) to support the piloting and
testing of technology to help alert workers to the presence of trains
and train operators to the presence of workers on the tracks. Finally,
FTA re-issued an awareness video, developed in collaboration with
WMATA, New York City Transit, and Transport Workers Union Local 100 in
response to earlier RWP-related worker accidents, called ``A Knock at
Your Door'' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31XyWpQCWRc). This video is
designed to reinforce the dangers and challenges of working on the rail
transit right-of-way and now is used by RTAs in their track safety
training programs.
In response to a December 19, 2013, safety event resulting in two
roadway worker fatalities on the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system,
NTSB issued two urgent safety recommendations to FTA, citing concerns
that the current RWP programs in place in the rail transit industry may
not be effective. NTSB recommended that FTA immediately:
Issue a directive to all rail transit properties requiring
redundant protection for roadway workers, such as positive train
control, secondary warning devices, or shunting (R-13-39); and
Issue a directive to require transit properties to review
their wayside worker rules and procedures and revise them as necessary
to eliminate any authorization that depends solely on the roadway
worker to provide protection from trains and moving equipment (R-13-
40).
To respond initially to these urgent safety recommendations, on
December 31, 2013, FTA issued Safety Advisory 14-1: Right-of-Way Worker
Protection to provide guidance to SSOAs and RTAs on redundant
protections for workers. Safety Advisory 14-1 also requested
information from RTAs and SSOAs regarding RWP program elements and
level of implementation in the rail transit industry, as well as
assessments from each RTA documenting the safety hazards and
mitigations in place at their agencies to protect workers on the
roadway.
FTA's Safety Advisory 14-1 also included RWP best practices
developed from the findings of 28 investigations of rail transit
roadway worker fatalities from 2002 through 2013. Effective practices
in flagging and redundant protection, roadway work scheduling,
communication rules, and other practices were detailed in the advisory.
Methods for improving existing practices, such as rules compliance
testing, job safety briefings and training, were also detailed to
assist transit agencies in improving their RWP processes and
procedures.
In addition, FTA provided new resources to assist the SSO program
and States in conducting activities such as audits, investigations, and
inspections related to Safety Advisory 14-1. Beginning in Fiscal Year
(FY) 2013, FTA established its grant program for SSOAs pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 5329(e)(6) and issued approximately $22 million per year to
States to fund staffing and training for SSO program managers, staff,
and contractors. FTA has continued to provide technical assistance and
training to SSOA staff through the Transportation Safety Institute, the
National Transit Institute, and a 2018 SSOA workshop session, including
sessions focused on oversight of RWP program elements.
Further, on September 24, 2014, NTSB released its Special
Investigation Report on Railroad and Rail Transit Roadway Worker
Protection (SIR 14-
[[Page 20609]]
03). In this report, NTSB identified and discussed the circumstances of
15 railroad and rail transit worker deaths in 2013 and issued eight
additional safety recommendations to FTA, including five directly
related to proposals in this NPRM:
Require initial and recurring training for roadway workers
in hazard recognition and mitigation. Such training should include
recognition and mitigation of the hazards of tasks being performed by
coworkers (R-14-36);
With assistance from the FRA and OSHA, establish roadway
worker protection rules, including requirements for job briefings (R-
14-38);
Once the action specified in Safety Recommendation R-14-38
is completed, update the state safety oversight program to ensure that
rail transit systems are meeting the safety requirements for roadway
workers (R-14-39);
Establish a national inspection program that specifically
includes roadway worker activities (R-14-40); and
Revise 49 CFR part 659 to require all federally funded
rail transit properties to comply with 29parts 1904, 1910, and 1926 (R-
14-41).
To respond to these recommendations, FTA has worked with the rail
transit industry, SSOAs, and through its internal safety program
regulatory processes to focus action on needed improvements in RWP
safety. Through guidance, technical assistance, training, research
projects, and now proposed regulation, transit worker safety, including
RWP safety, has been a major focus for FTA's safety program.
On October 30, 2015, FTA staff participated in developing the APTA
Standard for On-Track System Safety Requirements, APTA RT-OP-S-21-15,
as part of a cooperative agreement with the Center for Urban
Transportation Research. This voluntary standard addresses RWP programs
by providing minimum safety requirements for key elements noted in
NTSB's Special Investigation Report on Railroad and Rail Transit
Roadway Worker Protection.
This standard augments existing APTA voluntary standards that
address RWP by focusing specifically on the use and movement of on-
track equipment, which includes hi-rail vehicles and equipment. This
voluntary standard encourages RTAs to equip all existing and new on-
track equipment with certain minimum design features such as automatic
change-of-direction alarms; back up alarms which provide audible
signals; and alarms that are distinguishable from surrounding ambient
noise, all of which will serve as secondary warning systems. This
standard also encourages RTAs to develop operating procedures and
guidance for the use of on-track equipment in work zone areas and along
the right-of-way.
Additionally, in response to recommendation R-14-038 and to further
address recommendations R-13-039 and R-13-040, FTA contributed to the
development of APTA's 2016 Roadway Worker Protection Program
Requirements Standard, APTA RT-OP-S-016-11. This voluntary standard
encourages adherence to clear rules and procedures, appropriate
training, certification and retraining, and regular monitoring of
right-of-way safety compliance. It also defines minimum elements in an
RTA's on-track safety program and emphasizes opportunities for
redundant protection and the use of advanced worker warning technology.
In January 2017, FTA issued its National Public Transportation Safety
Plan, which encouraged the adoption of these voluntary APTA standards.
C. Safety Risk Analysis and Report on Rail Transit Roadway Worker
Protection
In 2019, FTA initiated a safety risk analysis of the hazards
associated with RWP. FTA conducted this analysis to determine
additional mitigations for RWP risks as the agency worked to maintain
vigilance in the protection of transit workers. FTA used the results of
this safety risk assessment to support the drafting of this NPRM.
In 2021, as part of FTA's Standards Development Program, FTA issued
Report No. 0212 on Rail Transit Roadway Worker Protection. This report
summarized research that reviewed existing standards and best
practices. The report also developed use cases, a risk assessment
matrix, and high-level concepts of operations for rail transit RWP. The
research report provided tools and resources that RTAs may use to
address the safety risks of roadway workers performing tasks on and
adjacent to rail tracks. By overlaying emerging technologies with
existing policies and procedures, this report demonstrated that risk
can be reduced for roadway workers.
As discussed in this report, the use of a hazard/risk assessment
matrix that incorporates human factors and risk analyses and considers
several use cases, and the use of secondary RWP protection devices, may
help agencies to improve RWP. It also demonstrated that while available
RWP technologies provide additional warning to roadway workers and
train crews, they are not a primary protection source. Only through
overlaying these technologies with existing procedures and practices
can RTAs enhance RWP and reduce safety risk for workers.
D. Transit Worker Safety Request for Information
In September 2021, FTA published a request for information in the
Federal Register to solicit information from the public related to
transit worker safety to inform the regulatory process (86 FR 53143).
FTA asked for comment on current RWP practices in the industry,
including redundant protections and training, and on minimum
requirements the public expected to see if FTA pursued Federal
requirements for transit RWP programs. FTA received comments suggesting
that classroom and field training should be required, RWP program
requirements should be responsive to modal differences and differences
in operating characteristics, and suggestions for specific technology
or practices to improve safety (Docket FTA-2021-0012). The section-by-
section analysis below identifies where FTA proposals are responsive to
these comments.
E. Summary of Major Provisions
This NPRM would establish minimum safety standards to protect
transit workers who may access the roadway in the performance of work.
The NPRM proposes that each RTA would adopt and implement an RWP
program to improve transit worker safety that is consistent with
Federal and State safety requirements and approved by the SSOA. The RWP
program would be documented in a dedicated RWP manual, which would
include: (1) terminology, abbreviations, and acronyms used to describe
the RWP program activities and requirements; (2) RWP program elements;
(3) a definition of RTA and transit worker responsibilities for the RWP
program; (4) training, qualification, and supervision required for
transit workers to access the roadway, by labor category or type of
work performed; and (5) processes and procedures to provide adequate
on-track safety for all transit workers who may access the roadway in
the performance of their work, including safety and oversight
personnel.
The RWP manual also would include or incorporate by reference a
track access guide to support on-track safety. The track access guide
would be based on a physical survey of the track geometry and condition
of the transit system.
The RTA would be required to completely review and update its RWP
[[Page 20610]]
manual not less than every two years. This includes updates to reflect
current conditions, lessons learned in implementing the RWP program as
described in the manual, and information provided by the SSOA and FTA.
RTAs would be required to conduct a review within two years of the
SSOA's initial approval of the RWP manual and not less than every two
years thereafter.
FTA's proposed rules for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans
(PTASP) would also require rail transit agencies to include or
incorporate by reference in their Agency Safety Plans (ASPs) the
policies and procedures regarding rail transit workers on the roadway.
The ASP, and any updates to the ASP, will require approval by a joint
labor-management Safety Committee. The joint labor-management Safety
Committee may also, as part of its statutory responsibilities, identify
RWP related safety deficiencies and identify and recommend risk-based
mitigations or strategies to address RWP hazards identified in the
agency's safety risk assessment.
The NPRM would prohibit the use of any protections that rely solely
on the roadway worker to detect rail transit vehicles. Each RTA would
be required to conduct a safety risk assessment to identify redundant
protections for all workers to be included in the RWP program and
manual. Protections would be based on the category of work being
performed. Tasks demanding more attention from roadway workers,
including the use of tools and equipment, based on the results of the
safety risk assessment, likely would require RTAs to implement greater
levels of protection.
In addition, the NPRM would require comprehensive job safety
briefings, a good faith safety challenge provision, and required
reporting of near misses. Formal training and qualification programs
would be required for all workers who access the roadway. RTAs also
would adopt a program for RWP program compliance auditing and
monitoring.
SSOAs would be responsible for approving, overseeing, and enforcing
implementation of the requirements in the NPRM for each RTA in their
jurisdiction, including the RWP Manual and supporting training and
qualification programs.
F. Summary of Economic Analysis
This proposed rule, which sets minimum safety standards for RWP
programs, would benefit roadway workers by reducing their risk of
fatalities and injuries. To estimate benefits, FTA analyzed national
transit worker safety data from 2008 to 2020 and identified accidents
that would have been prevented if agencies had implemented the
protections in the proposed rule. On average, the rule would prevent an
estimated 1.4 fatalities and 3.9 injuries per year, resulting in annual
safety benefits of $14.2 million in 2021 dollars. To meet the safety
standards, RTAs and SSOAs would incur an estimated $2.0 million in
start-up costs plus $11.3 million in ongoing annual costs. The largest
ongoing annual costs are for redundant worker protections ($5.9
million) and roadway worker protection training ($4.5 million).
Table ES-1 summarizes the potential effects of the proposed rule
over a ten-year analysis period from 2023 to 2032. In 2021 dollars, the
rule would have annualized net benefits of $2.6 million at a 2 percent
discount rate, discounted to 2023.
Table ES-1--Summary of Economic Effects
[2021 Dollars, discounted to 2023]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized value
Item (2% discount
rate)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits............................................. $13,414,248
Costs................................................ 10,848,469
Net Benefits......................................... 2,565,779
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
Subpart A--General
671.1 Purpose and Applicability
FTA proposes that this regulation would apply to RTAs that receive
Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. chapter 53 and to all
SSOAs that oversee the safety of rail fixed guideway public
transportation systems. It also specifies that this regulation would
not apply to rail systems that are subject to the safety oversight of
the Federal Railroad Administration.
FTA also proposes to specify that this regulation applies to
transit workers who access any rail fixed guideway public
transportation system in the performance of their work. FTA is
proposing this applicability to encompass the RTAs and SSOAs in its SSO
program and to establish protections for individuals under the RTA's
purview as they access the roadway.
671.3 Policy
FTA proposes that section 671.3(a) will explain that this
regulation establishes minimum safety standards for rail transit RWP.
FTA proposes that each RTA and SSOA may prescribe additional or more
stringent rules that are consistent with this part.
FTA further proposes that section 671.3(b) will explain that FTA
has adopted the use of SMS as the basis for enhancing the safety of
public transportation. Safety Risk Management and Safety Assurance, as
required in part 673 of this chapter, form the basis of a transit
agency's safety risk identification, assessment, mitigation, and
monitoring programs. As such, FTA also proposes that any activities
conducted to carry out this Part must be integrated into the RTA's SMS
required under part 673 of this chapter.
671.5 Definitions
FTA proposes definitions for terms used in this part to establish a
standard RWP vocabulary.
This section also includes definitions of terms used throughout
FTA's safety program. Some of these terms are included in FTA's PTASP
NPRM, which was issued on April 26, 2023 (88 FR 25336). FTA's intent is
for terms to have the same meaning across the safety program, and FTA
will reconcile overlapping terms in the appropriate rulemakings.
Readers should refer, specifically, to the definitions of ``Accountable
Executive,'' ``Equivalent Entity,'' ``Near-miss,'' ``Rail Fixed
Guideway Public Transportation System,'' ``Rail Transit Agency,''
``Roadway,'' ``Safety event,'' ``State Safety Oversight Agency,'' and
``Transit Worker.''
FTA is proposing definitions for this part that are not found in
other parts of the FTA safety program. FTA is proposing to define
``roadway worker protection'' to mean the policies, processes, and
procedures implemented by an RTA to prevent safety events for transit
workers who must access the roadway in the performance of their work.
FTA is proposing ``roadway worker'' to mean a transit worker whose
duties involve inspection, construction, maintenance, repairs, or
providing on-track safety such as flag persons and watchpersons on or
near the roadway or right-of-way or with the potential of fouling
track. FTA is proposing to define ``fouling a track'' to mean the
placement of an individual or an item of equipment in such proximity to
a track that the individual or equipment could be struck by a moving
rail transit vehicle or on-track equipment and to further explain that
any time an individual or equipment is within the track zone, it is
fouling the track.
FTA is proposing to define ``ample time'' to mean the time
necessary for a roadway worker to be clear of the track zone or in a
place of safety 15 seconds
[[Page 20611]]
before a rail transit vehicle moving at the maximum authorized speed on
that track could arrive at the location of the roadway worker. As with
the other requirements of this proposed regulation, FTA anticipates
that some RTAs will exceed FTA's minimum requirements. In this case,
FTA is proposing minimum ample time of 15 seconds to provide a baseline
of safety that includes clearing the track zone or being in a place of
safety. It is FTA's intent with this proposal to ensure that roadway
workers receive adequate time to move sufficiently clear of moving
vehicles or equipment determined not only by the amount of time needed
to move physically off the tracks but also by the amount of time needed
in that specific location to be sufficiently clear of moving vehicles.
FTA is proposing to define ``place of safety'' to mean a place an
individual or individuals can safely occupy outside the track zone,
sufficiently clear of any rail transit vehicle, including any on-track
equipment, moving on any track. FTA is proposing to define ``track
zone'' to mean an area identified by transit workers where a person or
equipment could be struck by the widest equipment that could occupy the
track and typically is an area within six feet of the outside rail on
both sides of any track.
FTA is also proposing to define ``individual rail transit vehicle
detection'' to mean a process by which a lone worker acquires on-track
safety by visually detecting approaching rail transit vehicles and
leaving the track in ample time. FTA is proposing to define ``on-track
safety'' to mean a state of freedom from the danger of being struck by
a moving rail transit vehicle or other equipment as provided by
operating and safety rules that govern track occupancy by roadway
workers, other transit workers, rail transit vehicles, and on-track
equipment.
Finally, FTA is proposing to define ``minor tasks'' to mean those
tasks performed without the use of tools during the execution of which
a roadway worker or other transit worker can visually assess their
surroundings at least every five seconds for approaching rail transit
vehicles and that can be performed without violating ample time. This
definition is part of FTA's proposal to identify appropriate redundant
protections for individuals engaged in tasks that require varying
levels of attention. FTA is proposing to define ``redundant
protection'' to mean at least one additional protection beyond
individual rail transit vehicle detection to ensure on-track safety for
roadway workers and that redundant protections may be procedural,
physical, or both.
FTA is also proposing definitions for ``equivalent protection,''
``flag person,'' ``foul time protection,'' ``job safety briefing,''
``lone worker,'' ``maximum authorized speed,'' ``qualified,'' ``rail
transit vehicle approach warning,'' ``roadway maintenance machine,''
``roadway work group,'' ``roadway worker in charge,'' ``RWP manual,''
``sight distance,'' ``track access guide,'' ``watchperson,'' ``working
limits,'' and ``work zone.''
Subpart B--RWP Program and Manual
This subpart proposes minimum requirements for the RWP program,
which must be adopted and implemented by each RTA. This subpart also
proposes minimum requirements for the RWP manual. Similar to the
relationship between the Agency Safety Plan and the SMS required by the
PTASP regulation, the RWP manual documents the mechanisms by which the
RTA will carry out its RWP program.
671.11 RWP Program
Section 671.11(a) proposes that each RTA must adopt and implement
an RWP program designed to improve transit worker safety and that this
program must be consistent with Federal and state requirements.
Section 671.11(b) proposes that the RWP program must include an RWP
manual, described further in proposed section 671.13, and all of the
RWP program elements described in proposed subpart D of this part.
Section 671.11(c) proposes that each RTA must submit its RWP manual
and subsequent updates to its SSOA for review and approval, as
described in proposed section 671.25.
671.13 RWP Manual
Section 671.13(a) proposes that the RTA establish and maintain a
separate, dedicated manual. The creation of this document as a
separate, dedicated manual reflects FTA's expectation that this manual
will be a critical safety component of an RTA's rail program. This
proposal also reflects FTA's belief that separation from other manuals
or documents will grant the RTA greater flexibility and responsiveness
in updating and amending the RWP manual as needed.
Section 671.13(b) proposes that the RWP manual must include the
terminology, abbreviations, and acronyms used by the RTA to describe
its RWP program activities and requirements. This proposal reflects
FTA's expectation that RTAs will continue use of, or, as necessary,
create standard terminology, abbreviations, and acronyms used
throughout the agency in relation to RWP.
Section 671.13(c) proposes the list of required elements that must
be documented in the RWP manual. The proposed required elements of the
manual include all elements of the RWP program required in subpart D of
this part and a definition of RTA and transit worker responsibilities
as described in subpart C of this part. FTA also proposes that the RWP
manual must document the training, qualification, and supervision the
RTA requires for transit workers to access the track zone, by labor
category or type of work performed. Finally, FTA proposes to require
the RWP manual to document the processes and procedures for all transit
workers who may access the track zone in the performance of their work,
including safety and oversight personnel. In addition, FTA proposes
that procedures for SSOA personnel to access the roadway must conform
with the SSOA's risk-based inspection program. By requiring an RWP
manual to contain certain elements, FTA's intent is to ensure that all
critical elements of an RWP program are documented in one manual. FTA
expects this to reduce the potential for conflicting RWP program
directions and provide a single authoritative source of RWP program
information.
Section 671.13(d) proposes that the RWP manual must include or
incorporate by reference a track access guide to support on-track
safety. FTA believes that a track access guide is a critical element of
on-track safety, as discussed in each subsection below. As FTA proposes
that this guide must be based on a physical survey of the track
geometry and condition of the track system, FTA is proposing
flexibility for RTAs to choose to maintain this track access guide
separately from their RWP manual to allow frequent updates as the
condition of the track system changes.
FTA proposes in section 671.13(d)(1) that the track access guide
includes locations with limited, close, or no clearance, including
locations that have size or access limitations. Locations with size or
access limitations may include but are not limited to, alcoves,
recessed spaces, or other designated places or areas of refuge or
safety. FTA understands that, although areas of refuge or safety should
not be used in a way that limits access, such as being used to store or
otherwise house tools, equipment, or materials, RTAs may use some of
these areas to store or ``stage'' items used to repair, maintain, or
inspect the roadway. FTA proposes including these areas in the physical
[[Page 20612]]
survey to ensure roadway workers are aware of any such areas with
access limitations.
Section 671.13(d)(2) proposes that the track access guide must also
identify locations with increased rail vehicle or on-track equipment
braking requirements.
Sections 671.13(d)(2), (3), (4), and (5) propose that the track
access guide must identify areas with limited visibility, including
locations with reduced rail transit operator visibility due to weather
conditions; curves with limited or no visibility; locations with
limited or no visibility due to obstructions or topography; and all
portals with restricted views. Finally, section 671.13(d)(6) and (7)
propose that the track access guide must identify locations with heavy
outside noise or other environmental conditions that impact on-track
safety and any other locations with access considerations.
In section 671.13(e), FTA proposes to require that the RTA must
completely review and update its RWP manual at least every two years.
FTA proposes that this includes updates to reflect current conditions,
lessons learned in implementing the RWP program as described in the
manual, and information provided by the SSOA and FTA. FTA proposes that
this review and update occur within two years after the SSOA's initial
approval of the RWP manual and not at least every two years thereafter.
FTA proposes a review and update cycle of not less than every two
years to ensure that RWP manuals reflect current RTA conditions,
policies and procedures, and lessons learned. This cycle is intended to
balance the critical nature of this document and effort to review and
update the same. As the track access guide must be included or
incorporated by reference in the RWP manual, FTA's proposal includes
the requirement that this complete review and update will include the
track access guide, regardless of whether the guide is maintained as a
separate document from the RWP manual. Further, in section 671.13(f),
FTA requires RTAs to update both the RWP manual and the track access
guide as soon as is practicable when a change in RTA conditions means
either document does not reflect current conditions.
Section 671.13(g) proposes that the RTA must distribute the RWP
manual to all transit workers who access the roadway and that the RTA
distribute the revised manual to all transit workers who access the
roadway after each revision. For RTAs that decide to maintain the track
access guide separately from the RWP manual, this proposal includes the
requirement that those RTAs distribute the track access guide to all
transit workers who access the roadway and distribute the revised track
access guide to all transit workers after each revision. FTA's intent
is to ensure that this safety critical information is disseminated to
those workers who access the roadway.
Subpart C--Responsibilities
FTA is proposing RWP responsibilities for three distinct entities:
the RTA, transit workers, and the SSOA.
671.21 Rail Transit Agency
Section 671.21 specifies responsibilities for the RTA, including
establishing procedures and requirements for equipment and protection.
Section 671.21(a) proposes general requirements for the RTA, the
intent of each is described below. Section 671.21(a)(1) proposes to
require the RTA to establish procedures to provide ample time and
determine appropriate sight distance based on maximum authorized track
speeds. FTA's proposed definition for terms used in this part can be
found in proposed section 671.5. As previously noted, it is FTA's
intent with this proposal to ensure that roadway workers receive
adequate time to move sufficiently clear of moving vehicles or
equipment determined not only by the amount of time needed to move
physically off the tracks but also by the amount of time needed in that
specific location to be sufficiently clear of moving vehicles.
FTA's proposals reflect the expectation that RTAs include
considerations for roadway work group size when making these
determinations, to ensure ample time for all workers to be sufficiently
clear of moving vehicles. For example, if the nearest place of safety
is not sufficiently large to allow the entire roadway work group to be
sufficiently clear of moving vehicles, the RTA must include additional
time for members of the workgroup to access another location clear of
moving vehicles.
Section 671.21(a)(2) proposes to prohibit the use of individual
rail transit vehicle detection as the only form of protection in the
track zone. This proposed prohibition reflects FTA's determination that
a lone worker may not be able to reliably detect approaching rail
transit vehicles or equipment in ample time and, further, that the
safety risk associated with the practice of individual rail transit
vehicle detection as the only form of protection in the track zone is
unacceptable. This proposed prohibition also reflects public input to a
September 2021 Request for Information (RFI) on transit worker safety
mitigations including potential minimum safety standards for RWP
programs. Respondents generally agreed that the use of individual
detection of rail transit vehicles as the only method of RWP program
did not adequately address all hazards for workers.
Sections 671.21(a)(3) and (4) propose that the RTA must establish
procedures to provide job safety briefings to all transit workers who
enter a track zone to perform work whenever a rule violation is
observed. This is responsive both to FTA's determination that job
safety briefings are a critical component of roadway safety and to RFI
respondents' assertion that poor quality job safety briefings at
different operational and organizational levels may contribute to
safety risk for workers on the roadway.
Section 671.21(a)(5) proposes that the RTA must establish
procedures to provide transit workers with the right to challenge and
refuse in good faith any assignment based on on-track safety concerns
and resolve such challenges and refusals promptly and equitably. This
is often called a ``good faith safety challenge'' or ``good faith
challenge.'' FTA's proposed good faith challenge process described in
section 671.37 is modelled on and generally consistent with the
existing FRA good faith challenge. FTA understands that many RTAs
already implement a version of this procedure and that their version
may encompass more than just on-track safety concerns. FTA is not
proposing that these RTAs to revise their existing procedure and
process, as long as they meet the minimums specified here.
Section 671.21(a)(6) proposes that the RTA must establish
procedures to require the reporting of unsafe acts, unsafe conditions,
and near-misses on the roadway to the Transit Worker Safety Reporting
Program. This proposal creates additional safety reporting requirements
for an RTA's Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program established under
FTA's existing PTASP regulation (49 CFR 673.23(b)). FTA proposes that
an RTA's Transit Worker Safety Reporting program must include mandatory
reporting of three major categories of safety concerns on the roadway
(unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, and near-misses). This proposed
expansion of an RTA's safety reporting program reflects the safety
critical nature of information related to RWP.
Section 671.21(a)(7) proposes to require the RTA to ensure that all
transit workers who must enter a track zone to
[[Page 20613]]
perform work understand, are qualified in, and comply with the RWP
program. This proposal reflects industry practice and is intended to
ensure that the RWP program is sufficiently broad in application to
address all transit workers who may access a track zone.
Section 671.21(b) requires the RTA to establish requirements for
on-track safety, including equipment and protection. This proposal
reflects industry practice. Section 671.21(b)(1) proposes to require
the RTA to establish requirements for equipment transit workers must
have in order to access the roadway or track zone. In deference to the
specific equipment different job functions may require, FTA specifies
that the RTA must establish these requirements by labor category. FTA's
intent is to ensure that RTAs establish minimum basic requirements for
equipment and to encourage RTAs to consider which positions at their
agency may require additional equipment and address those requirements
accordingly.
Section 671.21(b)(2) proposes to require RTAs to establish
requirements for credentials that transit workers must display while on
the roadway or in the track zone. FTA's examples include a badge,
wristband, or RWP card, but RTAs may identify alternate forms of
credentialing. FTA proposes that RTAs must also establish a requirement
for display of credentials such that they are visible when on the
roadway or in the track zone. A physical indication of an individual's
qualification to access the roadway or the track zone is reflective of
industry best practices.
Section 671.21(b)(3) proposes to require the RTA to establish
requirements for on-track safety, including protections for emergency
response personnel who must access the roadway or the track zone. FTA
is proposing this to support the safety of emergency personnel who need
to access the roadway or track zone in the performance of their job
duties.
Section 671.21(b)(4) proposes to require the RTA to establish
protections for multiple roadway work groups within a common area in a
track zone. This proposal is responsive to NTSB recommendations. FTA's
proposal reflects its expectation that these protections include, at a
minimum, information such as, when multiple work groups are present,
who is considered the roadway worker in charge, whether one job safety
briefing is sufficient or multiple job safety briefings must occur, and
how track access is granted and released.
671.23 Transit Worker
Section 671.23 proposes responsibilities for the transit worker.
FTA is proposing specific responsibilities for transit workers in part
to respond to common industry observations that, when regulations apply
only directly to the transit agency, some transit agencies experience
difficulty ensuring compliance from the workforce. FTA is also
proposing specific responsibilities for transit workers as a reflection
of the key role the individual transit worker plays in ensuring on-
track safety. This approach is consistent with FRA's requirement for
individual roadway workers in 49 CFR 214.313.
Section 671.23(a) proposes to require transit workers to follow the
requirements of the RTA's RWP program as it applies to their position
and labor category.
Section 671.23(b) proposes to prohibit transit workers from fouling
the track until they have received appropriate permissions and
redundant protections have been established as specified in the RWP
manual.
Section 671.23(c) proposes to require transit workers to understand
the protections that they will use for their on-track safety while
performing the specific task that requires access to the roadway or
track zone. Further, transit workers must acknowledge these protections
in writing before they access the roadway or track zone.
Section 671.23(d) proposes to permit a transit worker to refuse to
foul the track if the worker makes a good faith determination that the
instructions to be applied at a job location do not comply with the
RTA's RWP program or are otherwise unsafe. This proposal is the
companion to proposed section 671.21(a)(5), which requires RTAs to
provide transit workers the right to challenge and refuse in good faith
any assignment based on on-track safety concerns.
Similarly, section 671.23(e) proposes to require transit workers to
report unsafe acts and conditions and near-misses related to the RWP
program as part of the RTA's Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program.
This proposal is the companion to proposed section 671.21(a)(6).
671.25 State Safety Oversight Agency
Section 671.25 proposes responsibilities for the SSOA. FTA proposes
to require the SSOA to fulfill these responsibilities for every RTA
under their jurisdiction. Although not explicitly stated in this text,
SSOAs who oversee an RTA that operates in a location that places the
RTA under the jurisdiction of two or more SSOAs must work cooperatively
with the other SSOA(s) having jurisdiction as required under 49 CFR
674.15.
Section 671.25(a) proposes to require the SSOA to review and
approve the RWP manual and any subsequent updates for each RTA within
their jurisdiction. This is reflective of the SSOA's primary safety
oversight responsibility for such RTAs.
Section 671.25(a)(1) proposes to require that SSOA approve RWP
program elements within 90 calendar days of receipt of the program.
FTA's proposal reflects its expectation that this amount of time will
allow SSOAs to complete full and detailed reviews of all program
elements commensurate to the critical role the RWP program plays in
ensuring transit worker safety. FTA encourages SSOAs and RTAs to
collaborate early and often in the development of the initial RWP
program to ensure that (1) the SSOA and RTA can meet their deadlines
and (2) the RWP program developed is sufficient to ensure transit
worker safety.
Section 671.25(a)(2) proposes to require the SSOA to submit all
approved RWP program elements for each RTA in its jurisdiction, and any
subsequent updates, to FTA within 30 calendar days of when the SSOA
approves those elements. FTA is proposing this to ensure it can
validate these safety critical elements.
Section 671.25(b) proposes to require the SSOA to update its
Program Standard to explain the role of the SSOA in overseeing the
RTA's execution of its RWP program. FTA believes that, as a key safety
element of an SSOA's oversight program, the RWP program must be
reflected in the SSOA's Program Standard. FTA encourages SSOAs and RTAs
to work collaboratively on this update in conjunction with the
recommended collaboration on the initial RWP program. FTA is proposing
this approach to help SSOAs leverage RTA experience and vice versa,
ultimately reducing the need for a prolonged RWP program review and
revision process and strengthening both the RWP program and the SSOA's
RWP program oversight.
Section 671.25(c)(1) proposes that the SSOA conduct an annual audit
of the RTA's compliance with its RWP program. FTA's proposal includes
the requirement that the audit include all required RWP program
elements and be conducted for each RTA the SSOA oversees. FTA expects
SSOAs to conduct these audits independently from any analogous RTA
internal audit
[[Page 20614]]
or compliance process. The proposal is responsive to NTSB
recommendations to require SSOAs to ensure RTAs meet the safety
requirements for roadway workers.
Section 671.25(c)(2) proposes to require the SSOA to issue a report
with any findings and recommendations arising from the audit. FTA
proposes that this report must include, at a minimum, (1) an analysis
of the effectiveness of the RWP program; (2) recommendations for
improvements, if necessary or appropriate; and (3) corrective action
plan(s), if necessary or appropriate. FTA also proposes that the RTA
must be given an opportunity to comment on any findings and
recommendations. In making this proposal, FTA expects the SSOA to
exercise judgment and incorporate changes to the findings or
recommendations when presented with errors of fact or other reasonable
requests from the RTA. FTA believes these audit reports will be a
valuable tool for communicating the results of the SSOA's audit in a
form that supports communication of these results to the RTA and,
ultimately, resolution of any findings and incorporation of any
recommendations as appropriate. Regarding the proposed requirement that
SSO audit reports of the RWP program include corrective action plans if
necessary or appropriate, FTA proposes that SSOAs and RTAs will follow
processes established in part 674 for requiring, developing, approving,
and executing corrective action plan(s) related to the RWP program
audit.
FTA proposes that the analysis of the effectiveness of the RWP
program included in the report must include a review of (1) all RWP-
related events over the period covered by the audit; (2) all RWP-
related reports made to the Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program
over the period covered by the audit; (3) all documentation of
instances where a transit worker(s) has challenged and refused in good
faith any assignment based on on-track safety concerns and
documentation on the resolution; (4) an assessment of the adequacy of
the track access guide required in section 671.13(d), including whether
the guide reflects current track geometry and conditions; (5) a review
of training and qualification records for transit workers who must
enter a track zone to perform work; (6) a representative sample of
written job safety briefing confirmations as described in sections
671.33(b)(2) and (3); and (7) a review of the RWP compliance monitoring
program as described in section 671.43.
Subpart D--Required RWP Program Elements
FTA is proposing the following minimum RWP program element
requirements: roadway worker in charge, job safety briefings,
requirements for lone workers, good faith safety challenges, risk-based
redundant protections, an RWP training and qualification program, and
an RWP compliance monitoring program.
671.31 Roadway Worker in Charge
Section 671.31(a) proposes that the RTA must designate one roadway
worker in charge for each roadway work group whose duties require
fouling a track. FTA proposes that the roadway worker in charge must be
qualified under the training and qualification program specified in
proposed section 671.41 and is responsible for the on-track safety for
all members of the roadway work group. This means that FTA expects the
individual assigned as the roadway worker in charge to serve only the
function of maintaining on-track safety for all members of their
roadway work group and to perform no other unrelated job function. RTAs
may designate a general roadway worker in charge or may designate a
roadway worker in charge specifically for a particular work situation.
Section 671.31(b) proposes that the RTA must ensure the roadway
worker in charge provides a job safety briefing to all roadway workers
before any member of the roadway work group fouls a track.
Additionally, FTA proposes that the roadway worker in charge must
provide an updated job safety briefing before the on-track safety
procedures change during the work period and immediately after any
observed violation of on-track safety procedures before track zone work
continues.
FTA understands that emergencies may occur such that roadway
workers in charge may not be able to provide updated job safety
briefings of changes to on-track safety. Therefore, FTA proposes
section 671.31(b)(2) to specify that, in the event of an emergency, any
roadway worker who cannot receive the updated job safety briefing in
advance of a change to on-track safety procedures, must be removed from
the roadway and must not return until on-track safety is re-
established, and they have been given an updated job safety briefing.
FTA's proposals regarding job safety briefings largely reflect
industry practice and propose explicitly requiring updated job safety
briefings to address common situations where the on-track safety
procedures change during a work period and to immediately respond to
observed violations of on-track safety procedures.
671.33 Job Safety Briefing
Section 671.33 proposes specific requirements for job safety
briefings. This proposal is responsive to NTSB safety recommendations
about establishing requirements for job safety briefings and is
consistent with FRA requirements.
Section 671.33(a) reiterates the proposed requirements that the RTA
must ensure the roadway worker in charge provides any roadway worker
who must foul a track with a job safety briefing prior to fouling the
track, every time the roadway worker fouls the track.
Section 671.33(b) proposes the required minimum elements, as
appropriate, of the job safety briefing that the roadway worker in
charge must provide. FTA proposes the ``as appropriate'' language
because not all of the elements may be relevant to each rail transit
system. This proposal includes (1) a discussion of the nature of the
work to be performed and the characteristics of the work, and includes
work plans for instances where multiple roadway worker groups are
working within a single area. FTA expects this to also include any
relevant information for multiple roadway worker groups working in
adjacent areas; (2) a discussion of the established working limits; (3)
identification of any hazards involved in performing the work; (4)
information on how track safety is being provided for each track
identified to be fouled and identification and location of key
personnel, such as a watchperson and the roadway worker in charge; (5)
instructions for each on-track safety procedure to be followed,
including appropriate flags and flag placement, placement; (6) roles
and responsibilities for communication for all transit workers involved
in the work, responsive to NTSB recommendations; (7) safety information
about any adjacent track and identification of the roadway maintenance
machines or on-track equipment that may foul adjacent tracks; (8)
information on how to access the roadway worker in charge and
instructions for alternative procedures in the event that the roadway
worker in charge becomes inaccessible to members of the roadway work
group; (9) personal protective equipment required for the work to be
performed; (10) designated place(s) of safety; and (11) the means for
determining how ample time will be provided.
FTA's intent is that the proposed discussion of the nature and
characteristics of the work includes any relevant information for
multiple
[[Page 20615]]
roadway worker groups working in adjacent areas. The proposals that the
job safety briefing include instructions for each on-track safety
procedure to be followed and the role and responsibilities for
communication for all transit workers involved in the work are
responsive to NTSB recommendations.
Section 671.33(b)(10) proposes that the job safety briefing must
identify designated place(s) of safety. FTA intends that the identified
designated place(s) of safety will be sufficient for the number of
transit workers in the roadway work group. This proposal reflects FTA's
understanding that such designated places of safety must be accessible
and clear of debris, tools, equipment, or any other material that
hinders the ability to access and occupy the space. While not part of
the proposal, FTA's expectation is that, where multiple work groups
occupy overlapping or adjacent work locations, the associated roadway
workers in charge coordinate to ensure their job safety briefings
identify designated place(s) of safety sufficient for the combined
number of transit workers in the roadway work group.
Section 671.33(c) proposes that, to complete a job safety briefing,
the roadway worker in charge must confirm that each roadway worker
understands the on-track safety procedures and instructions, each
roadway worker acknowledges the briefing and accepts the required
personal protective equipment in writing, and the roadway worker in
charge verifies in writing each roadway worker's understanding and
written acknowledgment of the briefing.
Section 671.33(d) proposes that, if there is any change in the
scope of work or roadway work group after the initial job safety
briefing, or if a violation of on-track safety is observed, a follow-up
job safety briefing must be conducted. This follow-up safety briefing
must be completed before any member of the work group reenters the
roadway.
671.35 Lone Worker
FTA proposes section 671.35 to address common industry and NTSB
concerns and recommendations about the practice of permitting a single
person to foul the track. Specifically, FTA proposes to allow RTAs to
authorize lone workers to perform limited duties that require fouling a
track only under the following circumstances: (1) the lone worker must
be qualified as both as a roadway worker in charge and as a lone worker
following the RTA's RWP training and qualification program; (2) the
lone worker may perform only routine inspection or minor tasks and move
from one location to another, may only access locations defined in the
track access guide as appropriate for lone workers, and may not use
power tools; and (3) the lone worker may not use individual rail
transit vehicle detection as the only form of on-track safety. The
proposal that lone workers may not use individual rail transit vehicle
detection is a form of on-track safety is responsive to NTSB
recommendations on lone workers. These proposed restrictions reflect
the exponential increase in safety risk presented by workers fouling
the track as individuals rather than as part of a roadway work group
while respecting that certain job functions may be performed safely
under these restrictions as a lone worker.
Section 671.35(b) proposes that each lone worker must communicate
with a supervisor or other designated transit worker to receive an on-
track safety briefing consistent with proposed section 671.33(b) prior
to fouling the track. FTA proposes that this briefing must include a
discussion of the planned work activities and the procedures they will
use to establish on-track safety. FTA also proposes that the lone
worker must acknowledge and document the job safety briefing in
writing.
671.37 Good Faith Safety Challenge
Section 671.37(a) proposes that the RTA must document its
procedures that it provides to roadway workers the right to challenge
and refuse in good faith any RWP assignment they believe is unsafe or
would violate the RTA's RWP program. FTA proposes in section 671.37(b)
that this written procedure must include methods or processes to ensure
prompt and equitable resolution of any challenges and refusals made.
Section 671.37(c) proposes that the written procedure must require the
roadway worker to provide a description of the safety concern regarding
on-track safety and that the roadway worker issuing a good faith safety
challenge must remain clear of the roadway or track zone until the
challenge and refusal is resolved. This process reflects common
industry practice and provides a mechanism for transit workers, who
often are the most familiar with the particular needs and hazards
related to their specific job tasks, to appropriately address unsafe
situations.
671.39 Risk-Based Redundant Protections
Section 671.39(a) proposes requirements for RTAs to identify and
provide redundant protections for each category of work roadway workers
perform on the roadway or track. This section also proposes to require
the establishment of redundant protections to ensure on-track safety
for multiple roadway work groups within a common area. This proposal is
responsive to NTSB recommendations for FTA to require the use of
redundant protections.
Section 671.39(b) proposes that the RTA must use the appropriate
Safety Risk Management of its SMS established in part 673 to assess
safety risk and establish mitigations in the form of redundant
protections. This section proposes that the RTA must use the methods
and processes established under part 673 to establish redundant
protections for each category of work performed by roadway workers on
the rail transit system, including workers, to the extent that lone
workers are permitted under the agency's RWP program. This proposal
reflects FTA's adoption of the principles of SMS as the mechanism for
ensuring transit safety.
In section 671.39(b)(1), FTA proposes that this safety risk
assessment must be consistent with the RTA's Agency Safety Plan and the
SSOA's Program Standard. In section 671.39(b)(2), FTA is proposing that
RTAs may supplement the safety risk assessment with engineering
assessments, inputs from the Safety Assurance process established in
part 673, the results of safety event investigations, and other safety
risk management strategies and approaches.
Section 671.39(b)(3) proposes that the RTA must review and update
the safety risk assessment at least every two years. This proposal is
intended to ensure that the safety risk assessment reflects current
conditions, lessons learned from safety events, actions the RTA has
taken to address reports of unsafe acts and conditions and near-misses,
and the results of the agency's monitoring of redundant protection
effectiveness.
Section 671.39(b)(4) proposes that the SSOA may identify and
require the RTA to implement alternate redundant protections based on
the RTA's unique operating characteristics and capabilities. These
redundant protections may supplant or be implemented alongside the
RTA's identified redundant protections.
Section 671.39(c) proposes that the RTA must identify redundant
protections for roadway workers performing different categories of work
on the roadway and within track zones. This flexibility is intended to
reflect the wide range of activities conducted on the roadway and to
provide the opportunity for RTAs to ``right size''
[[Page 20616]]
protections based on the safety risk associated with different
categories of work. This proposal would require RTAs to establish and
layer redundant protections commensurate with the work being performed.
FTA proposes that RTAs, at a minimum, identify redundant protections
for the following categories of work, as appropriate: (1) roadway
workers moving from one track zone to another; (2) roadway workers
performing minor tasks; (3) roadway workers conducting visual
inspections; (4) roadway workers using hand tools, machines, or
equipment to test track system components or conduct non-visual
inspections; (5) roadway workers using hand tools, machines, or
equipment in performing maintenance, construction, or repairs; and (6)
lone workers, to the extent that lone workers are permitted by the
RTA's RWP program, accessing the roadway or track zone or performing
visual inspections or minor tasks.
Section 671.39(d)(1) proposes that redundant protections may be
procedural or physical. FTA has proposed definitions for each kind of
protection as it is likely that RTAs will use a mix of procedural and
physical redundant protections to ensure on-track safety. Allowing both
physical and procedural redundant protections is responsive to RFI
respondents, the majority of whom recommended that FTA allow both
physical and redundant protections for workers on the roadway.
Section 671.39(d)(2) proposes example redundant protections. FTA is
not proposing an explicit set of redundant protections; rather, FTA
proposes that RTAs and SSOAs may use any of the redundant protections
listed in this paragraph or identify, using the agency's Safety Risk
Management process, redundant protections suitable to the specific
circumstance under which they will be used.
Section 671.39(d)(3) proposes that redundant protections for lone
workers must include, at a minimum, foul time or an equivalent
protection approved by the SSOA.
671.41 RWP Training and Qualifications
Section 671.41(a) proposes the general requirement for an RTA to
adopt an RWP training program. This proposal is responsive to NTSB
recommendations. Section 671.41(a)(1) proposes that the training
program must address all transit workers responsible for on-track
safety by position. This proposal includes, but is not limited to,
roadway workers, operation control center personnel, rail transit
vehicle operators, operators of on-track equipment and roadway
maintenance machines, and any other transit workers who play a role in
providing on-track safety or fouling a track for the performance of
work as transit workers who must be addressed by the RWP training
program.
Section 671.41(a)(2) proposes that a transit worker must complete
the RWP training program for the relevant position before the RTA may
assign that transit worker to perform the duties of a roadway worker;
to oversee or supervise access to the track zone from the operations
control center; or to operate vehicles, on-track equipment, and roadway
maintenance machines on the rail transit system.
Section 671.41(a)(3) proposes that the RWP training program must
address RWP hazard recognition and mitigation. This proposal is
responsive to an NTSB recommendation to require initial and recurring
training for roadway workers in hazard recognition and mitigation. This
section also specifies that the training program must address lessons
learned through the results of compliance testing, near-miss reports,
reports of unsafe acts or conditions, and feedback received on the
training program.
Section 671.41(a)(4) proposes that the RWP training program must
include both initial and refresher training by position and that
refresher training must occur every two years at a minimum.
Section 671.41(a)(5) proposes that the RTA must review and update
its RWP program not less than every two years. FTA proposes that this
includes incorporating lessons learned in implementing the RWP program
and information provided by the SSOA and FTA. FTA also proposes that
the review and update process must include an opportunity for roadway
worker involvement, to ensure potentially valuable safety information
from workers executing tasks on the roadway can be collected and
incorporated into the safety training program.
Section 671.41(b) proposes the required elements of the RWP
training program. FTA is proposing these elements based on industry
best practices and best practices for adult learners.
Section 671.41(b)(1) proposes that the RWP training program must
include interactive training that provides the opportunity for workers
to ask the RWP trainer questions and for workers and trainers to raise
and discuss RWP issues. FTA proposes that the initial training must
include experience in a representative field setting such that the
initial training may not be classroom-only. FTA also proposes that both
the initial and refresher training must include worker demonstrations
and trainer assessments of the worker's ability to comply with RWP
instructions.
Section 671.41(c) proposes minimum contents for the RWP training
program. FTA proposes that the RWP training program include at a
minimum: (1) how to interpret and use the RTA's RWP manual; (2) how to
use the RTA's good faith challenge process; (3) how to make reports on
unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, and near misses through the RTA's
Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program and the mandatory duty to make
such reports; (4) track zone recognition and an understanding of the
space around the tracks within which on-track safety is required,
including use of the track access guide; (5) the functions and
responsibilities of all transit workers involved in on-track safety, by
position; (6) proper compliance with on-track safety instructions; (7)
signals and directions given by watchpersons, and the proper procedures
to implement upon receiving a rail transit vehicle approach warning
from a watchperson; (8) the hazards associated with working on or near
rail transit tracks, including traction power, if applicable; (9) rules
and procedures for redundant protections identified under section
671.37 and how they are applied to RWP; and (10) how to safely cross
rail transit tracks in yards and on the mainline. These minimum
proposed elements reflect industry best practice and provide a baseline
for safety on the roadway.
Section 671.41(d) proposes specialized minimum training and
qualifications for transit workers with additional responsibilities for
on-track safety. FTA is proposing additional training for transit
workers serving the function of watchpersons, flag persons, lone
workers, roadway workers in charge, and any other transit workers with
responsibilities for establishing, supervising, and monitoring on track
safety. FTA proposes that this training must cover the content and
application of the additional RWP program requirements carried out by
the relevant position(s). FTA also proposes that this additional
training must also address the relevant physical characteristics of the
RTA's system where on-track safety may be established.
Similar to the general RWP training program, FTA proposes that this
specialized training must include demonstration and assessment of the
transit worker's ability to perform these additional responsibilities.
FTA proposes that refresher training on these additional
responsibilities must occur at
[[Page 20617]]
least every two years. This proposal reflects the critical safety role
these transit workers have in establishing, supervising, and monitoring
on track safety.
Section 671.41(e) proposes that the RTA must ensure that those
transit workers providing RWP training are qualified and have active
RWP certification at the RTA. This proposal is intended to ensure that
RTAs are providing effective RWP training. Section 671.41(e) further
proposes that, at a minimum, the RTA must consider: (1) a trainer's
experience and knowledge of effective training techniques in the chosen
learning environment; (2) a trainer's experience with the RTA RWP
program; (3) a trainer's knowledge of the RTA RWP rules, operations,
and operating environment, including applicable operating rules; and
(4) a trainer's knowledge of the training requirements specified in
this part. FTA's intent with this proposal is to ensure that trainers
providing RWP program training have the capacity to deliver effective
training in the learning environment used at the agency; are
experienced with the specifics of the RTA's individual RWP program, the
RTA's rules, operations, and operating environment; and are
knowledgeable about FTA's requirements for RWP program training.
671.43 RWP Compliance Monitoring Program
Section 671.43 proposes that the RTA must develop and implement a
program to monitor its own compliance with the requirements specified
in its RWP program. This monitoring program is consistent with Safety
Assurance principles and is intended to ensure consistent and effective
RWP program implementation. FTA proposes that this program must
include, at a minimum, inspections, observations, and audits consistent
with the safety performance monitoring and measurement practices
established in the RTA's Agency Safety Plan and the SSOA's Program
Standard.
Section 671.43(b)(1) further proposes that the RTA must provide
monthly reports to the SSOA documenting the RTA's compliance with and
sufficiency of the RWP program and section 671.43(b)(2) specifies that
the RTA must provide an annual briefing to the Accountable Executive
and the Board of Directors, or equivalent entity, regarding the
performance of the RWP program and any identified deficiencies
requiring corrective action.
Subpart E--Recordkeeping
671.51 Recordkeeping
FTA proposes recordkeeping requirements related to the RWP program
in keeping with the recordkeeping requirements established in part 673,
which requires transit agencies to maintain document related to SMS
implementation and the results of SMS processes and activities. As
discussed above, an RWP program is a key element of Safety Risk
Management and Safety Assurance in an RTA's SMS.
Section 671.51(a) proposes that the RTA must maintain the documents
that set forth its RWP program, documents related to the implementation
of its RWP program, and documentation of the results from the
procedures, processes, assessments, training, and activities specified
in this part for the RWP program.
Section 671.51(b) proposes that the RTA must maintain records of
its compliance with this requirement, including transit worker RWP
training and refresher training records, for a minimum of three years
after the individual record is created.
Finally, Section 671.51(c) specifies that the RTA must make these
documents available upon request by FTA or other Federal entity, or an
SSOA having jurisdiction.
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review''), as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563 (``Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review'') and Executive Order 14094 (``Modernizing
Regulatory Review''), directs Federal agencies to assess the benefits
and costs of regulations, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits when possible, and to consider economic, environmental,
and distributional effects. It also directs the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) to review significant regulatory actions, including
regulations with annual economic effects of $200 million or more. OMB
has determined that the proposed rule is not significant within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 and has not reviewed it under that
order.
Overview and Need for Regulation
FTA has determined that unsafe practices and conditions place rail
transit workers at risk of being killed or seriously injured while
performing work on the roadway. According to data collected by FTA,
roadway worker accidents have caused more transit worker fatalities
than any other type of safety event. Since 1994, 52 rail transit
workers have been killed and over 200 workers have experienced major
injuries from roadway safety events, primarily from collisions with
rail transit vehicles, falls, and electrocution. From January 1, 2008,
to October 31, 2022, 22 workers have been killed and 120 workers
seriously injured in roadway accidents. Currently, there are no Federal
regulations or standards governing rail transit worker RWP, despite
recommendations from NTSB and TRACS.
The proposed rule would establish RWP program standards for rail
transit agencies in all states. The rule would establish minimum
baseline standards and require risk-based redundant protections,
defined as protections outside of the employee's individual ability to
detect a train and move to a place of safety, such as shunts or
derailers, for rail transit roadway workers occupying the rail roadway
during hours of operations. The rule would require transit agencies to
do the following:
1. Set minimum standards for RWP program elements, including an RWP
manual and track access guide.
2. Meet requirements for on-track safety and supervision, job
safety briefings, good faith safety challenges, and reporting unsafe
acts and conditions and near-misses.
3. Develop and implement risk-based redundant protections for
workers.
4. Establish RWP training, qualification, and compliance monitoring
activities.
The proposed rule would apply to RTAs in the SSO program, SSOAs,
and rail transit workers who access the roadway to perform work. SSOAs
would oversee and enforce FTA's RWP program requirements.
Baseline and Analytical Approach
FTA considered three regulatory options while developing the
proposed rule. The key distinction between the three options is the use
of redundant protections.
Option 1: FTA would require RTAs to perform a risk analysis to
determine what types of redundant protections must be used in addition
to the baseline RWP program.
Option 2: FTA would establish requirements for an RWP program but
would not mandate the use of redundant protections.
Option 3: FTA would mandate the use of standard physical redundant
protections to protect workers when accessing the roadway in additions
to the baseline RWP program.
[[Page 20618]]
To assess the effects of the three regulatory options, FTA analyzed
roadway worker injuries and fatalities outside California from January
1, 2008, to September 19, 2020 (12.7 years). The analysis excludes
California because the state established RWP safety standards in
2016.\2\ Agencies reported 97 injuries and 20 fatalities, for an annual
average of 7.6 injuries and 1.6 fatalities. FTA used the annual
averages as a baseline rate for fatalities and injuries in the absence
of the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Public Utilities Commission of the State of California
(2016). ``General Order No. 175-A: Rules and Regulations Governing
Roadway Worker Protection Provided by Rail Transit Agencies and Rail
Fixed Guideway Systems.'' https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M159/K905/159905345.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To estimate benefits and costs of the proposed rule, FTA used a
ten-year analysis period from 2023-2032. All dollar amounts listed are
in 2020 dollars. To estimate labor costs associated with meeting
requirements, FTA used occupational wage data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics as of May 2020 for the ``Urban Transit Systems'' industry
(North American Industry Classification System code 485100).\3\ FTA
used median hourly wages as a basis for the estimated labor costs,
multiplied by 1.62 to account for employer benefits.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). ``May 2020 National
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates: United States: NAICS
485000--Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation.'' https://www.bls.gov/oes/2020/may/naics3_485000.htm.
\4\ Multiplier derived using Bureau of Labor Statistics data on
employer costs for employee compensation in December 2022 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.htm). Employer costs for state and
local government workers averaged $57.60 an hour, with $35.69 for
wages and $21.95 for benefit costs. To estimate full costs from
wages, one would use a multiplier of $57.60/$21.95, or 1.62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits
Transit subject-matter experts working with FTA reviewed injuries
and fatalities reported in the NTD to determine if the regulatory
options would have prevented them. FTA then calculated the average
annual number of preventable injuries and fatalities to estimate the
benefits of each regulatory option. One source of uncertainty for the
analysis is that FTA does not have information on the RWP programs or
protections that agencies may have adopted after the accidents. As a
result, the analysis may slightly overestimate the benefits (and the
associated costs) of the regulatory options.
Table 1 compares the average number of preventable injuries and
fatalities for each regulatory option. Option 1 would result in an
average annual reduction of 2.37 injuries and 1.18 fatalities. Option 2
results in an average annual reduction of 1.34 injuries and 0.87
fatalities. Option 3 results in an average annual reduction of 3.87
injuries and 1.42 fatalities.
Table 1--Average Annual Preventable Injuries and Fatalities, 2008 to 2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preventable Injuries................................... 2.37 1.34 3.87
Preventable Fatalities................................. 1.18 0.87 1.42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine the monetized values for prevented fatalities and
injuries, FTA used DOT's value of $11.6 million for a fatality and the
KABCO Scale value of $210,000 for an injury with ``Severity Unknown.''
\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Department of Transportation (2022). ``Departmental
Guidance on Valuation of a Statistical Life in Economic Analysis.''
https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/revised-departmental-guidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-in-economic-analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the 10-year analysis period, the undiscounted benefits for
Option 1 are $142.3 million, and the annualized benefits are $13.7
million at a 2 percent discount rate, discounted to 2023 (Table 2). For
Option 2, the undiscounted benefits are $103.5 million, with annualized
benefits of $10 million. For Option 3, the undiscounted benefits are
$173 million, with annualized benefits of $16.6 million.
Table 2--Benefits of the Proposed Rule
[2023-2032]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (2023 to 2032) Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted........................................... $142,311,760 $103,532,044 $172,931,886
Annualized (2% Discount Rate).......................... 13,678,562 9,951,177 16,621,673
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs
Agencies are expected to incur start-up and ongoing costs to
implement RWP requirements. While some costs vary by regulatory option,
many of the costs are fixed. Table 3 summarizes costs of the provisions
over the 10-year analysis period. The largest fixed cost is for the
Roadway Worker Protection Training program, which has estimated costs
of $46 million. The largest difference in costs among the regulatory
options stems from the Minimum Controls and Limitations (redundant
worker protections) requirement, which has costs ranging from $0 for
Option 2 to $118 million for Option 3.
Table 3--Ten-Year Costs of the Proposed Rule
[2023-2032]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Program............................................ $911,728 $911,728 $911,728
RWP Manual............................................. 51,656 51,656 51,656
Rail System Responsibilities........................... 152,466 152,466 152,466
[[Page 20619]]
Employee Responsibilities.............................. 5,165,600 5,165,600 5,165,600
Job Safety Briefing.................................... 2,418 2,418 2,418
Minimum Controls and Limitations....................... 59,138,560 0 118,277,120
Roadway Worker Protection Training..................... 46,041,229 46,065,170 46,065,170
Risk Assessment for Redundant Protections.............. 118,910 0 118,91
Employee Injury and Illness Program & Records.......... 356,730 356,730 356,730
Near Miss Reporting Program & Records.................. 2,616,020 2,616,020 2,616,020
Recordkeeping.......................................... 258,280 258,280 258,280
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Costs........................................ 114,813,598 55,508,069 176,976,098
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Programs
RTAs would incur costs to develop and implement programs for ROW
workers if they do not already have formal standalone programs. FTA
estimates that 33 of the 55 RTAs outside California (60 percent)
already have formal standalone programs, based on industry responses to
FTA Safety Advisory 14-1,\6\ and that 26 of the 33 RTAs already monitor
the effectiveness of the programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Federal Transit Administration (December 2013). ``FTA Safety
Advisory 14-1: Right-of Way Worker Protection.'' https://www.transit.dot.gov/oversight-policy-areas/safety-advisory-14-1-right-way-worker-protection-december-2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the remaining 22 RTAs (40 percent), FTA estimates that an RTA
would need an average of 96 labor hours to develop and implement a
formal standalone RWP program, plus 40 hours per year to monitor the
program's effectiveness. The 40-hour estimate also applies to the 5
RTAs that already have programs but do not monitor their effectiveness.
FTA assumes that the work is performed by a First-Line Supervisor of
Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers with a median wage rate of $58.70
per hour. The program requirements have estimated one-time costs of
$232,452 and annual recurring costs of $67,928 (Table 4).
Table 4--RWP Program Costs
[Options 1-3]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement One-time costs Recurring costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Program Establishment......... $51,656 .................
RWP Program Effectiveness 0 $67,928
Monitoring.......................
SSOA Review....................... 129,140 .................
RWP Program Response to SSOA 51,656 .................
Comments.........................
-------------------------------------
Total......................... 232,452 67,928
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Training Programs
The proposed rule would require agencies to establish initial and
refresher training for roadway workers. FTA subject matter experts
estimated resources needed for transit agencies to develop and
implement the programs. FTA assumes that initial training and refresher
trainings for roadway workers require 4.5 hours to complete per
employee, training for all RTA employees requires 1 hour, and training
for lone workers requires 8 hours. The resources needed for initial and
refresher training are the same for each regulatory option.
FTA estimates that 90 percent of RTAs have already developed
initial training programs for roadway workers and 79 percent of RTAs
have already developed refresher training for roadway workers. FTA
estimates that an RTA would need 60 hours to develop an initial or
refresher training if it has not already. FTA assumes that no agencies
have developed training for all employees or training for lone workers.
The training has estimated one-time costs of $560,000 and annual
recurring costs of $4.5 million for all three regulatory options. Table
5 shows estimated costs by regulatory option for RWP training in the
first year and subsequent years; Table 6 shows estimated costs by
occupation.
Table 5--RWP Training Program Costs
[Options 1-3]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total costs, Total costs,
Requirement Workers Total required hours initial annual
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development of Initial Training... ........... 60 hours per RTA............... $11,623 ..............
Development of Recurring Training. ........... 60 hours per RTA............... 24,407 ..............
Initial Training for Roadway 31,974 143,882........................ 524,915 ..............
Workers.
Refresher Training for Roadway 31,974 143,882........................ .............. $1,102,322
Workers.
Training for All Employees........ 50,132 50,132......................... .............. 1,881,946
Training for Lone Workers......... 5,500 44,000......................... .............. 1,563,760
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20620]]
Total......................... ........... ............................... 560,945 4,548,028
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--RWP Training Program Costs by Occupation
[Options 1-3]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Total
Fully Hours per required required Total Total
Occupation loaded Workers worker hours, hours, costs, costs,
wage rate initial annual initial annual
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
49-9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General.............. $35.54 13,824 4.5 62,209 62,209 $221,090 $928,577
53-4041 Subway and Streetcar Operators....................... 37.20 18,150 4.5 81,674 81,674 303,825 1,276,067
00-0000 All Occupations...................................... 37.54 50,132 1 ........... 50,132 ........... 1,881,946
49-9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General (Lone 35.54 5,500 8 ........... 44,000 ........... 1,563,760
Workers)....................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................... ........... 87,606 ........... 143,882 238,014 524,915 4,548,028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Redundant Worker Protections
The major cost driver for redundant worker protections is the
number of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees needed to establish
worker controls and access limitations. Option 1 requires RTAs to do a
risk assessment to determine the types of redundant protections to use,
Option 2 does not require redundant protections, and Option 3 requires
all RTAs to use standard physical redundant protections.
Table 7 lists annual estimated costs for the additional FTEs needed
under each regulatory option. The number of FTEs needed is derived from
information in California's Public Utilities Commission General Order
Number 175-A. FTA assumes a labor rate of $35.54 per hour for
Maintenance and Repair Workers, General for this requirement. For
Option 1, FTA assumes 80 additional FTEs (at 2080 hours per FTE) for an
annual total of 166,400 hours and $5,913,856 in recurring costs. Option
3 assumes 160 additional FTEs for a total of 332,800 required hours,
annually and $11,827,712 in recurring costs.
Table 7--Redundant Worker Protections, Estimated Costs
[2023-2032]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory option FTEs Required hours Labor rate Annual costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1...................................... 80 2,080 $35.54 $5,913,856
Option 2...................................... 0 0 0 0
Option 3...................................... 160 2,080 35.54 11,827,712
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Costs
Additional cost elements for each regulatory option include:
Developing an RWP manual
Establishing rail fixed guideway public transportation system
responsibilities
Establishing employee responsibilities
Conducting job safety briefings
Conducting risk assessment for redundant protections
Establishing employee injury and illness program and
maintaining records
Establishing a near miss reporting program and maintaining
records
Other recordkeeping
FTA assumes that each option has the same staffing requirements and
costs for the additional cost elements, unless stated otherwise. A
breakdown of the costs is listed in Table 8.
Table 8--Additional RWP Requirements, Options 1-3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement One-time costs Recurring costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Manual........................ $51,656 .................
Rail System Responsibilities...... 95,564 $5,690
Employee Responsibilities......... ................. 516,560
Job Safety Briefing............... ................. 242
Risk Assessment for Redundant 118,910 .................
Protections (Options 1 and 3)....
Employee Injury and Illness ................. 35,673
Program and Records..............
Near Miss Reporting Program and 951,280 166,474
Records..........................
Recordkeeping..................... ................. 25,828
-------------------------------------
Total......................... 1,217,410 750,467
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20621]]
Summary of Costs
Table 9 summarizes undiscounted costs for the three regulatory
options. Option 1 has one-time costs of $2.0 million and annual costs
of $11.3 million. Option 2 has one-time costs of $1.9 million and $5.4
million. Finally, Option 3 has one-time costs of $2.0 million and $17.2
million in annual costs.
Table 9--Summary of Costs by Regulatory Option, 2023-2032
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total costs
Regulatory option One-time costs Annual costs (undiscounted)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1............................................... $2,010,807 $11,280,279 $114,813,598
Option 2............................................... 1,915,917 5,366,415 55,580,068
Option 3............................................... 2,034,827 17,194,127 173,976,098
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 10 shows estimated discounted costs for each regulatory
option over the 10-year analysis period at a 2 percent discount rate,
discounted to 2023. Option 1 has annualized costs of $11.1 million,
Option 2 has annualized costs of $5.4 million, and Option 3 has
annualized costs of $16.7 million.
Table 10--Discounted Costs (2023-2032), 2% Discount Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RWP Program............................................ $805,517 $805,517 $805,517
RWP Manual............................................. 48,677 48,677 48,677
Rail System Responsibilities........................... 139,180 139,180 139,180
Employee Responsibilities.............................. 4,459,866 4,459,866 4,459,866
Job Safety Briefing.................................... 2,088 2,088 2,088
Minimum Controls and Limitations....................... 51,058,933 0 102,117,867
Roadway Worker Protection Training..................... 39,795,269 39,795,269 39,795,269
Risk Assessment for Redundant Protections.............. 112,051 0 112,051
Employee Injury and Illness Program & Records.......... 307,923 307,923 307,923
Near Miss Reporting Program & Records.................. 2,333,712 2,333,712 2,333,712
Recordkeeping.......................................... 222,993 222,993 222,993
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Costs........................................ 99,286,280 48,173,861 150,367,799
Annualized Costs................................... 11,053,197 5,359,021 16,739,923
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net Benefits
Table 11 shows the estimated net benefits for each regulatory
option at a 2 percent discount rate, discounted to 2023. Option 1 has
annualized net benefits of $2.6 million, Option 2 has annualized net
benefits of $4.6 million, and Option 3 has annualized net benefits of -
$120,000.
Option 2, which would prevent an annual average of 1.34 injuries
and 0.87 fatalities, yielded the highest net benefit. Option 1 prevents
more fatalities and injuries (2.37 injuries and 1.18 fatalities) while
also yielding a positive net benefit. While Option 3 would prevent the
most fatalities and injuries, it does not have a positive net benefit
due to the costs of the required physical redundant protections.
Table 11--Net Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized net
Regulatory option Annualized Annualized costs benefits (2%
benefits discount rate)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1............................................... $13,678,562 $11,053,197 $2,625,365
Option 2............................................... 9,951,177 5,359,021 4,592,156
Option 3............................................... 16,621,673 16,733,623 -111,950
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensitivity Analysis
The net benefits for each regulatory option primarily depend on the
estimated number of fatalities they would prevent. FTA conducted a
sensitivity analysis to understand how changes to the estimates would
affect the relative net benefits of the three options.
If the redundant worker protections that agencies would adopt in
Option 1 would prevent more fatalities and injuries than estimated,
then the net benefits of Option 1 would increase relative to Option 2.
The protections would need to prevent an additional 0.18 fatalities
(for an annual average of 1.36 fatalities) for Option 1 to have the
same net benefits as Option 2 at a 2 percent discount rate. Similarly,
for Option 3, the redundant worker protections would need to prevent an
additional .42 fatalities (for an annual average of 1.84 fatalities)
for Option 3 to have the same net benefits as Option 2 at a 2 percent
discount rate.
Regulatory Alternatives
FTA selected the requirements of Option 1 for the proposed rule
because it would prevent more roadway worker safety events than Option
2 while maintaining net positive benefits. Many current rail transit
RWP programs have provisions that allow roadway workers onto the track
to perform work without protections beyond their own ability to detect
oncoming trains and clear the tracks before their arrival. FTA's
internal safety risk management process
[[Page 20622]]
identified the lack of redundant protections as the most significant
contributor to rail transit roadway worker safety events. Similarly,
NTSB, TRACS, and many commenters responding to FTA's RFI on Rail
Transit Worker Safety also support the use of redundant protections.\7\
Because no two RTAs are the same, Option 1 would provide rail transit
agencies the flexibility to determine the types of procedural and
physical redundant protections to incorporate. Option 1 would also
provide a clear role for SSOAs to approve RWP programs and to ensure
overall program effectiveness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Federal Transit Administration (2021). ``Request for
Information on Transit Worker Safety.'' https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/09/24/2021-20744/request-for-information-on-transit-worker-safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires Federal agencies to assess the impact of a regulation on small
entities unless the agency determines that the regulation is not
expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
The proposed rule would create new RWP program requirements for
RTAs and SSOAs. Under the Act, public-sector organizations and local
governments qualify as small entities if they serve a population of
less than 50,000. RTAs do not qualify as small entities because they
all operate in urbanized areas with populations of more than 50,000,
and SSOAs do not qualify because they are state agencies. FTA has
therefore determined that the proposed rule would not have a
significant effect on a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
FTA has determined that this rule would not impose unfunded
mandates, as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4). This rule does not include a Federal mandate that may result
in expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year, adjusted for
inflation, by State, local, and tribal governments in the aggregate or
by the private sector. The threshold in 2023 dollars is $183 million
after adjusting for inflation using the gross domestic product implicit
price deflator. Additionally, the definition of ``Federal mandate'' in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act excludes financial assistance of the
type in which State, local, or tribal governments have authority to
adjust their participation in the program in accordance with changes
made in the program by the Federal government. The Federal Transit Act
permits this type of flexibility.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism Assessment)
Executive Order 13132 requires agencies to assure meaningful and
timely input by State and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that may have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. This action has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive
Order 13132 dated August 4, 1999, and FTA determined this action will
not have a substantial direct effect or sufficient federalism
implications on the States. FTA also determined this action will not
preempt any State law or regulation or affect the States' ability to
discharge traditional State governmental functions.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply
to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501, et seq.) (PRA), and the White House Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) implementing regulation at 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FTA is
seeking approval from OMB for a new information collection that is
associated with a notice of proposed rulemaking. FTA is seeking
approval from OMB for the information collection request abstracted
below.
Type of Collection: Operators of rail public
transportation systems.
Respondents to Collection: RTAs in the SSO program, SSOAs,
and rail transit workers who access the roadway to perform work.
Type of Review: OMB Clearance. New information collection
request.
Summary of the Collection: The collection of information
includes: (1) Each RTA would adopt and implement an RWP program to
improve transit worker safety that is consistent with Federal and State
safety requirements and approved by the SSOA; they would be required to
review and update their program manual not less than every two years;
(2) Require implementation of comprehensive job safety briefings and
reporting of near-misses; (3) Documenting formal training and
qualification programs for all workers who access the roadway; (4)
Program compliance auditing and monitoring; (5) Periodic request for
information; and (6) Ensuring compliance of SSOAs responsibility to
approve, oversee and enforce RWP requirements (7) submission of RWP
programs and updates to FTA.
Frequency: Bi-Annual, Periodic.
FTA seeks public comment to evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
FTA's functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; whether the estimation of the burden of the proposed
information collection is accurate, including the validity of the
methodologies and assumptions used; ways in which the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information can be enhanced; and whether the burden
can be minimized, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
National Environmental Policy Act
Federal agencies are required to adopt implementing procedures for
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that establish specific
criteria for, and identification of, three classes of actions: (1)
Those that normally require preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement, (2) those that normally require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment, and (3) those that are categorically excluded
from further NEPA review (40 CFR 1507.3(b)). This rule qualifies for
categorical exclusions under 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4) (planning and
administrative activities that do not involve or lead directly to
construction). FTA has evaluated whether the rule will involve unusual
or extraordinary circumstances and has determined that it will not.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights. FTA does not believe this rule affects a taking of
private property or otherwise has taking implications under Executive
Order 12630.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
[[Page 20623]]
minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. FTA
certifies that this action will not cause an environmental risk to
health or safety that might disproportionately affect children.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, and
believes that it will not have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs
on Indian tribal governments; and will not preempt tribal laws.
Therefore, a tribal summary impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
FTA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. FTA has determined that this action is not a
significant energy action under that order and is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
Executive Orders 14096 and 12898 (Environmental Justice)
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All) (Apr. 21, 2023) (which builds upon
Executive Order 12898) and DOT Order 5610.2(a) (77 FR 27534, May 10,
2012; see: https://www.transportation.gov/transportation-policy/environmental-justice/department-transportation-order-56102a) require
DOT agencies to make achieving environmental justice (EJ) part of their
mission consistent with statutory authority by identifying, analyzing,
and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionate and adverse human
health or environmental effects, including those related to climate
change and cumulative impacts of environmental and other burdens on
communities with EJ concerns. All DOT agencies seek to advance these
policy goals and to engage in this analysis as appropriate in
rulemaking activities. On August 15, 2012, FTA's Circular 4703.1 became
effective, which contains guidance for recipients of FTA financial
assistance to incorporate EJ principles into plans, projects, and
activities. (See: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/fta-circulars/environmental-justice-policy-guidance-federal-transit).
FTA has evaluated this action under its environmental justice
policies and FTA has determined that this action will not cause
disproportionate and adverse human health and environmental effects on
communities with EJ concerns.
Regulation Identifier Number
A Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The
Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in
April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading
of this document can be used to cross-reference this rule with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 671
Mass transportation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Safety, Transportation.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and under the authority of
49 U.S.C. 5329 and the delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.91, FTA
proposes to amend Chapter VI of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations,
by adding part 671, as set forth below:
PART 671--RAIL TRANSIT ROADWAY WORKER PROTECTION
Subpart A--General
Sec.
671.1 Purpose and Applicability.
671.3 Policy.
671.5 Definitions.
Subpart B--Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) Program and Manual
671.11 RWP Program.
671.13 RWP Manual.
Subpart C--Responsibilities
671.21 Rail Transit Agency.
671.23 Transit Worker.
671.25 State Safety Oversight Agency.
Subpart D--Required RWP Program Elements
671.31 Roadway Worker in Charge.
671.33 Job Safety Briefing.
671.35 Lone Worker.
671.37 Good Faith Safety Challenge.
671.39 Risk-Based Redundant Protections.
671.41 RWP Training and Qualification Program.
671.43 RWP Compliance Monitoring Program.
Subpart E--Recordkeeping
671.51 Recordkeeping.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5329, 49 CFR 1.91.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 671.1 Purpose and Applicability.
(a) The purpose of this part is to set forth the applicability of
the rail transit Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) regulation.
(b) This part applies to rail transit agencies (RTA) that receive
Federal financial assistance authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53; and
to State Safety Oversight Agencies (SSOA) that oversee the safety of
rail fixed guideway public transportation systems. This part does not
apply to rail systems that are subject to the safety oversight of the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).
(c) This part applies to transit workers who access any rail fixed
guideway public transportation systems in the performance of work.
Sec. 671.3 Policy.
(a) This part establishes minimum safety standards for rail transit
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) to ensure the safe operation of public
transportation systems and to prevent accidents, incidents, fatalities,
and injuries to transit workers who may access the roadway in the
performance of work. Each RTA and SSOA may prescribe additional or more
stringent operating rules, safety rules, and other special instructions
that are consistent with this part.
(b) The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has adopted the
principles and methods of Safety Management Systems (SMS) as the basis
for enhancing the safety of public transportation in the United States.
Activities conducted to carry out these RWP safety standards must be
integrated into the RTA's SMS, including the Safety Risk Management
process, specified in Sec. 673.25 of this chapter, and the Safety
Assurance process, specified in Sec. 673.27 of this chapter.
Sec. 671.5 Definitions.
As used in this part:
Accountable Executive means a single, identifiable person who has
ultimate responsibility for carrying out the Public Transportation
Agency Safety Plan of a transit agency; responsibility for carrying out
the transit agency's Transit Asset Management Plan; and control or
direction over the human and capital resources needed to develop and
maintain both the transit agency's Public Transportation Agency Safety
Plan, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), and the transit agency's
Transit Asset Management Plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5326.
[[Page 20624]]
Ample time means the time necessary for a roadway worker to be
clear of the track zone or in a place of safety 15 seconds before a
rail transit vehicle moving at the maximum authorized speed on that
track could arrive at the location of the roadway worker.
Equivalent entity means an entity that carries out duties similar
to that of a Board of Directors, for a recipient or subrecipient of FTA
funds under 49 U.S.C. chapter 53, including sufficient authority to
review and approve a recipient or subrecipient's Public Transportation
Agency Safety Plan.
Equivalent protection means alternative designs, materials, or
methods that the RTA can demonstrate to the SSOA will provide equal or
greater safety for roadway workers than the means specified in this
part.
Flag person means a roadway worker designated by the RTA to direct
or restrict the movement of rail transit vehicles or equipment past a
point on a track to provide on-track safety for roadway workers, while
engaged solely in performing that function.
Foul time protection is a method of establishing working limits in
which a roadway worker is notified by the control center that no rail
transit vehicles will be authorized to operate within a specific
segment of track until the roadway worker reports clear of the track.
Fouling a track means the placement of an individual or an item of
equipment in such proximity to a track that the individual or equipment
could be struck by a moving rail transit vehicle or on-track equipment.
Any time an individual or equipment is within the track zone, it is
fouling the track.
Individual rail transit vehicle detection means a process by which
a lone worker acquires on-track safety by visually detecting
approaching rail transit vehicles or equipment and leaving the track in
ample time.
Job safety briefing means a meeting addressing the requirements of
this part that is conducted prior to commencing work by the Roadway
Worker in Charge, typically at the job site, to notify roadway workers
or other transit workers about the hazards related to the work to be
performed and the protections to eliminate or protect against those
hazards. Alternatively, briefings can be conducted virtually for those
individuals who are working remotely on the job site (e.g., remote
drone operators).
Lone worker means an individual roadway worker who is not afforded
on-track safety by another roadway worker, who is not a member of a
roadway work group, and who is not engaged in a common task with
another roadway worker.
Maximum authorized speed means the highest speed permitted for the
movement of rail transit vehicles established by the rail transit
vehicle control system, service schedule, and operating rules. This
speed is used when calculating ample time.
Minor tasks mean those tasks performed without the use of tools
during the execution of which a roadway worker or other transit worker
can visually assess their surroundings at least every five (5) seconds
for approaching rail transit vehicles and that can be performed without
violating ample time.
Near-miss means a narrowly avoided safety event.
On-track safety means a state of freedom from the danger of being
struck by a moving rail transit vehicle or other equipment as provided
by operating and safety rules that govern track occupancy by roadway
workers, other transit workers, rail transit vehicles, and on-track
equipment.
Place of safety means a space an individual or individuals can
safely occupy outside the track zone, sufficiently clear of any rail
transit vehicle, including any on-track equipment, moving on any track.
Qualified means a status attained by a roadway worker or other
transit worker who has successfully completed required training,
including refresher training, for; has demonstrated proficiency in; and
is authorized by the RTA to perform the duties of a particular position
or function.
Rail fixed guideway public transportation system means any fixed
guideway system or any such system in engineering or construction, that
uses rail, is operated for public transportation, is within the
jurisdiction of a State, and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the
Federal Railroad Administration, or any such system in engineering or
construction. These systems include but are not limited to rapid rail,
heavy rail, light rail, monorail, trolley, inclined plane, funicular,
and automated guideway.
Rail transit agency (RTA) means any entity that provides services
on a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.
Rail transit vehicle means any rolling stock used on a rail fixed
guideway public transportation system, including but not limited to
passenger and maintenance vehicles.
Rail transit vehicle approach warning means a method of
establishing on-track safety by warning roadway workers of the approach
of rail transit vehicles in ample time for them to move to or remain in
a place of safety in accordance with the requirements of this part.
Redundant protection means at least one additional protection
beyond individual rail transit vehicle detection to ensure on-track
safety for roadway workers. Redundant protections may be procedural,
physical, or both.
Roadway means land on which rail transit tracks and support
infrastructure have been constructed to support the movement of rail
transit vehicles.
Roadway maintenance machine means a device which is used on or near
rail transit track for maintenance, repair, construction or inspection
of track, bridges, roadway, signal, communications, or electric
traction systems. Roadway maintenance machines may have road or rail
wheels or may be stationary.
Roadway worker means a transit worker whose duties involve
inspection, construction, maintenance, repairs, or providing on-track
safety such as flag persons and watchpersons on or near the roadway or
right-of-way or with the potential of fouling track.
Roadway work group means two or more roadway workers organized to
work together on a common task.
Roadway Worker in Charge means a roadway worker who is qualified
under this part to establish on-track safety.
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) means the polices, processes, and
procedures implemented by an RTA to prevent safety events for transit
workers who must access the roadway in the performance of their work.
RWP manual means the entire set of the RTA's on-track safety rules
and instructions maintained together, including operating rules and
other procedures concerning on-track safety protection and on-track
safety measures, designed to prevent roadway workers from being struck
by rail transit vehicles or other on-track equipment.
Safety event means an unexpected outcome resulting in injury or
death; damage to or loss of the facilities, equipment, rolling stock,
or infrastructure of a public transportation system; or damage to the
environment.
Sight distance means mean the length of roadway visible ahead for a
roadway worker.
State Safety Oversight Agency (SSOA) means an agency established by
a State that meets the requirements and performs the functions
specified by 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) and 49 CFR part 674.
Track access guide means a document that describes the physical
characteristics of the RTA's track system, including track areas with
close
[[Page 20625]]
or no clearance, curves with blind spots or restricted sight lines,
areas with loud noise, and potential environmental conditions that
require additional consideration in establishing on-track safety.
Track zone means an area identified by transit workers where a
person or equipment could be struck by the widest equipment that could
occupy the track, and typically is an area within six feet of the
outside rail on both sides of any track.
Transit worker means any employee, contractor, or volunteer working
on behalf of the RTA or SSOA.
Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program means the process required
under Sec. 673.23 of this chapter that allows transit workers to
report safety concerns, including transit worker assaults, near-misses,
and unsafe acts and conditions to senior management, provides
protections for transit workers who report safety conditions to senior
management, and describes transit worker behaviors that may result in
disciplinary action.
Watchperson means a roadway worker qualified to provide warning to
roadway workers of approaching rail transit vehicles or track equipment
whose sole duty is to look out for approaching rail transit vehicles
and track equipment and provide at least 15 seconds advanced warning
plus time to clear based on the maximum authorized track speed for the
work location to transit workers before the arrival of rail transit
vehicles.
Working limits means a segment of track with explicit boundaries
upon which rail transit vehicles and on-track equipment may move only
as authorized by the roadway worker having control over that defined
segment of track.
Work zone means the immediate area where work is being performed
within the track zone.
Subpart B--Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) Program and Manual
Sec. 671.11 RWP program.
(a) Each RTA must adopt and implement an approved RWP program to
improve transit worker safety that is consistent with Federal and State
safety requirements and meets the minimum requirements of this part.
(b) The RWP program must include:
(1) An RWP manual as described in Sec. 671.13.
(2) All of the RWP program elements described in Subpart D.
(c) Each RTA must submit its RWP manual and subsequent updates to
its SSOA for review and approval as described in Sec. 671.25.
Sec. 671.13 RWP manual.
(a) Each RTA must establish and maintain a separate, dedicated
manual documenting its RWP program.
(b) The RWP manual must include the terminology, abbreviations, and
acronyms used to describe the RWP program activities and requirements.
(c) The RWP manual must document:
(1) All elements of the RWP program in Subpart D.
(2) A definition of RTA and transit worker responsibilities as
described in Subpart C--Responsibilities.
(3) Training, qualification, and supervision required for transit
workers to access the track zone, by labor category or type of work
performed.
(4) Processes and procedures, including any use of roadway workers
to provide adequate on-track safety, for all transit workers who may
access the track zone in the performance of their work, including
safety and oversight personnel. Procedures for SSOA personnel to access
the roadway must conform with the SSOA's risk-based inspection program.
(d) The RWP manual must include or incorporate by reference a track
access guide to support on-track safety. The track access guide must be
based on a physical survey of the track geometry and condition of the
transit system and include, at a minimum:
(1) Locations with limited, close, or no clearance, including
locations (such as alcoves, recessed spaces, or other designated places
or areas of refuge or safety) with size or access limitations.
(2) Locations subject to increased rail vehicle or on-track
equipment braking requirements or reduced rail transit vehicle operator
visibility due to precipitation or other weather conditions.
(3) Curves with no or limited visibility.
(4) Locations with limited or no visibility due to obstructions or
topography.
(5) All portals with restricted views.
(6) Locations with heavy outside noise or other environment
conditions that impact on-track safety.
(7) Any other locations with access considerations.
(e) Following initial approval of the RWP manual by its SSOA, not
less than every two years, the RTA must review and update its RWP
manual to reflect current conditions and lessons learned in
implementing the RWP program and information provided by the SSOA and
FTA.
(f) The RTA must update its RWP manual and track access guide as
necessary and as soon as practicable upon any change to the system
which conflicts with any element of either document.
(g) The RWP manual must be distributed to all transit workers who
access the roadway and redistributed after each revision.
Subpart C--Responsibilities
Sec. 671.21 Rail transit agency.
(a) In General. Each RTA must establish procedures to:
(1) Provide ample time and determine the appropriate sight distance
based on maximum authorized track speeds.
(2) Ensure that individual rail transit vehicle detection is never
used as the only form of protection in the track zone.
(3) Provide job safety briefings to all transit workers who must
enter a track zone to perform work.
(4) Provide job safety briefings to all transit workers whenever a
rule violation is observed.
(5) Provide transit workers with the right to challenge and refuse
in good faith any assignment based on on-track safety concerns and
resolve such challenges and refusals promptly and equitably.
(6) Require the reporting of unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, and
near-misses on the roadway as part of the Transit Worker Safety
Reporting Program and described in Sec. 673.23(b) of this chapter.
(7) Ensure all transit workers who must enter a track zone to
perform work understand, are qualified in, and comply with the RWP
program.
(b) Equipment and protections. Each RTA must establish the
requirements for on-track safety, including:
(1) Equipment that transit workers must have to access the roadway
or a track zone by labor category, including personal protective
equipment such as high-reflection vests, safety shoes, and hard hats.
(2) Credentials (e.g., badge, wristband, RWP card) for transit
workers to enter the roadway or track zone by labor category and how to
display them so they are visible.
(3) Protections for emergency response personnel who must access
the roadway or the track zone.
(4) Protections for multiple roadway work groups within a common
work area in a track zone.
Sec. 671.23 Transit worker.
(a) RWP program. Each transit worker must follow the requirements
of the RTA's RWP program by position and labor category.
(b) Fouling the track. A transit worker may only foul the track
once they have received appropriate permissions and
[[Page 20626]]
redundant protections have been established as specified in the RWP
manual.
(c) Acknowledgement of protections providing on-track safety. A
transit worker must understand and acknowledge in writing the
protections providing on-track safety measures for their specific task
before accessing the roadway or track zone.
(d) Refusal to foul the track. A transit worker may refuse to foul
the track if the transit worker makes a good faith determination that
that they believe any RWP assignment is unsafe or would violate the
RTA's RWP program.
(e) Reporting. A transit worker must report unsafe acts and
conditions and near-misses related to the RWP program as part of the
RTA's Transit Worker Safety Reporting Program.
Sec. 671.25 State safety oversight agency.
(a) Review and approve RWP program elements. The SSOA must review
and approve the RWP manual and any subsequent updates for each RTA
within its jurisdiction within the following deadlines:
(1) Initial approval of the RWP program elements must be completed
within 90 calendar days of receipt of the program, and
(2) The SSOA also must submit all approved RWP program elements for
each RTA in its jurisdiction, and any subsequent updates, to FTA within
30 calendar days of approving them.
(b) RWP program oversight. The SSOA must update its program
standard to explain the role of the SSOA in overseeing an RTA's
execution of its RWP program.
(c) Annual RWP program audit.
(1) The SSOA must conduct an annual audit of the RTA's compliance
with its RWP program, including all required RWP program elements, for
each RTA that it oversees.
(2) The SSOA must issue a report with any findings and
recommendations arising from the audit, which must include, at minimum:
(i) An analysis of the effectiveness of the RWP program, including,
at a minimum, a review of:
(A) All RWP-related events over the period covered by the audit.
(B) All RWP-related reports made to the Transit Worker Safety
Reporting Program over the period covered by the audit.
(C) All documentation of instances where a transit worker(s)
challenged and refused in good faith any assignment based on on-track
safety concerns and documentation of the resolution for any such
instance during the period covered by the audit.
(D) An assessment of the adequacy of the track access guide,
including whether the guide reflects current track geometry and
conditions.
(E) A review of all training and qualification records for transit
workers who must enter a track zone to perform work.
(F) A representative sample of written job safety briefing
confirmations as described in Sec. 671.33.
(G) The compliance monitoring program described in Sec. 671.43.
(ii) Recommendations for improvements, if necessary or appropriate.
(iii) Corrective action plan(s), if necessary or appropriate, must
be, developed and executed consistent with requirements established in
part 674.
(3) The RTA must be given an opportunity to comment on any findings
and recommendations.
Subpart D--Required RWP Program Elements
Sec. 671.31 Roadway worker in charge.
(a) On-track safety and supervision. The RTA must designate one
roadway worker in charge for each roadway work group whose duties
require fouling a track.
(1) The roadway worker in charge must be qualified under the RTA's
training and qualification program as specified in Sec. 671.41.
(2) The roadway worker in charge may be designated generally or may
be designated specifically for a particular work situation.
(3) The roadway worker in charge is responsible for the on-track
safety for all members of the roadway work group.
(4) The roadway worker in charge must serve only the function of
maintaining on-track safety for all members of the roadway work group
and perform no other unrelated job function while designated for duty.
(b) Communication. The RTA must ensure that the roadway worker in
charge provides a job safety briefing to all roadway workers before any
member of a roadway work group fouls a track, following the
requirements specified in Sec. 671.33.
(1) The roadway worker in charge must provide the job safety
briefing to all members of the roadway work group before the on-track
safety procedures change during the work period, or immediately
following an observed violation of on-track safety procedures before
track zone work continues.
(2) In the event of an emergency, any roadway worker who cannot be
notified in advance of changes to on-track safety, must be warned
immediately to leave the roadway and must not return until on-track
safety is re-established, and a job safety briefing is completed.
Sec. 671.33 Job safety briefing.
(a) General. The RTA must ensure the roadway worker in charge
provides any roadway worker who must foul a track with a job safety
briefing prior to fouling the track, every time the roadway worker
fouls the track.
(b) Elements. The job safety briefing must include, at a minimum,
the following, as appropriate:
(1) A discussion of the nature of the work to be performed and the
characteristics of the work, including work plans for multiple roadway
worker groups within a single work area.
(2) Working limits.
(3) The hazards involved in performing the work, as described in
Federal Railroad Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's guidance on hazard identification as part of a job
safety briefing.
(4) Information on how on-track safety is to be provided for each
track identified to be fouled and identification and location of key
personnel such as a watchperson and the roadway worker in charge.
(5) Instructions for each on-track safety procedure to be followed,
including appropriate flags and proper flag placement.
(6) Communication roles and responsibilities for all transit
workers involved in the work.
(7) Safety information about any adjacent track, defined as track
next to or adjoining the track zone where on-track safety has been
established, and identification of roadway maintenance machines or on-
track equipment that will foul such tracks.
(8) Information on the accessibility of the roadway worker in
charge and alternative procedures in the event the roadway worker in
charge is no longer accessible to members of the roadway work group.
(9) Required personal protective equipment.
(10) Designated place(s) of safety of a sufficient size to
accommodate all roadway workers within the work area.
(11) The means for determining ample time.
(c) Confirmation and written acknowledgement. A job safety briefing
is complete only after:
(1) The roadway worker in charge confirms that each roadway worker
understands the on-track safety procedures and instructions.
(2) Each roadway worker acknowledges the briefing and the
[[Page 20627]]
requirement to use the required personal protective equipment in
writing.
(3) The roadway worker in charge confirms in writing that they
attest to each roadway worker's understanding of the briefing and has
received written acknowledgement of the briefing from each worker.
(d) Follow-up briefings. If there is any change in the scope of
work or roadway work group after the initial job safety briefing, or if
a violation of on-track safety is observed, a follow-up job safety
briefing must be conducted.
Sec. 671.35 Lone worker.
(a) On-track safety and supervision. The RTA may authorize lone
workers to perform limited duties that require fouling a track.
(1) The lone worker must be qualified as a roadway worker in charge
and lone worker under the RTA's training and qualification program as
specified in Sec. 671.41.
(2) The lone worker may perform routine inspection or minor tasks
and move from one location to another. The lone worker may not use
power tools and may only access locations defined in the track access
guide as appropriate for lone workers, i.e., no loud noises, no
restricted clearances, etc.
(3) The lone worker may not use individual rail transit vehicle
detection, where the lone worker is solely responsible for seeing
approaching trains and clearing the track before the trains arrive, as
the only form of on-track safety.
(b) Communication. Each lone worker must communicate prior to
fouling the track with a supervisor or another designated employee to
receive an on-track safety job briefing consisting of the elements in
Sec. 671.33(b), including a discussion of their planned work
activities and the procedures that they intend to use to establish on-
track safety. The lone worker must acknowledge and document the job
safety briefing in writing consistent with Sec. 671.33(c).
Sec. 671.37 Good faith safety challenge.
(a) Written procedure. Each RTA must document its procedures that
provide to every roadway worker the right to challenge and refuse in
good faith any RWP assignment they believe is unsafe or would violate
the RTA's RWP program.
(b) Prompt and equitable resolution. The written procedure must
include methods or processes to achieve prompt and equitable resolution
of any challenges and refusals made.
(c) Requirements. The written procedure must include a requirement
that the roadway worker provide a description of the safety concern
regarding on-track safety and must remain clear of the roadway or track
zone until the challenge and refusal is resolved.
Sec. 671.39 Risk-based redundant protections.
(a) General requirements.
(1) Each RTA must identify and provide redundant protections for
each category of work roadway workers perform the roadway or track.
(2) Redundant protections must be established to ensure on-track
safety for multiple roadway work groups within a common work area.
(b) Safety risk assessment to determine redundant protections. Each
RTA must assess the risk associated with transit workers accessing the
roadway using the methods and processes established under Sec.
673.25(c) of this chapter. The RTA must use the methods and processes
established under Sec. 673.25(d) of this chapter to establish
redundant protections for each category of work performed by roadway
workers on the rail transit system and must include lone workers.
(1) The safety risk assessment must be consistent with the RTA's
Agency Safety Plan and the SSOA's Program Standard.
(2) The safety risk assessment may be supplemented by engineering
assessments, inputs from the safety assurance process established under
Sec. 673.27 of this chapter, the results of safety event
investigation, and other safety risk management strategies or
approaches.
(3) The RTA must review and update the safety risk assessment at
least every two years to include current conditions and lessons learned
from safety events, actions taken to address reports of unsafe acts and
conditions, and near-misses, and results from compliance monitoring
regarding the effectiveness of the redundant protections.
(4) The SSOA may also identify and require the RTA to implement
alternate redundant protections based on the RTA's unique operating
characteristics and capabilities.
(c) Categories of work requiring redundant protections. Redundant
protections must be identified for roadway workers performing different
categories of work on the roadway and within track zones, which may
include but are not limited to categories such as:
(1) Roadway workers moving from one track zone location to another.
(2) Roadway workers performing minor tasks.
(3) Roadway workers conducting visual inspections.
(4) Roadway workers using hand tools, machines, or equipment in
conducting testing of track system components or non-visual
inspections.
(5) Roadway workers using hand tools, machines, or equipment in
performing maintenance, construction, or repairs.
(6) Lone workers accessing the roadway or track zone or performing
visual inspections or minor tasks.
(d) Types of redundant protections.
(1) Redundant protections may be procedural or physical.
(i) Procedural protections alert rail transit vehicle operators to
the presence of roadway workers and use radio communications,
personnel, signage, or other means to direct rail transit vehicle
movement.
(ii) Physical protections physically control the movement of rail
transit vehicles into or through a work zone.
(2) Redundant protections may include:
(i) Approaches consistent with the Federal Railroad Administration
rules governing redundant protections.
(ii) Rail transit vehicle approach warning.
(iii) Foul time.
(iv) Exclusive track occupancy, defined as a method of establishing
working limits, as part of on-track safety, in which movement authority
of rail transit vehicles and other equipment is withheld by the control
center or restricted by flag persons and provided by a roadway worker
in charge.
(v) Warning signs, flags, or lights.
(vi) Flag persons.
(vii) Lock outs from the rail transit vehicle control systems or
lining and locking track switches or otherwise physically preventing
entry and movement of rail transit vehicles.
(viii) Secondary warning devices and alert systems.
(ix) Shunt devices and portable trip stops to reduce the likelihood
of rail transit vehicles from entering work zone with workers.
(x) Restricting work to times when propulsion power is down with
verification that track is out of service, and when barriers are placed
that physically prevent rail transit vehicles, including on-track
equipment, from entering the work zone.
(xi) Use of walkways in tunnels and on elevated structures to
reduce roadway worker time in the track zone.
(xii) Speed restrictions.
(3) Redundant protections for lone workers must include, at a
minimum,
[[Page 20628]]
foul time or an equivalent protection approved by the SSOA.
Sec. 671.41 RWP training and qualification program.
(a) General. Each RTA must adopt an RWP training program.
(1) The RWP training program must address all transit workers
responsible for on-track safety, by position, including roadway
workers, operations control center personnel, rail transit vehicle
operators, operators of on-track equipment and roadway maintenance
machines, and any others with a role in providing on-track safety or
fouling a track for the performance of work.
(2) The RWP training program must be completed for the relevant
position before an RTA may assign a transit worker to perform the
duties of a roadway worker, to oversee or supervise access to the track
zone from the operations control center, or to operate vehicles, on-
track equipment, and roadway maintenance machines on the rail transit
system.
(3) The RWP training program must address RWP hazard recognition
and mitigation, and lessons learned through the results of compliance
testing, near-miss reports, reports of unsafe acts or conditions, and
feedback received on the training program.
(4) The RWP training program must include initial and refresher
training, by position. Refresher training must occur every two years at
a minimum.
(5) The RTA must review and update its RWP training program not
less than every two years, to reflect lessons learned in implementing
the RWP program and information provided by the SSOA and FTA. The RTA
must provide an opportunity for roadway worker involvement in the RWP
training program review and update process.
(b) Required elements. The RWP training program must include
interactive training with the opportunity to ask the RWP trainer
questions and raise and discuss RWP issues.
(1) Initial training must include experience in a representative
field setting.
(2) Initial and refresher training must include demonstrations and
assessments to ensure the ability to comply with RWP instructions given
by transit workers performing, or responsible for, on-track safety and
RWP functions.
(c) Minimum contents for RWP training. The RWP training program
must address the following minimum contents:
(1) How to interpret and use the RTA's RWP manual.
(2) How to challenge and refuse in good faith RWP assignments.
(3) How to report unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, and near-misses
after they occur, and the mandatory duty to make such reports.
(4) Recognition of the track zone and understanding of the space
around tracks within which on-track safety is required, including use
of the track access guide.
(5) The functions and responsibilities of all transit workers
involved in on-track safety, by position.
(6) Proper compliance with on-track safety instructions given by
transit workers performing or responsible for on-track safety
functions.
(7) Signals and directions given by watchpersons, and the proper
procedures upon receiving a rail transit vehicle approach warning from
a watchperson.
(8) The hazards associated with working on or near rail transit
tracks to include traction power, if applicable.
(9) Rules and procedures for redundant protections identified under
671.37 and how they are applied to RWP.
(10) Requirements for safely crossing rail transit tracks in yards
and on the mainline.
(d) Specialized training and qualification for transit workers with
additional responsibilities for on-track safety. The RWP training
program must include additional training for watchpersons, flag
persons, lone workers, roadway workers in charge, and other transit
workers with responsibilities for establishing, supervising, and
monitoring on-track safety.
(1) This training must cover the content and application of the
additional RWP program requirements carried out by these positions and
must address the relevant physical characteristics of the RTA's system
where on-track safety may be established.
(2) This training must include demonstrations and assessments to
confirm the transit worker's ability to perform these additional
responsibilities.
(3) Refresher training on additional responsibilities for on-track
safety, by position, must occur every two years at a minimum.
(e) Competency and qualification of training personnel. Each RTA
must ensure that transit workers providing RWP training are qualified
and have active RWP certification at the RTA to provide effective RWP
training, and at a minimum must consider the following:
(1) A trainer's experience and knowledge of effective training
techniques in the chosen learning environment.
(2) A trainer's experience with the RTA RWP program.
(3) A trainer's knowledge of the RTA RWP rules, operations, and
operating environment, including applicable operating rules.
(4) A trainer's knowledge of the training requirements specified in
this part.
Sec. 671.43 RWP compliance monitoring program.
(a) General. Each RTA must adopt a program for monitoring its
compliance with the requirements specified in its RWP program.
(b) Required elements. The RWP compliance monitoring program must
include inspections, observations, and audits, consistent with safety
performance monitoring and measurement requirements in the RTA's Agency
Safety Plan described in Sec. 673.27 of this chapter and the SSOA's
Program Standard.
(1) The RTA must provide monthly reports to the SSOA documenting
the RTA's compliance with and sufficiency of the RWP program.
(2) The RTA must provide an annual briefing to the Accountable
Executive and the Board of Directors, or equivalent entity, regarding
the performance of the RWP program and any identified deficiencies
requiring corrective action.
Subpart E--Recordkeeping
Sec. 671.51 Recordkeeping.
(a) Each RTA must maintain the documents that set forth its RWP
program, documents related to the implementation of the RWP program and
results from the procedures, processes, assessments, training, and
activities specified in this part for the RWP program.
(b) Each RTA must maintain records of its compliance with this
requirement, including records of transit worker RWP training and
refresher training, for a minimum of three years after they are
created.
(c) These documents must be made available upon request by the FTA
or other Federal entity, or a SSOA having jurisdiction.
Veronica Vanterpool,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-06251 Filed 3-22-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-P