Certification of Signal Employees, 44830-44896 [2024-09958]
Download as PDF
44830
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 246
[Docket No. FRA–2022–0020, Notice No. 4]
RIN 2130–AC92
Certification of Signal Employees
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
FRA is prescribing regulations
for certification of signal employees,
pursuant to the authority granted in
section 402 of the Rail Safety
Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA).
DATES: Effective Date: The rule is
effective July 22, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal, Train
Control, and Crossings Division, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal
Railroad Administration, telephone:
(816) 516–7168, email: Gabe.Neal@
dot.gov; or Kathryn Gresham, Attorney
Adviser, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Railroad
Administration, telephone: (202) 577–
7142, email: kathryn.gresham@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This
Document
AANP—American Association of Nurse
Practitioners
AAR—Association of American Railroads
ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act
APTA—American Public Transportation
Association
ASLRRA—American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association
BRS—Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
CE—Categorical Exclusion
CFR—Code of Federal Regulations
CRB—Certification Review Board
DAC—Drug and alcohol counselor
DOT—United States Department of
Transportation
EA—Environmental Assessment
EIS—Environmental Impact Statement
FRA—Federal Railroad Administration
IBEW—International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers
IRFA—Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
ITLC—International Transportation Learning
Center
MTA—New York State Metropolitan
Transportation Authority
NEPA—National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NRC—Network Rail Consulting Inc.
NRCMA—National Railroad Construction
and Maintenance Association
NRM—Northwest Railway Museum
OCSR—Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad
OMB—United States Office of Management
and Budget
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
PRA—The Paperwork Reduction Act
PTC—Positive Train Control
PV—Present Value
RIA—Regulatory Impact Analysis
RIN—Regulatory Identification Number
RSAC—Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
RSIA—Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008
SAP—Substance Abuse Professional
SMART–TD—Transportation Division of the
International Association of Sheet Metal,
Air, Rail and Transportation Workers
STB—The Surface Transportation Board
TTD—Transportation Trades Department,
AFL–CIO
U.S.C.—United States Code
UTC—Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission
Table of Contents for Supplementary
Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Legal Authority
III. Background
A. Roles and Responsibilities of Signal
Employees
B. FRA History of Certification
C. Statutory Background for Signal
Employee Certification
D. Report to Congress
E. RSAC Working Group
F. Public Outreach
G. Role of Third Parties
H. Interaction With Other FRA Regulations
I. Confidential Close Call Reporting System
J. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
IV. Discussion of General Comments and
FRA’s Conclusions
A. Cost-Benefit Analysis/Safety
Justification
B. RSIA Authority
C. Role of Third Parties
D. Interaction With Other FRA Regulations
E. Confidential Close Call Reporting
System
F. PTC
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive
Order 13272
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Federalism Implications
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
F. Environmental Impact
G. Environmental Justice
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
I. Energy Impact
J. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
I. Executive Summary
Purpose of the Regulatory Action
FRA is requiring railroads to develop
FRA-approved programs for certifying
signal employees who work on signal
systems and signal-related technology
on their networks. Pursuant to this rule,
railroads are required to have formal
processes for training signal employees,
as well as verifying that each signal
employee has the requisite knowledge,
skills, safety record, and ability to safely
perform assigned tasks mandated by
railroad rules and safety standards and
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Federal law and regulations prior to
certification. In addition, railroads will
be required to have formal processes for
revoking certification (either
temporarily or permanently) for signal
employees who violate specified
minimum requirements.
FRA is promulgating this regulation
in response to section 402 of the RSIA,
Public Law 110–432, 122 Stat. 4848,
4884 (Oct. 16, 2008), which required the
Secretary of Transportation (Secretary)
to submit a report to Congress
addressing whether certification of
‘‘certain crafts or classes’’ of railroad
employees or contractors, including
signal employees, was necessary to
‘‘reduce the number and rate of
accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.’’ Section 402 further
provides that the Secretary may
prescribe regulations requiring the
certification of certain crafts or classes
if the Secretary determined, pursuant to
the report to Congress, that such
regulations are necessary to reduce the
number and rate of accidents and
incidents or to improve railroad safety.
The Secretary submitted a report to
Congress on November 4, 2015,1 stating
that, based on FRA’s preliminary
research, signal employees were one of
the most viable candidate railroad crafts
for certification, particularly with the
introduction of Positive Train Control
(PTC) technology. Given the safety
critical role of signal employees in
facilitating safe railroad operations, FRA
determined that the number and rate of
accidents and incidents would be
expected to decrease and railroad safety
would be expected to improve if signal
employees are required to satisfy certain
standards and be certified by each
railroad whose signal systems they
install, troubleshoot, repair, test, or
maintain.
Summary of Major Provisions
This rule requires railroads to develop
written programs for certifying
individuals who work as signal
employees on their territories, and to
submit those written certification
programs to FRA for approval prior to
implementation. FRA will issue a letter
to the railroad when it approves a
certification program that explains the
basis for approval, and a program will
not be considered approved until FRA
issues the approval letter. Subpart A of
this rule contains general provisions,
including a formal statement of the
rule’s purpose and scope.
1 A copy of this November 4, 2015 Report to
Congress has been posted in the rulemaking docket
at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA2022-0020-0001.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart B of this rule covers the
review and approval process of
certification programs, the
implementation schedule for this rule,
the certification program requirements,
and the eligibility determinations a
railroad must make to certify a person
as a signal employee. Class I railroads
(including the National Railroad
Passenger Corporation), and railroads
providing commuter service, are
required to submit their written
certification programs to FRA no later
than eight (8) months after this rule’s
effective date. Class II and Class III
railroads are required to submit their
written certification plans sixteen (16)
months after this rule’s rule effective
date. New railroads that begin operation
after the effective date are required to
submit their written certification
programs to FRA and obtain FRA
approval before installing their signal
systems and commencing operations. In
addition, railroads seeking to materially
modify their FRA-approved certification
programs must obtain FRA approval
prior to modifying their programs.
Railroads are required to evaluate
certification candidates in multiple
areas, including prior safety conduct as
a motor vehicle operator, prior safety
conduct as an employee of a different
railroad, substance abuse disorders and
alcohol/drug rules compliance, and
visual and hearing acuity.
The rule also contains minimum
requirements for the training provided
to candidates for signal employee
certification. These requirements are
intended to ensure certified signal
employees have received sufficient
training before they are hired to work on
signal systems and signal-related
technology. These requirements are also
intended to ensure that certified signal
employees periodically receive
recurring training on Federal laws,
regulations, and orders and railroad
safety and operating rules, as well as
comprehensive training on new signal
systems and signal-related technology
before they are introduced on the
railroads where they work.
Subpart C of this rule addresses how
railroads are to administer their signal
employee certification programs. With
the exception of individuals designated
as certified signal employees prior to
FRA approval of the railroad’s signal
employee certification program, this
rule prohibits railroads from certifying
signal employees for intervals longer
than three (3) years. This three-year
limitation, which is consistent with the
36-month maximum period for
certifying locomotive engineers in 49
CFR 240.217(c) and the 36-month
maximum period for certifying
conductors in 49 CFR 242.201(c), allows
for periodic re-evaluation of certified
signal employees to verify their
continued compliance with FRA’s
minimum safety requirements.
Subpart D of this rule addresses the
process and criteria for denying and
revoking certification. Before a railroad
denies an individual certification or
recertification, it must provide the
certification candidate with the
information that forms the basis for the
denial decision and give the candidate
an opportunity to rebut such evidence.
The rule also requires that a railroad
make any decision to deny an
individual certification or recertification
in writing and meet certain
requirements.
A railroad can only revoke a signal
employee’s certification if one of eleven
events occurs. Generally, for the first
revocable event that is not related to a
signal employee’s use of drugs or
alcohol, the person’s certification would
be revoked for 30 days. If a person
accumulates more of these violations in
a given time period, the revocation
period (period of ineligibility) becomes
longer.
If a railroad acquires reliable
information that a certified signal
employee has violated an operating rule
or practice requiring decertification
under this rule, the railroad must
suspend the signal employee’s
certification immediately, while it
determines whether revocation is
warranted. In such circumstances,
signal employees are entitled to a
hearing. Similar to a railroad’s decision
to deny certification, a railroad’s
decision to revoke a signal employee’s
44831
certification must satisfy certain
requirements. Finally, if an intervening
cause prevented or materially impaired
a signal employee’s ability to comply
with a railroad operating rule or
practice, the railroad must not revoke
the signal employee’s certification.
Subpart E of this rule describes the
dispute resolution process for
individuals wishing to challenge a
railroad’s decision to deny certification,
deny recertification, or revoke
certification. This dispute resolution
process mirrors the process used for
locomotive engineers and conductors
under 49 CFR parts 240 and 242,
respectively.
Finally, this final rule contains two
appendices. Appendix A discusses the
procedures that a person seeking
certification or recertification should
follow to furnish a railroad with
information concerning their motor
vehicle driving record. Appendix B
provides guidance on the procedures
railroads should employ in
administering the vision and hearing
requirements under §§ 246.117 and
246.118.
Benefits and Costs
FRA analyzed the economic impact of
this final rule. FRA estimated the
benefits of fewer signal employeecaused accidents, and the costs
anticipated to be incurred by railroads
and the Government.
This rule will help ensure that signal
employees are properly trained, are
qualified to perform their duties, and
meet Federal safety standards. This rule
will reduce the likelihood of an accident
occurring due to signal employee error.
FRA has analyzed accidents over the
past 10 years to categorize those where
signal employee training and
certification would have impacted the
accident. FRA then estimated benefits
based on that analysis.
The following table shows the
estimated 10-year quantifiable benefits
of the final rule. The total 10-year
estimated benefits would be $2.9
million (PV, 7%) and annualized
benefits would be $0.4 million (PV,
7%).
TOTAL 10-YEAR DISCOUNTED BENEFITS
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
[2020 Dollars]
Present value
7%
($)
Category
Grade Crossing Accidents ...............................................................................
Train Accidents/Incidents .................................................................................
Business Benefits (Railroad Industry) .............................................................
Business Benefits (Government) .....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1,766,028
960,671
53,817
87,985
Present value
3%
($)
2,064,676
1,123,127
62,917
102,863
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Annualized
7%
($)
251,443
136,778
7,662
12,527
Annualized
3%
($)
242,043
131,665
7,376
12,059
44832
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
TOTAL 10-YEAR DISCOUNTED BENEFITS—Continued
[2020 Dollars]
Present value
7%
($)
Category
Total ..........................................................................................................
This final rule will also provide
unquantifiable benefits. FRA has
quantified the monetary impact from
accidents which is reported on FRA
accident forms. However, some accident
costs are not required to be reported on
FRA accident forms (e.g., environmental
impact). That impact may account for
additional benefits not quantified in this
analysis. If these costs were realized,
2,868,501
accidents affected by this rulemaking
could have much greater economic
impact than estimated quantitative
benefit estimates.
There is also a chance of a high
impact event due to signal employee
error. This could involve fatalities,
injuries, and environmental damage, as
well as impact railroads, communities,
and the public. FRA has not estimated
Present value
3%
($)
3,353,584
Annualized
7%
($)
408,410
Annualized
3%
($)
393,142
the likelihood of such an event, but this
final rule is expected to reduce the risk
of an accident of that magnitude.
FRA estimates the 10-year costs of the
final rule to be $9.4 million, discounted
at 7 percent. The estimated annualized
costs are $1.3 million discounted at 7
percent. The following table shows the
total costs of this final rule, over the 10year analysis period.
TOTAL 10-YEAR DISCOUNTED COSTS
[2020 Dollars] 2
Present value
7%
($)
Category
Annualized
7%
($)
Annualized
3%
($)
Development of Certification Program ............................................................
Certification Eligibility Requirements ...............................................................
Recertification Eligibility Requirements ...........................................................
Training ............................................................................................................
Knowledge Testing ..........................................................................................
Vision and Hearing ..........................................................................................
Monitoring Operational Performance ...............................................................
Railroad Oversight Responsibilities .................................................................
Certification Card .............................................................................................
Petitions and Hearings ....................................................................................
Government Administrative Cost .....................................................................
1,504,135
202,952
243,632
2,079,835
746,865
1,097,523
1,178,812
267,530
103,175
181,733
1,780,113
1,541,874
227,006
310,417
2,379,911
898,884
1,320,891
1,408,753
326,714
124,175
217,183
2,065,541
214,155
28,896
34,688
296,122
106,337
156,263
167,836
38,090
14,690
25,875
253,448
180,755
26,612
36,390
278,998
105,377
154,849
165,149
38,301
14,557
25,460
242,144
Total ..........................................................................................................
9,386,306
10,821,350
1,336,399
1,268,592
II. Legal Authority
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Present value
3%
($)
Pursuant to the Rail Safety
Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law
110–432, sec. 402, 122 Stat. 4884 (Oct.
16, 2008) (hereinafter ‘‘RSIA’’), the
Secretary of Transportation (Secretary)
was required to submit a report to
Congress addressing whether
certification of certain crafts or classes
of employees, including signal repair
and maintenance employees, was
necessary to reduce the number and rate
of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.3 If the Secretary
determined it was necessary to require
the certification of certain crafts or
classes of employees to reduce the
number and rate of accidents and
incidents or to improve railroad safety,
section 402 of the RSIA stated the
Secretary may prescribe such
2 Numbers in this table and subsequent tables
may not sum due to rounding.
3 See also 49 U.S.C. 20103 (providing FRA’s
general authority to ‘‘prescribe regulations and
issue orders for every area of railroad safety’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
regulations. The Secretary delegated this
authority to the Federal Railroad
Administrator. 49 CFR 1.89. In response
to the RSIA, the Secretary submitted a
report to Congress on November 4, 2015,
stating that, based on FRA’s preliminary
research, dispatchers and signal
employees were potentially the most
viable candidate railroad crafts for
certification. Based on the analysis in
Section III below, the Federal Railroad
Administrator has determined that it is
necessary to require the certification of
signal employees to improve railroad
safety.
III. Background
A. Roles and Responsibilities of Signal
Employees
Railroad signal employees play an
integral role in ensuring the safety of
railroad operations, as well as the safety
of highway motorists. As noted in
comments submitted by the
Transportation Trades Department of
the AFL–CIO (TTD), signal systems are
critical to the operation of every
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
railroad. Signal employees are
responsible for the installation, testing,
troubleshooting, repair, and
maintenance of signal systems, as
defined in § 246.7, which railroads
utilize to direct train movements. Signal
employees must also use specialized
test and maintenance equipment to
complete safety critical tasks on
mechanical, electrical, and electronic
signal equipment.
The work performed by signal
employees can generally be divided into
two categories: construction and
maintenance. On larger railroads, some
signal employees work in groups (often
referred to as ‘‘gangs’’) under the direct
supervision of an experienced signal
employee to construct, install, and
upgrade signal systems and signal
system subsystems and components.
Some signal employees also work in
‘‘gangs’’ under the direct supervision of
an experienced signal employee to make
repairs to the signal system, while other
signal employees (often referred to as
‘‘signal maintainers’’) are primarily
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
tasked with inspecting, testing,
troubleshooting, and maintaining signal
systems and performing emergency
repairs as needed.
The definition of ‘‘signal employee’’
for purposes of this rulemaking may
differ from the conventional definition
of this term. As stated in § 246.1(c), the
signal employee certification
requirements contained in this part
apply to any person who meets the
definition of signal employee contained
in § 246.7, even if the person has a job
classification title other than that of
signal employee.
The term ‘‘signal employee’’ is
defined in § 246.7 as an individual who
is engaged in installing, troubleshooting,
testing, repair, or maintenance of
railroad signal systems or related
technology. FRA acknowledges that this
definition is expansive, as an employee
of a railroad (or railroad contractor or
subcontractor) may be considered a
signal employee for purposes of this
rule if they engage in the installation,
troubleshooting, testing, repair, or
maintenance of railroad signal systems
or related technology, even if such tasks
are not the primary focus of the
employee’s job. Railroads and other
interested parties seeking additional
guidance on how the term, ‘‘signal
employee,’’ has been defined for
purposes of this part may find it helpful
to review FRA’s Technical Bulletin S–
19–01, entitled ‘‘Application of the
Hours of Service Laws to Positive Train
Control Systems’’ (TB S–19–01). This
technical bulletin provides a general
framework for evaluating whether
individuals engaged in certain types of
tasks are subject to the Federal hours of
service law for signal employees (49
U.S.C. 21104).
For example, as noted in FRA’s
Technical Bulletin S–19–01, employees
who are engaged in testing signal system
components (even so-called ‘‘self-tests’’
of cab signal equipment installed on
locomotives) that require the employee
to interact with the signal system
component, monitor the progress of the
test, or interpret the results of the test
are considered to be ‘‘signal employees’’
who are subject to the Federal hours of
service law (49 U.S.C. 21104).
Accordingly, even employees of the
railroad’s mechanical department are
considered ‘‘signal employees’’ for
purposes of this part if they test signal
system components that require
employee interaction, monitor the
progress of the test, or interpret the
results of the test.
B. FRA History of Certification
On January 4, 1987, an Amtrak train
and Conrail train collided in Chase,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Maryland, resulting in 16 deaths and
174 injuries. At the time, it was the
deadliest train accident in Amtrak’s
history. The subsequent investigation by
the National Transportation Safety
Board concluded that the probable
cause of the accident was the
impairment of the Conrail engineer who
was under the influence of marijuana at
the time of the collision.4
Following this accident, Congress
passed the Rail Safety Improvement Act
of 1988, Public Law 100–342, 4, 102
Stat. 624, 625 (1988), which instructed
the Secretary to ‘‘issue such rules,
regulations, orders, and standards as
may be necessary to establish a program
requiring the licensing or certification of
any operator of a locomotive, including
any locomotive engineer.’’ On June 19,
1991, FRA published a final rule
establishing a certification system for
locomotive engineers and requiring
railroads to ensure that they only certify
individuals who met minimum
qualification standards.5 FRA
prescribed a certification system where
the railroads issue the certificates as
opposed to a government-run licensing
system. This final rule, published in 49
CFR part 240 (part 240), created
certification requirements for engineers
that addressed various areas including
vision and hearing acuity; training,
knowledge, and performance skills; and
prior safety conduct.
Seventeen years later, in 2008,
Congress passed the RSIA, which
mandated the creation of a certification
system for conductors. On November 9,
2011, FRA published a final rule
requiring railroads to have certification
programs for conductors and to ensure
that all certified conductors satisfy
minimum Federal safety standards.6
The conductor certification rule,
published in 49 CFR part 242 (part 242),
was largely modeled after part 240 with
some deviations based on the different
job classifications. Part 242 also
included some organizational
improvements which made the
regulation more streamlined than part
240.
C. Statutory Background for Signal
Employee Certification
In addition to requiring certification
for conductors, the RSIA required the
Secretary to submit a report to Congress
addressing whether certain other
railroad crafts or classes of employees
4 Railroad Accident Report: Rear-end Collision of
Amtrak Passenger Train 94, the Colonial and
Consolidated Rail Corporation Freight Train ENS–
121, on the Northeast Corridor, Chase, Maryland,
January 4, 1987 (144 Nat’l Transp. Safety Bd. 1988).
5 56 FR. 28227 (June 19, 1991).
6 76 FR 69801 (Nov. 9, 2011).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44833
would benefit from certification.
Specifically, section 402 of the RSIA
required the Secretary to issue a report
to Congress ‘‘about whether the
certification of certain crafts or classes
of railroad carrier or railroad carrier
contractor or subcontractor employees is
necessary to reduce the number and rate
of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.’’ As part of that report,
section 402 specifically required the
Secretary to consider ‘‘signal repair and
maintenance employees’’ as one of the
railroad crafts for certification.
After identifying a railroad craft or
class for which certification is
necessary, pursuant to the report to
Congress discussed above, section 402
authorized the Secretary to ‘‘prescribe
regulations requiring the certification of
certain crafts or classes of employees
that the Secretary determines . . . are
necessary to reduce the number and rate
of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.’’
D. Report to Congress
On November 4, 2015, the Secretary
submitted the report to Congress
required by section 402(b) of the RSIA.
The report stated that, based on FRA’s
preliminary research, dispatchers and
signal repair employees were the most
viable candidates for certification,
particularly with the introduction of
Positive Train Control (PTC) technology.
In reaching this determination with
respect to signal employees, the
Secretary cited a variety of factors.
The report noted that signal
employees perform safety-sensitive
work as shown by signal employees
being covered under the hours of service
laws. The report also noted that the
greatest proportion of contractors
covered under the hours of service laws
are signal employees and noted that
they tend to switch employers more
frequently than other crafts of
employees.
FRA did not include data to support
the position in its 2015 report to
Congress that signal employees of
railroad contractors tend to switch jobs
more frequently than other crafts of
employees. However, given the lack of
regulations requiring prior employment
background checks, it is relatively easy
for signal employees to leave their
current employer after committing a
rules violation and find work on another
railroad.
Another important factor noted in the
2015 report was the nature of the work
signal employees perform on wayside
signal and train control systems, which
are safety-critical for freight and
passenger rail operations. The report
noted that, in the coming decade, the
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44834
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
rail industry will likely lose many
experienced signal employees to
retirement, while growth in freight,
commuter, and intercity passenger rail
will require that more signal employees
are hired and trained.
The report also summarized the
challenges posed by PTC system
implementation, while noting the
‘‘increasingly sophisticated work’’
involved in the implementation of
complex PTC system technology by
signal employees.7 In particular, the
report noted that ‘‘signal employees will
be required to differentiate between a
vital and non-vital PTC system 8 and to
address the technicalities of using
standalone or overlay PTC systems.’’ 9
This combination of factors led to the
report’s conclusion that signal
employees are a potentially viable
candidate craft for certification.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
E. RSAC Working Group
In March 1996, FRA established the
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
(RSAC), which provides a forum for
collaborative rulemaking and program
development. RSAC includes
representatives from all of the agency’s
major stakeholder groups, including
railroads, labor organizations, suppliers
and manufacturers, and other interested
parties. When appropriate, FRA assigns
a task to RSAC, and after consideration
and debate, RSAC may accept or reject
the task. If accepted, RSAC establishes
a Working Group that possesses the
appropriate expertise and representation
of interests to develop recommendations
to FRA for action on the task.
On April 21, 2017, a task statement
regarding certification of signal
employees was presented to the RSAC
by email but no vote was taken. On
April 24, 2019, the RSAC accepted a
task (No. 19–03) entitled, ‘‘Certification
of Railroad Signal Employees.’’ 10 The
7 See 2015 DOT Report to Congress on
Certification of Railroad Crafts at 3.
8 PTC systems vary widely in complexity and
sophistication based on the level of automation and
functionality they implement, the system
architecture used, the wayside system upon which
they are based (i.e., non-signaled, block signal, cab
signal, etc.), and the degree of train control they are
capable of assuming. Vital systems are reliable and
built upon failsafe principles, while non-vital
systems are reliable but not guaranteed to provide
failsafe operation.
9 See 2015 DOT Report to Congress on
Certification of Railroad Crafts at 3. An overlay
system relies upon and supplements an existing
wayside signal system or redundant method of
operation. A standalone system replaces the
existing method of operation.
10 At the same meeting, the RSAC also accepted
a task (No. 19–02) titled ‘‘Certification of Train
Dispatchers.’’ A separate RSAC Working Group was
formed to address this task, and FRA plans to issue
a related rule that would establish certification
requirements for dispatchers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
purpose of the task was ‘‘[t]o consider
whether rail safety would be enhanced
by developing guidance, voluntary
standards, and/or draft regulatory
language for the certification of railroad
signal installation, repair, and
maintenance workers.’’
The Working Group, which included
representatives from the Association of
American Railroads (AAR), American
Public Transportation Association
(APTA), American Short Line and
Regional Railroad Association
(ASLRRA), Brotherhood of Railroad
Signalmen (BRS), Transportation
Division of the International Association
of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and
Transportation Workers (SMART–TD),
International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers (IBEW), Commuter Rail
Coalition, and National Railroad
Construction and Maintenance
Association (NRCMA), held its first and
only meeting on September 5, 2019 in
Washington, DC. At this meeting, the
Working Group reviewed the task
statement from the RSAC, discussed
some of the safety-critical tasks
performed by signal employees, and
debated whether certification of signal
employees would be beneficial to
railroad safety. At the end of the
meeting, action items were assigned,
and the next meeting was tentatively
scheduled for January 2020.
However, on December 16, 2019, the
presidents of the American Train
Dispatchers Association, BRS, and
IBEW (collectively the ‘‘Unions’’)
requested that both the dispatcher and
signal certification RSAC tasks be
withdrawn from consideration. The
Unions stated that they were involved
in numerous activities and were not
able to give the task proper attention.
AAR and ASLRRA advised the unions
that they were not opposed to this
request. In response, FRA withdrew the
tasks from the RSAC, and the Working
Groups became inactive.
F. Public Outreach
In 2021, FRA revisited the issue of
establishing certification requirements
for signal employees. The agency
assembled subject matter experts from
FRA, IBEW and BRS to exchange facts
or information regarding the tasks
performed by signal employees. Those
parties met virtually several times
between May 5, 2021 and June 30, 2021.
As part of FRA’s outreach, a list of
tasks performed by signal employees
was developed. These tasks generally
involved: vital equipment design
validation, installation, calibration,
testing, maintenance, and repair
(interlockings, grade crossings, wayside
signal systems, PTC, etc.). FRA
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
reviewed each task to determine
whether correctly performing the task
was critical to railroad safety; the
potential consequences if errors were
made while performing the task; and
whether there were any recent examples
of issues or concerns with respect to the
task. After performing this analysis,
FRA concluded that the vast majority of
tasks performed by signal employees
(80–90% of the listed tasks) were
critical to railroad safety with
potentially catastrophic consequences,
such as accidents, injuries, and/or
deaths, if the tasks were not performed
properly.
During FRA’s outreach, the benefits of
certification based on the experience of
stakeholders with engineer and
conductor certification under 49 CFR
parts 240 and 242 were also discussed.
Some of the main benefits of
certification that were identified
include:
—Creating a minimum standard for
training to ensure that the training
encompasses all skills and
proficiencies necessary to properly
perform all safety-related signal
employee functions;
—Establishing a record of safety
compliance that will follow a signal
employee if the employee wishes to
become certified by another railroad,
and that can be used to review a
signal employee’s performance and
potential training needs;
—Requiring certain safety checks,
which can help identify active
substance abuse disorders; and
—Establishing a system for individuals
to dispute a railroad’s decision to
deny or revoke certification with the
aim of creating a fair and consistent
process for all parties.
Based on these meetings, FRA
concluded that requiring certification
for signal employees would be an
important tool to ensure signal
employees performing safety-sensitive
tasks are adequately trained and
qualified and have a documented record
of performance that is accessible to
prospective employers.
Following this initial outreach, FRA
held a follow-up conversation with BRS
and IBEW, on March 3, 2022, and
individuals from BRS and IBEW
informed FRA of elements that they
believed would be beneficial in a signal
employee certification program. During
this conversation, which was held in
videoconference format, FRA asked the
attendees to provide individualized
feedback on how similar or different a
signal employee certification rule
should be to FRA’s locomotive engineer
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
and conductor certification rules found
in 49 CFR parts 240 and 242.
In response to that request, FRA heard
that the agency needs to ensure that
comprehensive training is provided to
signal employees, as the current training
is inadequate. FRA also heard that
railroads are not providing enough
training on new equipment and new
technology for signal employees. It was
also noted that, in some cases, signal
employees are being required to use
new equipment and new technology
without having received any prior
training on the equipment or
technology.
On March 7, 2022, FRA met with the
railroad industry, including Norfolk
Southern Railway Company (NS),
ASLRRA, and AAR. During this
conversation, which was conducted in a
videoconference format, FRA also asked
for individualized feedback on how
FRA’s locomotive engineer and
conductor certification regulations in 49
CFR parts 240 and 242 could be
improved upon with respect to signal
employee certification. Specifically,
FRA asked for feedback on any
regulatory provisions in 49 CFR parts
240 and 242 that, in their experience,
may have been difficult to implement,
as well as whether FRA should explore
any changes to these regulatory
provisions.
AAR expressed opposition to FRA’s
proposal to issue regulations requiring
certification of signal employees,
arguing that there was not a safety
benefit to certification. In addition, NS
questioned the need for certification
regulations in the absence of any
identified gaps in coverage by existing
railroad training programs.
ASLRRA expressed concern that
FRA’s proposal to issue regulations
requiring certification of dispatchers
and signal employees would result in a
big paperwork burden with little
benefit. In addition, ASLRRA asserted
that most short line railroads do not
have signal systems. With respect to
grade crossings, ASLRRA asserted that
most short line railroads rely on
contractors to maintain their grade
crossing warning systems.
After this conversation, FRA provided
a short list of written questions to AAR
and ASLRRA. While AAR did not
provide additional feedback in response
to FRA’s list of questions, ASLRRA
responded to FRA’s list of written
questions by email on April 13, 2022, a
copy of which has been placed in the
docket.11
11 A record of public contact summarizing this
meeting has been posted in the rulemaking docket
at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA2022-0020-0003.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
On March 8, 2022, FRA staff had a
follow-up conversation with BRS and
IBEW to receive information on the
types of errors and grade crossing and
signal violations that should result in a
railroad revoking a signal employee’s
certification. During this conversation,
which was conducted in a
videoconference format, FRA heard that
it might be appropriate to revoke a
signal employee’s certification in
response to willful violations.
G. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On May 31, 2023, FRA published an
NPRM proposing the establishment of
signal employee certification and
provided commenters 60 days to file
comments.12 On July 5, 2023, FRA
extended the comment period by an
additional 30 days.13 On August 22,
2023, FRA extended the comment
period again, this time by an additional
15 days until September 14, 2023.14
IV. Discussion of General Comments
and FRA’s Conclusions
FRA received 24 comments on the
NPRM and the related Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) from State
agencies, labor organizations, trade
associations, tourist, historic, and
excursion railroads, railway museums,
consulting firms, a transportation
learning center, and a public-interest
law firm and policy center. The order of
the topics or comments discussed in
this document does not reflect the
significance of the comment raised or
the standing of the commenter.
Additionally, this summary of
comments provides a general
understanding of the overall scope and
themes raised by the commenters and
gives some specific descriptions to
provide context. Not every comment is
described in this summary. Comments
addressing specific sections of this rule
are discussed in the section-by-section
analysis below. Comments regarding the
proposed RIA are addressed in the RIA
to the final rule.
A. Cost-Benefit Analysis/Safety
Justification
FRA received several comments
related to the costs and benefits of the
proposed rule. Comments were received
from AAR, ASLRRA, and the
Washington Legal Foundation (WLF),
each of whom commented that the costs
of the proposed rule outweigh the
benefits.
AAR and ASLRRA commented on
several of FRA’s cost estimates for
FR 35632 (May 31, 2023).
FR 42907 (July 5, 2023).
14 88 FR 57044 (Aug. 22, 2023).
provisions in the proposed rule. AAR
and ASLRRA commented that FRA’s
estimates for the time to develop the
certification programs were low.
ASLRRA commented that it would take
550 hours to develop a model program
and 19 hours per small railroad to
implement. For unannounced
compliance tests (monitoring
operational performance), AAR and
ASLRRA estimated that the time per
supervisor would be much more than
the two hours per year that FRA
estimated. Regarding dispute resolution
hearings, AAR and ASLRRA
commented that the cost assessments for
hearings are underestimated and that
the actual cost would amount to 20
percent of the total estimated costs of
the proposed rule. AAR and ASLRRA
also contend that FRA underestimated
wage-related costs by using the 2020
railroad wage rates which ‘‘do not take
into account the 24% wage increase that
railroad employees received as part of
the 2022 collective bargaining process
or the 10.7% increase in Federal
government employee pay rates.’’ 15
FRA also received comments
pertaining to the estimated benefits in
the RIA associated with the proposed
rule. AAR and ASLRRA contend that
FRA relied on some incidents that were
not caused by signal employee activities
and some incidents for which AAR and
ASLRRA assert that it would be
impossible to draw the conclusion that
the incident would have been prevented
by a signal employee certification
program.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that
there is no safety justification for this
rulemaking and asserted, in their
comments, that ‘‘the last decade was the
safest on record for railroads.’’ 16 In
support of this assertion, AAR and
ASLRRA provided statistics reflecting a
reduction in rail accidents since 2000.
Based on ASLRRA’s comment
regarding the time to develop a
certification program, FRA has revised
the estimated time for ASLRRA to
develop a model program to 550 hours
and increased the estimated time for
small railroads to implement a program
from 8 hours to 15 hours. FRA has now
accounted for only one template
program produced by ASLRRA. Holding
companies will likely use the template
program developed by ASLRRA, instead
of producing their own template, as
discussed in the RIA associated with the
NPRM.
FRA also reassessed the costs for
petitions and hearings based on
comments from AAR and ASLRRA. The
12 88
13 88
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44835
15 FRA–2022–0020–0035.
16 Ibid.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44836
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
safety in recent decades and instituting
such requirements for signal employees
could lead to similar improvements in
the future.
A more detailed response to these
comments is, however, provided in the
RIA.
categories of employees have been
revised and estimates have been
increased. FRA determined these
estimates by looking at the number of
petitions and hearings associated with
the conductor and engineer certification
programs. This baseline was then
adjusted for the population size of
signal employees. Additionally,
Government costs for petitions and
hearings have been increased and now
include more categories of employees
involved in the process.
With respect to AAR and ASLRRA’s
comment that the time estimate for
unannounced compliance tests is too
low, FRA has revised its estimate for
monitoring operational performance.
FRA estimates that each signal
employee will require 17 minutes per
year for unannounced compliance tests.
This revised estimate reflects 15
minutes of additional tasks that would
not have been performed otherwise and
2 minutes for documentation.
As for AAR and ASLRRA’s comments
on the 2020 wage rates used in the
NPRM, FRA notes that the wage rates
used during NPRM drafting were the
most recently available data, as
provided by the Surface Transportation
Board’s (STB) wage data series and
General Schedule (GS) pay scales.
With respect to AAR and ASLRRA’s
comments on FRA’s estimate of benefits
in the RIA on the proposed rule, FRA
has decreased the number of activation
failures from 45 (as stated in the NPRM
RIA) to 41.5. In addition, FRA adjusted
the number of train accidents from 77 to
75 to align with the FRA supplemental
data report to the NPRM RIA.17
Turning to the contention from AAR
and ASLRRA that there is no safety
justification for this rule, FRA disagrees
with the premise that because railroad
safety has improved over the last 20
years, the agency does not need to take
actions that could further improve
safety. Moreover, the associations
neglected to mention in their comments
that one of the changes in the railroad
industry over the past few decades has
been the introduction of certification
requirements. The locomotive engineer
certification requirements in part 240
went into effect in 1991,18 and the
conductor certification requirements in
part 242 became effective just over a
decade ago in 2012.19 Thus, it stands to
reason that certification has been one of
the factors that has improved railroad
B. RSIA Authority
In their comments on the proposed
rule, AAR and ASLRRA challenge
FRA’s assertion that section 402 of the
RSIA authorized the Secretary to
prescribe regulations requiring the
certification of signal employees. AAR
and ASLRRA assert that Congress only
authorized the Department to issue
regulations requiring certification if the
Secretary determined in a report to
Congress that regulations are ‘‘necessary
to reduce the number and rate of
accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.’’ 20 AAR and ASLRRA
contend the Secretary failed to make
such a determination in the 2015 report
to Congress.
While section 402 of the RSIA
required the Secretary to issue a report
to Congress ‘‘about whether the
certification of certain crafts or classes
of railroad carrier or railroad carrier
contractor or subcontractor employees is
necessary to reduce the number and rate
of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety,’’ it did not require the
Secretary to make an official
determination in this report that the
issuance of signal employee certification
regulations was necessary to reduce the
number and rate of accidents and
incidents or to improve railroad safety,
as a necessary precondition to the
initiation of this rulemaking.
Section 402 of the RSIA authorizes
the Secretary (and by delegation, FRA)
to prescribe regulations requiring the
certification of certain crafts or classes
of railroad carrier employees (or railroad
carrier contractor or subcontractor
employees) ‘‘pursuant to’’ the report to
Congress that was required by section
402(b) of the RSIA. The phrase,
‘‘pursuant to,’’ is defined to mean ‘‘in a
way that agrees with or follows
(something).’’ 21 Thus, in section 402 of
the RSIA, Congress authorized FRA to
prescribe regulations that are consistent
with the 2015 report to Congress.
Moreover, FRA notes that it has broad
authority to ‘‘prescribe regulations and
issue orders for every area of railroad
safety,’’ including this regulation.22
17 FRA, ‘‘Certification of Signal Employees Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking: Supplemental Data to the
Regulatory Impact Analysis,’’ July 2023, https://
www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2022-00200010.
18 56 FR 28227, 28228 (June 19, 1991).
19 76 FR 69802 (Nov. 9, 2011).
20 Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public
Law 110–432, section 402, 122 Stat. 4848, 4884
(2008).
21 www.britannica.com.
22 49 U.S.C. 20103. The Secretary delegated this
authority to the Federal Railroad Administrator. 49
CFR 1.89.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
C. Role of Third Parties
Consistent with FRA’s engineer and
conductor certification regulations, this
final rule requires railroads to develop
and submit certification programs to
FRA for approval and then implement
their FRA-approved certification
programs. However, FRA received
multiple comments urging FRA to
clarify how signal employee
certification programs will be
implemented for the employees of
signal contractors.
The International Transportation
Learning Center (ITLC) urged FRA to
implement a process that allows
railroads to use model programs in a
manner similar to the existing process
established pursuant to FRA’s training
regulations in part 243 of this chapter.
In contrast, AAR and ASLRRA
submitted comments asserting that FRA
should authorize contractors and
subcontractors to certify their own
employees. AAR and ASLRRA asserted
that locomotive engineers and
conductors are not a useful comparison
when considering this issue because
Class I railroad engineers and
conductors are almost uniformly
company employees. AAR and ASLRRA
asserted that Class I railroads make far
greater use of contractors in the context
of signal systems, as railroads typically
engage contractors to perform temporary
or intermittent signal work, such as
manufacturing signal bungalows in a
shop environment and for field work
like installing signal mast foundations.
Then, once the project is complete, AAR
and ASLRRA asserted that the
contractor and the contractor’s
employees will move on to a new
project, possibly on a different railroad.
Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA
concluded that requiring railroads to
certify signal employees employed by
signal contractors will be inefficient and
result in significant administrative
burdens for railroads.
With respect to short line railroads,
AAR, ASLRRA, and the National
Railroad Construction and Maintenance
Association (NRCMA) submitted
comments asserting that many short line
railroads use contractors extensively for
signal work because they do not have
the in-house expertise to otherwise
manage signal maintenance. AAR and
ASLRRA noted that signal contractors
often provide signal maintenance for
dozens of short lines at the same time.
Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA asserted
that it would be infeasible and an
inefficient waste of resources for dozens
of railroads to potentially certify the
same individual in any given period. In
addition, NRCMA asserted that, while
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
many of FRA’s regulations hold a
railroad responsible for the actions of an
individual performing tasks in
accordance with the regulation, no other
FRA regulation requires railroads to
determine whether a non-employee has
the stated qualifications to perform such
tasks.
As noted in the proposed rule,
especially with respect to Class I, Class
II, and commuter railroads, the railroad
is generally most knowledgeable about
the signal systems and signal-related
technology that have been deployed on
their territories. Therefore, Class I, Class
II, and commuter railroads are best
suited to develop certification programs
to ensure signal employees tasked with
installing, testing, repair, or
maintenance of their signal systems and
signal-related technology have been
properly trained and qualified on such
systems and technology. However,
railroads are encouraged to work with
any signal contractors they hire to
obtain records for the contractor’s
employees that will assist the railroad in
making the signal employee certification
determinations required by this part.
There are a number of provisions in
this final rule which are intended to
reduce the burdens associated with
developing signal employee certification
programs. As noted in the section-bysection analysis of § 246.207, parent
companies can assist subsidiary
railroads with compliance with this
final rule by developing and submitting
signal employee certification programs
for one or more of their subsidiary
railroads to FRA for review and
approval. For example, a parent
company can submit one signal
employee certification program to FRA
for multiple subsidiary railroads. In this
scenario, the parent company must
identify and address all variances
associated with each subsidiary railroad
that will be covered by the certification
program developed by the parent
company and submitted by the parent
company to FRA for approval. After
FRA approves the signal employee
certification program, § 246.207 allows
either the parent company or the
subsidiary railroad to issue signal
employee certificates to the signal
employees of each subsidiary railroad
that is covered by the parent company’s
certification program.
In addition, to ease the burden of
developing signal employee certification
programs, especially with respect to
Class III railroads, this final rule allows
railroads to choose between conducting
their own training for signal employees,
hiring a third party to provide training
to the railroad’s signal employees, or
using a training program developed by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
a third party (including a parent
company). NRCMA asserted in their
comments that signal contractors have
expertise in the equipment they install
and maintain and that they are wellsituated to develop a training program
to address particular safety issues that
may arise in the course of their work.
FRA acknowledges that some signal
contractors may, in fact, be well-situated
to develop training programs for their
signal employees. Therefore, some
railroads may choose to hire signal
contractors who have their own inhouse signal employee training
programs. Railroads that adopt this
approach should, however, keep in
mind that most, if not all, existing signal
employee training programs which have
been approved by FRA pursuant to 49
CFR part 243 will need to be revised to
comply with the training and
knowledge testing requirements in this
part that specifically apply to signal
employees. In addition, the operational
performance monitoring requirements
in this part must be performed by the
certifying railroad.
However, if a railroad chooses to hire
a third party to provide training or use
a training program developed by a third
party, the third-party training program
must fit the railroad’s specific operating
environment and address any unique
signal system equipment or signalrelated technology (or any unique
deployment of signal system equipment
or signal-related technology) on the
railroad’s territory.
Ultimately, with respect to railroads
who hire signal contractors to perform
work on their signal systems and signalrelated technology, employees of signal
contracting companies must be certified
by the railroad before the railroad
allows them to work on its signal
systems and signal-related technology,
unless they are assigned to work under
the direct and immediate supervision of
a mentor or qualified instructor. As
stated in § 246.124(b), railroads are
responsible for ensuring that certified
signal employees install, test, maintain,
and repair their signal systems and
signal-related technology.
D. Interaction With Other FRA
Regulations
As stated in the 2015 DOT Report to
Congress on the Certification of Railroad
Employees, the purpose of certification
is to document and verify that the
holder of the certificate has achieved
certain training and proficiency and to
create a record of safety compliance
infractions that prospective employers
can review when hiring experienced
employees. While developing this rule,
FRA has been mindful of other
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44837
regulations that may touch upon topics
covered in this rule, including FRA’s
training, qualification, and oversight
regulations in 49 CFR part 243 (part
243); railroad safety risk reduction
programs (SSP/RRP) in 49 CFR parts
270 and 271 (parts 270 and 271); and
fatigue risk management programs
(FRMP) in parts 270 and 271. However,
FRA finds that this rule would
complement, rather than duplicate,
those regulations.
AAR and ASLRRA disagree. In their
comments on the proposed rule, AAR
and ASLRRA contend that the gaps in
FRA’s regulations which this rule is
trying to fill are either non-existent or
immaterial. AAR and ASLRRA assert
that there is no safety basis for layering
new certification requirements on top of
FRA’s training, qualification, and
oversight requirements in part 243 and
the railroad safety risk reduction
program requirements in parts 270 and
271. In addition, AAR and ASLRRA
specifically assert that there is
significant overlap between this rule
and part 243.
In support of their argument, AAR
and ASLRRA point to § 246.119, which
requires railroads to provide training on
railroad safety and operating rules, as
well as training on the signal systems
and signal-related technology deployed
on their networks to their signal
employees. AAR and ASLRRA assert
that this provision overlaps and
potentially conflicts with
§ 243.101(c)(5), which states that the
employer must determine how training
‘‘shall be structured, developed, and
delivered.’’ AAR and ASLRRA also
assert that § 246.119 overlaps and
potentially conflicts with the stated
purpose of part 243 of this chapter ‘‘to
ensure that any person employed by a
railroad or a contractor of a railroad as
a safety-related railroad employee is
trained and qualified to comply with
any relevant Federal railroad safety
laws, regulations, and orders, as well as
any relevant railroad rules and
procedures promulgated to implement
those Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders.’’
As an initial matter, AAR and
ASLRRA’s narrative that this rule is
duplicative of parts 243, 270, and 271
appears to be contradicted by
congressional direction. As they note in
their joint comment, FRA issued the
training regulations in part 243, the SSP
regulations in part 270, and the RRP
regulations in part 271 because of a
statutory mandate in the RSIA.
However, in the same law, Congress
explicitly permitted requiring the
certification of certain crafts if the
Secretary determined it was necessary
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44838
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
to improve railroad safety. Had Congress
determined that certification
requirements were duplicative of what
was already mandated by the RSIA, it
would not have required the Secretary
to study whether other crafts or classes
of employees could benefit from
certification or given the Secretary the
statutory authority to issue additional
certification regulations.
Turning to any overlap between this
rule and part 243, FRA stands by its
position proffered in the NPRM that this
rule complements, and does not
duplicate, part 243. This rule builds off
the initial performance skill evaluations
required in part 243 by mandating that
certified signal employees also receive
an unannounced compliance test each
calendar year to ensure that signal
employees continue to safely perform
their duties after their initial
certification. Part 243 has no such
continuing compliance testing
requirement. While 49 CFR 243.205
requires employers to perform periodic
oversight tests and inspections to
determine whether their employees are
complying with Federal railroad safety
laws and regulations, the rule does not
require that all employees receive such
tests and inspections. In fact, under part
243, an employee could work for
decades without being tested or
inspected. Therefore, § 246.123 fills a
significant gap in FRA’s training
regulations.
Also, as noted in the NPRM, part 243
does not require railroads to have formal
processes in place for promptly
removing signal employees from service
if they violate one or more basic
regulatory standards that could have a
significant negative impact on the safety
of rail operations. AAR and ALSRRA
failed to address this fact in their
comment. Part 246 complements part
243 by mandating that railroads remove
signal employees from service if they
commit one of the safety violations
enumerated in § 246.303(e). This rule
also requires railroads to perform
certain safety checks before certifying a
person as a signal employee. These
safety checks pertain to a person’s prior
safety conduct, both working on
railroads and as a motor vehicle
operator; their history of substance
abuse disorders; and their visual and
hearing acuity. These are basic safety
requirements that are not addressed in
part 243. Thus, FRA does not find
significant overlap between this rule
and part 243.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend ‘‘the
proposed rule would cast aside the
carefully considered risk analysis
conducted through the [system safety/
risk reduction programs] in favor of an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
approach that would have railroads
potentially focus on lower priority risks
associated with signal employees, not
because it is an effective safety
management tool, but solely because
this rulemaking would require it.’’ 23
AAR and ASLRRA assert that all Class
I railroads have submitted RRPs and
received approval from FRA. If all
railroads with passenger rail operations
that operate intercity or commuter
service have also submitted SSPs and
received FRA approval, AAR and
ASLRRA estimate that SSP/RRPs could
cover more than 83% of the line-haul
mileage and 95% of workers in the rail
industry.
However, even if a railroad has a
railroad safety risk reduction program
through which it identifies the risks
associated with installing, testing,
maintaining, and repairing signal
systems, the railroad can decide not to
implement mitigations to eliminate or
reduce those specific risks. Whether a
railroad is required to have a program
that mitigates risks associated with
signal systems will depend on how the
railroad prioritizes risks for mitigation
and how effectively that mitigation
would promote continuous safety
improvement, as compared to mitigation
of other identified hazards and risks.
Even if signal systems are identified as
a risk, a railroad may not be required by
its risk reduction program to implement
mitigations to eliminate or reduce that
risk.
Moreover, FRA disagrees with AAR
and ASLRRA’s assertion that this
rulemaking ‘‘cast[s] aside the carefully
considered risk analysis conducted
through the [system safety/risk
reduction programs] . . . .’’ 24 Nothing
in this rule obviates a railroad’s
responsibilities under parts 270 and
271. Railroads are expected to continue
to perform the risk analysis and the
necessary mitigations to comply with
parts 270 and 271, while also
implementing a signal employee
certification program. This final rule
does not duplicate existing FRA
regulations or hinder railroads from
complying with them. To the contrary,
part 246 complements FRA’s existing
regulations and will help promote
railroad safety.
E. Confidential Close Call Reporting
System
APTA and MTA each commented on
the potential interaction between part
246 and the Confidential Close Call
Reporting System (C3RS), an FRA23 Comment submitted by the AAR and ASLRRA,
Docket no. FRA–2022–0020–0035, p. 24.
24 Ibid.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sponsored program that allows railroad
employees reporting close calls to
receive certain protections, which
currently includes protection from
decertification for locomotive engineers
and conductors. Each C3RS program is
established through an Implementing
Memorandum of Understanding (IMOU)
signed by FRA and the participating
railroad and labor organization(s).
Under the current process, the
participating railroad submits to FRA a
petition to waive specific part 240 and/
or part 242 requirements necessary to
implement the IMOU’s decertification
protections. A waiver granted by FRA
then incorporates the IMOU’s
protections by reference. APTA and
MTA request that FRA add language to
this regulation which would state that
those railroads with existing C3RS
programs with part 240 and 242 waivers
do not have to similarly apply for a
waiver of part 246, as their C3RS
protections should automatically be
applied to part 246 revocable events.
APTA and MTA also request that FRA
identify in the rule whether any
revocable events for signal employees
will not be afforded C3RS protections.
While FRA appreciates the
commenters’ desire for a more
streamlined C3RS process, their request
is beyond the scope of the NPRM in this
proceeding and risks introducing
inconsistency and confusion into the
C3RS implementation process.
Specifically, addressing C3RS in this
rule would treat signal employees
differently than locomotive engineers
and conductors, who receive C3RS
decertification protection only pursuant
to part 240/242 waivers. The proposed
approach would also treat signal
employees at new C3RS programs
differently, as railroads joining C3RS
after the publication of the rule would
still have to file a part 246 waiver
petition. This inconsistency could
create confusion and lead to signal
employees at C3RS-participating
railroads being uncertain about whether
they were protected by the terms of a
waiver or by C3RS-related provisions in
part 246 (particularly signal employees
hired after the date of this final rule who
would not necessarily know when their
railroad implemented C3RS for signal
employees). Such confusion would be
compounded if this rule specified
which decertifiable events were not
afforded C3RS protections, as any such
regulatory provision could differ
substantively from the provisions of an
applicable IMOU and waiver.
Confusion is further risked because
only some existing C3RS IMOUs cover
signal employees, not all. Using part 246
to provide C3RS decertification
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
protection to signal employees at
railroads with ‘‘existing’’ C3RS programs
could therefore be particularly
confusing for signal employees at
railroads with existing C3RS programs
that do not currently include signal
employees. Such signal employees may
mistakenly believe that they are covered
by C3RS simply through the action of
part 246, not realizing that they lack
protection due to the absence of an
IMOU that applies to them.
Overall, FRA believes that to promote
signal employee confidence in C3RS
reporting, signal employees must be
certain about the decertification
protection they will receive. Such
confidence is best promoted by a clear
understanding that all signal employees
may only report pursuant to an IMOU
and waiver that specifically apply to
their railroad, rather than having some
signal employees protected by separate
provisions in part 246, depending on
whether they were covered by a C3RS
program at the time the final rule is
published.
FRA also notes that RSAC has
established a C3RS Working Group
tasked, in part, with examining how
C3RS could be expanded industry-wide
without a separate waiver required for
each participating railroad.25 Instead of
addressing C3RS in this rule, FRA finds
it preferable to allow the RSAC C3RS
Working Group to perform its work and
to apply any RSAC-recommended
improvements consistently to
locomotive engineers, conductors,
signal employees, and any other
certified craft through a future
rulemaking or some other means. In the
meantime, any railroad that already has
a C3RS program that applies to signal
employees will need to file a request to
modify its waiver if the railroad would
like the program’s decertification
protections to apply to its signal
employees. Likewise, a railroad that is
not currently participating in C3RS (or
a railroad that has a C3RS program, but
one that does not apply to its signal
employees) will need to file a petition
for relief if the railroad decides to
implement a C3RS program covering
signal employees.
F. PTC
Positive train control (PTC) systems
provide an additional layer of safety to
existing signal systems, many of which
have been place for many decades. PTC
systems are also interoperable with each
other, as well as with existing signal
systems. In their comments on the
proposed rule, AAR and ASLRRA assert
that PTC implementation has not
25 See
Task No. 2022–03.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
increased the complexity of the work
performed by signal employees. Instead,
AAR and ASLRRA assert that the work
of signal employees has become less
complex because installing, repairing,
and maintaining signal systems has
become more simplified and more
efficient as microprocessors monitor the
health of the system and provide
automated alerts. Accordingly, AAR and
ASLRRA assert that the implementation
of PTC systems does not provide a
justification for this rule.
FRA disagrees with this assertion.
Signal employees need to understand
the relationship between signal and PTC
systems and the communication
medium and how these systems operate,
function, and react to a myriad of
circumstances. Signal systems and PTC
systems are also continually upgraded,
so the development and implementation
of these increasingly complex systems
need to be properly understood by
signal employees who install,
troubleshoot, test, maintain, and repair
them.
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
This section responds to public
comments and identifies changes made
from the regulatory provisions as
proposed in the NPRM. Accordingly,
provisions that received no comment
and are otherwise being finalized as
proposed are not discussed below.
Subpart A—General
Subpart A of this rule contains
general provisions, including a formal
statement of the rule’s purpose and
scope. This subpart also provides that
the rule does not constrain the ability of
a railroad to prescribe additional or
more stringent requirements for its
signal employees that are not
inconsistent with this final rule.
Section 246.3 Application and
Responsibility for Compliance
The extent of FRA’s jurisdiction, and
the agency’s exercise of that
jurisdiction, is well-established. See 49
CFR part 209, app. A. This application
and responsibility for compliance
section is consistent with FRA’s
Statement of Agency Policy Concerning
Enforcement of the Federal Railroad
Safety Laws in appendix A to 49 CFR
part 209 (Policy Statement).
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.3 and 242.3, provides that this final
rule applies to all railroads with four
exceptions. Paragraph (a)(1) of this
section notes that this rule does not
apply to railroads that do not have a
signal system, as defined in § 246.7.
The second and third exceptions
apply to rail operations on tracks that
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44839
are not part of the general railroad
system of transportation. Paragraph
(a)(2) contains an exception for rail
operations that occur within the
confines of industrial installations
commonly referred to as ‘‘plant
railroads’’ and typified by operations
such as those in steel mills that do not
go beyond the plant’s boundaries and
that do not involve the switching of rail
cars for entities other than themselves.
Paragraph (a)(3) contains an exception
for ‘‘tourist, scenic, historic, or
excursion operations that are not part of
the general railroad system of
transportation,’’ as defined in § 246.7.
This reflects a change from the proposed
rule, in which paragraph (a)(3) would
have excluded tourist, scenic, historic,
and excursion operations that are not
part of the general railroad system of
transportation, if they are deemed to be
‘‘insular.’’
As explained in FRA’s Statement of
Agency Policy Concerning Enforcement
of the Federal Railroad Safety Laws in
appendix A to 49 CFR part 209 (Policy
Statement), FRA considers a railroad to
be ‘‘insular’’ if its operations are limited
to a separate enclave in such a way that
there is no reasonable expectation that
the safety of any member of the public
(except a business guest, a licensee of a
tourist operation or an affiliated entity,
or a trespasser) would be affected by the
operation. A railroad is not considered
insular if one or more of the following
exists on its line: (a) A public highwayrail grade crossing that is in use; (b) an
at-grade crossing that is in use; (c) a
bridge over a public road or waters used
for commercial navigation; or (d) a
common corridor with a railroad (i.e.,
its operations are within 30 feet of those
of any railroad. Therefore, for example,
a tourist railroad that operates outside
the general railroad system of
transportation yet operates over one or
more public highway-rail grade
crossings, would have been required by
the proposed rule to comply with these
regulatory requirements for signal
employees.
FRA received multiple comments on
paragraph (a)(3) in the proposed rule
from tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion operations, including the
Monticello Railway Museum, the
Colorado Railroad Museum, the Oregon
Coast Scenic Railroad, the Durango and
Silverton Narrow Gauge Railroad, the
Great Smoky Mountains Railroad, and
the Northwest Railway Museum, as well
as an association (HeritageRail Alliance,
Inc.) and a consultant (George Hardy
Consulting). All commenters expressed
support for excluding all tourist, scenic,
historic and excursion operations that
operate outside the general railroad
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44840
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
system from the scope of this rule—
regardless of whether the tourist, scenic,
historic, and excursion operation is
deemed to be insular or not.
Therefore, FRA took a closer look at
tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion
operations that operate outside the
general railroad system of
transportation. According to FRA’s
records, out of 818 railroads nationwide,
there are 34 tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion operations operating outside
the general railroad system of
transportation. FRA’s records also
indicate that these tourist, scenic,
historic, and excursion operations
maintain active warning devices at
approximately 105 grade crossings (a
small percentage of the 70,289 highwayrail grade crossings nationwide that are
equipped with active warning devices).
Asserting that excursion and heritage
railways have traditionally relied on
volunteer and part-time workers located
in their host community to perform
signal work, the Northwest Railway
Museum commented that the added
burden of medical exams, drug testing,
certification training, and the review of
signal employee driving records may
result in smaller entities having to
transition to contract signal maintainers.
The Northwest Railway Museum and
the Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad
commented that the transition to
contract signal maintainers may result
in the unintended consequence of
reducing the timeliness of repairs, as
contract signal maintainers could be
located two or more hours away. The
Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad asserted
that a highway-rail grade crossing could
remain out of service for a lengthy
period of time while a tourist railroad
arranges to bring in an expensive
outside contractor for a repair that
previously would have had the crossing
back in service within an hour.
Therefore, after taking a closer look at
tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion
operations that operate outside the
general railroad system of
transportation, and considering the
comments that were submitted to FRA
by tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion operations that may be
affected by this rulemaking, FRA has
excluded these operations from the
scope of this final rule. This is
consistent with FRA’s Policy Statement,
which excludes tourist, scenic, historic,
and excursion operations from all but a
limited number of Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders
(including FRA regulations governing
alcohol and drug testing in 49 CFR part
219 and employee training plans in 49
CFR part 243).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
The fourth exception, in paragraph
(a)(4), applies to rapid transit operations
in an urban area that are not connected
to the general railroad system of
transportation. It should, however, be
noted that FRA does exercise
jurisdiction over some rapid transit type
operations, given their links to the
general railroad system of
transportation, such as rapid transit
operations conducted on track used for
freight, intercity passenger, or commuter
passenger railroad operations during a
block of time when a general system
railroad is not operating (temporal
separation). FRA specifically intends to
have this rule apply to those rapid
transit operations.
Paragraph (b) is intended to clarify
that any person, as defined in § 246.7
(including a railroad employee or
employee of a railroad contractor or
subcontractor) who performs a function
required by this part will be held
responsible for compliance.
Section 246.5
Effect and Construction
This section is derived from 49 CFR
240.5 and 242.5. While FRA has not
revised the language in this section that
was proposed in the NPRM, FRA would
like to provide clarification in response
to comments from the AAR and
ASLRRA asserting that FRA fails to
understand this final rule will require
the altering of existing collective
bargaining agreements. Paragraph (a)
does not state that collective bargaining
agreements will not be altered as a
result of this new rule. To the contrary,
FRA understands that, due to new
requirements in this rule, collective
bargaining agreements may need to be
modified to reflect the training and
qualification requirements of the rule.
FRA acknowledges this fact, but this
rule allows for mentoring so individuals
can obtain new signal employee
positions and be mentored until they
become qualified on the railroad’s signal
system and signal-related technology.
Paragraph (a) of this section simply
acknowledges that the term ‘‘signal
employee’’ is defined in this final rule
to cover persons who engage in certain
tasks that affect railroad signal systems
and signal-related technology as defined
in § 246.7. However, railroads and labor
organizations may use job classification
titles other than ‘‘signal employee’’ for
persons who engage in installing,
troubleshooting, testing, repairing, or
maintaining railroad signal systems and
signal-related technology as defined in
§ 246.7, and this final rule does not
affect the use of such job classification
titles in collective bargaining
agreements.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Section 246.7 Definitions
This section defines a number of
terms that have specific meaning in this
part. However, consistent with FRA’s
approach in drafting this section-bysection analysis, definitions that
received no comment and are being
finalized as proposed are not discussed
in this section.
The American Association of Nurse
Practitioners (AANP) submitted
comments on the definition of ‘‘medical
examiner’’ in the proposed rule. Noting
that approximately 70% of all nurse
practitioner graduates deliver primary
care, AANP requested that FRA revise
the definition of ‘‘medical examiner’’ to
include nurse practitioners and thereby
authorize them to make determinations
on signal employees’ certification,
recertification, vision acuity and hearing
acuity. AANP asserted that the
definition of ‘‘medical examiner’’ in the
proposed rule was based on FRA’s
locomotive engineer certification
regulations in 49 CFR part 240, which
are now 32 years old, and not reflective
of the current practice environment
where nurse practitioners provide a
substantial portion of care.
While FRA has not revised the
definition of ‘‘medical examiner’’ to
specifically include nurse practitioners,
FRA clarifies that if a nurse practitioner
is a licensed or certified technician,
FRA’s regulations in 49 CFR parts 240
and 242 (and this final rule) allow the
nurse practitioner to perform the vision
and hearing examinations required in
those parts (and in this rule). However,
given the complex nature of this issue
and FRA’s lack of regulatory
requirements for medical examiners, the
question of whether nurse practitioners
should be allowed to serve as medical
examiners (and if so, whether they
should be required to comply with
specific regulatory or industry
standards) is best addressed in a future
rulemaking during which comments can
be solicited specifically on this issue.
Accordingly, only a doctor of medicine
or doctor of osteopathy is authorized by
this final rule to conduct a medical
evaluation to determine whether a
person can safely work as a certified
signal employee if the person fails the
vision or hearing acuity examination.
FRA has, however, revised the last
sentence of this definition by changing
‘‘employee’’ to ‘‘individual’’ to reflect
the fact that railroad medical examiners
will be asked to conduct medical
evaluations of railroad employees, as
well as other individuals seeking signal
employee certification or recertification.
In this part, mentor is defined as a
certified signal employee who has at
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
least one year of experience as a
certified signal employee. For purposes
of this part, a mentor provides direct
and immediate supervision over the
work of one or more signal employees.
In other words, FRA views a mentor as
a certified signal employee with current,
relevant experience who can be counted
on to impart knowledge and
demonstrate safety-related tasks through
on-the-job training. Unlike qualified
instructors, mentors are generally not
directly involved in testing or making
certification decisions.
BRS and the SMART–TD commented
on the definition of ‘‘mentor’’ in the
proposed rule and recommended that,
after the first year of implementing this
final rule, mentors should be required to
have at least three years of experience
working with sophisticated signal
systems. TTD and IBEW submitted
similar comments. TTD expressed
concern that one year of experience
does not provide enough time for an
employee to demonstrate real
proficiency in the signal craft, while
IBEW commented that mentors should
have no less than three years of
experience working as a certified signal
employee and should be chosen in
concurrence with the applicable
designated employee representative. In
contrast, AAR and ASLRRA commented
that FRA should only require signal
employee certification, instead of
requiring mentors to be certified signal
employees and also have at least one
year of experience as a certified signal
employee. Otherwise, AAR and
ASLRRA point out that the experience
requirements for mentors are more
stringent than the experience
requirements for qualified instructors.
FRA agrees that it would, in most
cases, be beneficial for mentors to have
more than one year of signal employee
experience and encourages the selection
of mentors with additional years of
experience in such cases. FRA believes
it is important to have individuals who
are comfortable with the signal systems
and signal-related technology deployed
on the railroad provide direct and
immediate supervision of the tasks
performed by uncertified persons on
such systems and devices.
However, FRA does not have
sufficient data to quantify the potential
impact on rail safety of having signal
employees with at least three years of
signal employee experience serve as
mentors, as opposed to having signal
employees with between one to three
years of signal employee experience,
serve in this role. Accordingly, FRA has
retained the requirement that mentors
have at least one year of certified signal
employee experience in this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
FRA has not, however, revised the
definition of mentor to require
concurrence by labor organizations in
the selection of individuals to serve as
mentors. Concurrence by labor
organizations is beneficial for qualified
instructors because qualified instructors
participate in the certification process
by confirming that on-the-job
proficiency and qualification on the
railroad’s signal system and signalrelated technology has been
demonstrated. FRA does not, however,
anticipate that mentors will be tasked by
railroads with evaluating certification
candidates. Therefore, concurrence by
labor organizations in the selection of
mentors seems unnecessary.
BRS and TTD also commented that
use of the terms ‘‘oversight’’ and
‘‘supervision’’ in the same sentence in
the definition of ‘‘mentor’’ in the
proposed rule may cause confusion. To
avoid confusion, BRS and TTD
recommended that FRA clarify that
oversight can be provided by a mentor
or supervisor. BRS and TTD explained
that, by making this change, the roles of
both mentor and supervisor will be
explicitly acknowledged and there will
be clearer understanding of the certified
signal employee’s responsibilities when
working on unfamiliar equipment.
However, after considering BRS and
TTD’s comments on this issue, FRA
revised the definition of ‘‘mentor’’ to
clarify that mentors are required to
provide direct and immediate
supervision of the person(s) they are
mentoring. As reflected in § 246.124,
mentors are held responsible for the
work performed by the person(s)
working under their direct and
immediate supervision. While the verb
‘‘oversee’’ is defined in the Britannica
Dictionary as ‘‘to watch and direct (an
activity, a group of workers, etc.) in
order to be sure that a job is done
correctly,’’ 26 mentors are held
responsible in this final rule for closely
supervising the work performed by the
person(s) they are mentoring. Therefore,
the definition of ‘‘mentor’’ has been
revised in the final rule to provide this
clarification.
A definition of ‘‘qualified’’ has been
added to this final rule, which is similar
to definition of this term in parts 240
and 242 of this chapter. Use of
‘‘qualified’’ as defined in this section is
intended to reflect that the railroad’s
instruction and training program not
only imparted knowledge of how to
perform a task, but also sufficiently
prepared the person to perform the task
proficiently. For example, a signal
employee qualified on a specific type of
26 Britannica.com.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44841
signal system equipment should have
received classroom training on how to
perform required tasks on the signal
system equipment, as well as on-the-job
training on how to perform those
required tasks proficiently. Without
both instruction and hands-on practice
performing required tasks on the signal
system equipment, the signal employee
cannot be considered qualified on the
equipment.
In this final rule, the definition of
‘‘qualified instructor’’ has been revised
to make it more consistent with the
definition of ‘‘qualified instructor’’ in 49
CFR 242.7. APTA submitted comments
on the definition of ‘‘qualified
instructor’’ in the proposed rule,
asserting that the selection of qualified
instructors is inherently the
responsibility of railroad management
and that discharge of this duty should
not be subject to the consent of another
party. APTA also expressed concern
that some current instructors may not be
able to be ‘‘qualified instructors’’
because they are not engaged in
installing, troubleshooting, testing,
repairing, or maintaining railroad signal
systems or signal-related technology and
would not be considered ‘‘signal
employees,’’ as defined in this rule.
Network Rail Consulting Inc. (NRC)
commented that the person providing
supervision should have at least two
years of experience and no safetyrelated incidents in the previous two
years, while IBEW commented that
qualified instructors should have no less
than three years of experience working
as a certified signal employee.
The definition of ‘‘qualified
instructor’’ has not, however, been
revised in this final rule to remove the
required concurrence of the designated
employee representative when selecting
a qualified instructor or the requirement
for the qualified instructor to be a
certified signal employee. The required
concurrence of the designated employee
representative has been retained to
facilitate input by designated employee
representatives, specifically in
situations involving qualified instructor
candidates with minimal experience
(i.e., less than 12 months experience
working as a signal employee) or
questionable experience who may be
under consideration by railroad
management for employment as
qualified instructors.
While FRA agrees that it would be
beneficial for qualified instructors to
have more than one year of signal
employee experience, the definition of
‘‘qualified instructor’’ has not been
revised to require that qualified
instructors have at least two years of
experience with no safety-related
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44842
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
incidents in the previous two years.
FRA does not have sufficient data to
quantify the potential impact on rail
safety of having signal employees with
at least two years of signal employee
experience serve as qualified
instructors, as opposed to having signal
employees with between one to two
years of signal employee experience,
serve in this role. Therefore, FRA has
retained the requirement that qualified
instructors have at least one year of
signal employee experience in this final
rule.
With respect to the concern expressed
by APTA regarding current instructors
who may not be able to work as
‘‘qualified instructors’’ because they are
not ‘‘signal employees’’ as this term is
defined in this rule, FRA notes that a
new term ‘‘signal instructor’’ has been
added to this section in the final rule.
To accommodate current instructors
who may not be able to comply with the
definition of ‘‘qualified instructor,’’
signal instructors are not required to be
certified signal employees or even
employees of a railroad. However, if
authorized by the railroad’s certification
program, signal instructors may provide
signal employee training.
Although the RSIA required FRA to
issue a report to Congress on whether
the certification of certain crafts or
classes of railroad carrier or railroad
carrier contractor or subcontractor
employees, including ‘‘signal repair and
maintenance employees,’’ is necessary
to reduce the number and rate of
accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety, the RSIA did not define
the term, ‘‘signal repair and
maintenance employees.’’ In the
absence of such a definition in the
RSIA, FRA is using the streamlined
term, ‘‘signal employee’’ in this part.
This streamlined term, ‘‘signal
employee,’’ is defined in this final rule
as a person who is engaged in installing,
troubleshooting, testing, repairing, or
maintaining railroad signal systems or
related technology. This definition is
generally consistent with the definition
of ‘‘signal employee’’ in the hours of
service laws but includes the terms
‘‘troubleshooting’’ and ‘‘testing’’ which
are not found in the statutory
definition.27
27 49 U.S.C. 21101(4). The hours of service law
defines ‘‘signal employee’’ as ‘‘an individual who
is engaged in installing, repairing, or maintaining
signal systems.’’ 49 U.S.C. 21101(4). While FRA
believes ‘‘troubleshooting’’ and ‘‘testing’’ would fall
under the terms ‘‘installing, repairing, or
maintaining’’ in the hours of service law definition,
FRA wanted to make explicit in this rule that
‘‘troubleshooting’’ and ‘‘testing’’ are included in the
definition of ‘‘signal employee.’’ The addition of
‘‘troubleshooting’’ and ‘‘testing’’ in the definition in
this final rule is not intended to capture a broader
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
In their comments on the proposed
rule, AAR and ASLRRA asserted the
final rule should be clear that it does not
apply to employees who are not subject
to the Federal hours of service law. As
noted earlier, the term ‘‘signal
employee’’ as used in this part is
intended to cover all individuals who
are currently subject to the Federal
hours of service law for signal
employees (49 U.S.C. 21104). However,
should questions arise as to whether a
specific group of employees are
considered signal employees for
purposes of this rule, FRA will examine
the tasks performed by the employees to
determine whether they are engaged in
the installation, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of railroad signal
systems or related technology (even if
such tasks are not the primary focus of
the employees’ job). If FRA determines
that the employees engage in the
installation, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of railroad signal
systems or related technology, FRA will
then examine whether the employees
are covered by the Federal hours of
service law for signal employees to
determine whether they are signal
employees for purposes of this part.
AAR and ASLRRA also commented
on the definition of ‘‘signal employee’’,
asserting that the definition in the
proposed rule was unmoored from the
definition of ‘‘signal employee’’ in the
Federal hours of service law (49 U.S.C.
21101(4)), while noting FRA’s
acknowledgement in the proposed rule
that troubleshooting and testing are
activities that were not listed in the
definition. AAR and ASLRRA asserted
that these tasks should be removed from
the definition of ‘‘signal employee’’ to
avoid confusion. However,
troubleshooting and testing signal
systems has always been considered
signal covered service for purposes of
the Federal hours of service law.
Accordingly, FRA has not revised the
definition of ‘‘signal employee’’ to
remove these tasks.
In the proposed rule, while describing
the roles and responsibilities of signal
employees, FRA stated that signal
maintainers are tasked with inspecting
and testing signal systems and
performing minor and emergency
repairs as needed. AAR and ASLRRA
objected to this statement, asserting that
FRA did not explain what was meant by
‘‘minor repairs.’’ AAR and ASLRRA also
asserted that this description limits the
scope of a signal employee’s work,
which could have implications for
existing collective bargaining
group of employees than provided in the hours of
service law.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
agreements. In addition, AAR and
ASLRRA asserted that there are several
minor tasks performed by people who
are not signal employees and FRA
should avoid an overlap in terms when
differentiating between these
employees. After considering these
concerns, FRA revised its description of
the work performed by signal employees
in the ‘‘Roles and Responsibilities of
Signal Employees’’ section above to
more accurately reflect the work
typically performed by signal
maintainers.
In their comments on the proposed
rule, AAR and ASLRRA also objected to
FRA’s assertion that a signal employee
certification program which includes
background checks and disqualification
from safety-sensitive service for
specified alcohol and drug violations
and for refusing alcohol and drug testing
could help prevent employees with
active substance abuse disorders from
‘‘job hopping.’’ AAR and ASLRRA
contend FRA presented no evidence
that signal employees switch jobs more
frequently than other crafts, including
those that are subject to certification
requirements.
FRA’s statements on this issue in the
proposed rule were based on FRA’s
finding in the 2015 report to Congress
that the greatest proportion of
contractors covered under the hours of
service laws are signal employees and
that they tend to switch employers more
frequently than other crafts of
employees. The 2015 report to Congress
did not, however, include data showing
the frequency with which the
employees of signal contractors switch
employers, as compared to other crafts
of employees. Therefore, FRA has
removed statements from this final rule
comparing the frequency with which
signal employees switch jobs to the
frequency with which other crafts of
railroad employees switch jobs.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that
the hiring process for signal employees
is already thorough. AAR and ASLRRA
noted that prospective signal employees
undergo pre-employment drug and
alcohol testing. Then, once they are
hired, AAR and ASLRRA noted that
signal employees are subject to random
and reasonable basis testing, as well as
post-accident/incident testing. FRA
agrees that railroads are well positioned
to identify signal employees with
substance abuse disorders, given
existing drug and alcohol testing
programs conducted by railroads in
accordance with 49 CFR part 219.
However, signal employee certification
will make it difficult for employees who
commit certain safety violations
(including violations related to
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
prohibited drug and alcohol use) to
continue performing safety-sensitive
work on railroad signal systems. By
issuing this final rule requiring signal
employee certification, FRA is taking a
proactive approach to minimize (and
hopefully eliminate) such occurrences
in the future.
In their comments on the definition of
‘‘signal employee,’’ APTA requested
clarification on how FRA defines
‘‘related technology.’’ APTA noted that
railroads may have electric traction
department employees performing
railhead bonding and contractors
performing non-vital work such as
running direct burial cable. However,
APTA asserted that neither the electric
traction department employees nor the
contractors engaged in running direct
burial cable should be considered signal
employees for purposes of this part. In
addition, APTA asserted that
mechanical department employees
working on a locomotive’s onboard cab
signal/PTC equipment might be
considered signal employees for
purposes of this part.
FRA agrees that individuals who
engage in electric traction work, such as
railhead bonding, and the running of
direct burial cable (without permanently
landing or splicing the cable) should not
be considered signal employees for
purposes of this part. As noted in FRA’s
Technical Bulletin S–19–01,
‘‘Application of the Hours of Service
Laws to Positive Train Control
Systems,’’ digging trenches for laying
signal cable and running cable without
permanently landing or splicing the
cable are not considered to be signal
covered service.
However, employees who test signal
system components (even so-called
‘‘self-tests’’ of cab signal equipment
installed on locomotives) that require
the employee to interact with the signal
system component, monitor the progress
of the test, or interpret the results of the
test are considered to be ‘‘signal
employees’’ who are subject to the
Federal hours of service law (49 U.S.C.
21104). Therefore, employees of the
railroad’s mechanical department are
considered ‘‘signal employees’’ for
purposes of this part if they test signal
system components that require the
employee to interact with the
component, monitor the progress of the
test, or interpret the results of the test.
Network Rail Consulting Inc. (NRC)
noted in their comments that employees
engaged in signal design have not been
included in the definition of ‘‘signal
employee’’ in § 246.7. However, NRC
contends that competence management
is needed for these employees as well.
In contrast, AAR and ASLRRA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
commented that the work performed by
signal design engineers (who program
and test the vital and non-vital software
programs that perform the functions for
a signal system) is very specific and not
related to the repair or maintenance of
railroad signal systems.
NRC is correct in noting that
employees engaged in signal design
have not been included in the definition
of ‘‘signal employee,’’ as they are not
considered signal employees for
purposes of this part. While competence
management would likely be beneficial,
as indicated in FRA’s Technical Bulletin
S–19–01, individuals engaged in the
production and design of signal system
hardware and software outside railroad
property are not generally covered by
the Federal hours of service law.
NRC also asserted that the
maintenance of signal technology in the
operations control center should be
covered by this final rule. FRA agrees
that the maintenance of signal
technology in the operations control
center plays an important role in signal
system safety. Accordingly, individuals
who maintain signal technology in the
operations control center (such as
electronic control system technicians
and centralized traffic control (CTC)
maintainers) are considered ‘‘signal
employees’’ for purposes of this part. As
stated in FRA’s Technical Bulletin S–
19–01, FRA considers work affecting the
proper functioning of software to be
signal covered service, for purposes of
the Federal hours of service law,
whether in the field or in an office
location. Therefore, in general,
individuals engaged in loading,
verifying, or testing software or
configurations into PTC system
hardware are considered to be ‘‘signal
employees’’ for purposes of this part.
With respect to back-office
employees, AAR and ASLRRA noted
that these employees are not considered
to be signal employees for purposes of
the Federal hours of service law (49
U.S.C. 21101(4)). While AAR and
ASLRRA acknowledge that some backoffice employees have limited ability to
remotely access onboard and wayside
systems for research purposes, AAR and
ASLRRA assert that they do not have
the ability to modify any safety-critical
component of PTC systems. Therefore,
AAR and ASLRRA assert that backoffice employees should not be
considered signal employees for
purposes of this part.
FRA agrees that back-office
employees, such as PTC help desk
personnel, who do not have the ability
to modify any safety-critical component
of the PTC system are not considered
‘‘signal employees’’ for purposes of this
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44843
part. However, back-office employees,
such as the centralized traffic control
(CTC) maintainers, who engage in the
installation, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of systems that
connect the dispatching system to the
wayside or onboard train control
systems are considered signal
employees for purposes of this rule.
These employees have historically been
subject to the Federal hours of service
law for signal employees.
As noted earlier, FRA is adding a
definition of ‘‘signal instructor’’ to the
final rule to facilitate the continued use
of third-party training organizations by
railroads. Unlike qualified instructors,
signal instructors are not required to be
certified signal employees. However, as
stated in the definition, signal
instructors must demonstrate adequate
knowledge of the subject matter they are
teaching and have the necessary
experience to provide formal training of
the subject matter. Therefore, even
though the signal instructor may not be
employed by the railroad, FRA expects
railroads to verify that the signal
instructors who are providing training
on signal systems and signal-related
technology have adequate knowledge
and the necessary experience to do so.
A slight revision has been made to the
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ to clarify
that this term refers to signal system
software and equipment. NRC
commented on the proposed definition
of ‘‘signal system’’ in the proposed rule
and asked FRA to clarify whether this
definition includes operations control
center signal equipment, while also
recommending that FRA revise the
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ in § 246.7
to include a reference to ‘‘train control
and detection systems.’’ As noted
earlier, FRA considers individuals who
maintain signal technology in the
operations control center (such as
electronic control system technicians
and CTC maintainers) to be signal
employees for purposes of this
rulemaking. Therefore, even though the
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ has not
been revised to include a specific
reference to ‘‘train control and detection
systems,’’ FRA is clarifying that
operations control center signal
equipment falls under the definition of
‘‘signal system’’ for purposes of this
part.
AAR and ASLRAA also commented
on the definition of ‘‘signal system,’’
asserting that FRA’s definition of
‘‘signal system’’ is inconsistent with the
definition of this term in the Federal
hours of service law (49 U.S.C. 20501).
The Federal hours of service law defines
‘‘signal system’’ as a block signal
system, an interlocking, automatic train
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44844
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
stop, train control, or cab-signal device,
or a similar appliance, method, device,
or system intended to promote safety in
railroad operations.’’ 28 However, AAR
and ASLRRA fail to mention that this
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ was issued
on July 5, 1994 and covers most of the
signal system components that were
regulated by FRA’s signal regulations in
49 CFR part 236 at that time. In the 30
years that have elapsed since this
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ was issued
in 49 U.S.C. 20501, FRA promulgated
regulations that specifically address
PTC systems, as well as pathway grade
crossings. Therefore, if FRA limited the
definition of ‘‘signal system’’ to a
definition of this term that was
promulgated 30 years ago, FRA would
have overlooked recent developments in
signal system technology and might
have inadvertently failed to require
certification and related training for
signal employees who are tasked with
working on recently developed signal
system components and signal-related
technology.
AAR and ASLRRA also assert FRA
needs to clarify that the term, ‘‘signal
system,’’ does not include signal
equipment that is not in service. AAR
and ASLRRA assert that FRA has no
authority to regulate equipment before
or after it has been taken out of service.
However, this final rule does not
directly regulate signal system
equipment. This final rule is intended to
ensure that signal employees who
install (and remove from service) signal
system components and signal-related
technology receive sufficient training to
perform these tasks in a safe manner.
Given the importance of properly
installing signal system components
that have not yet been placed in service,
FRA does not agree with AAR and
ASLRRA that persons tasked with
installing signal system components
which have not yet been placed in
service should be exempt from the
signal employee certification
requirements in this part.
Finally, AAR and ASLRRA
commented that the definition of
‘‘signal system’’ should not include
wayside detection devices used to
detect defective conditions on
locomotives and rolling stock (such as
high-wide load, hot or defective bearing,
defective wheel detectors) or other
unsafe conditions (such as high-water,
high-wind, sliding or slumping soil,
rock, or snow detectors) in non-signaled
territory, especially if the devices are
not integrated into a signal system. AAR
and ASLRRA also noted that RSAC
Working Group on wayside detectors
28 49
U.S.C. 20501.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
recently held its kickoff meeting on
August 31, 2023. AAR and ASLRRA
note that, according to the RSAC
Working Group’s task statement, the
purpose of the Working Group is to
consider and review issues related to
wayside detectors, including analyzing
existing regulations and guidance,
accident, incident, and performance
data, safety complaints, and existing
best practices. Therefore, AAR and
ASLRRA assert that any matters
impacting how FRA treats wayside
detection equipment should be reserved
for this RSAC Working Group (which
consists of a multi-disciplinary team of
subject matter experts.)
As noted earlier, FRA’s definition of
the term ‘‘signal employee’’ is based on
FRA’s longstanding interpretation of
what constitutes signal covered service,
as explained in FRA’s Technical
Bulletin S–19–01. As stated in FRA’s
Technical Bulletin S–19–01, FRA
considers ‘‘installing, repairing, or
maintaining locomotive and wayside
equipment that encodes or decodes
transmissions (e.g., a wayside messaging
server) to be signal covered service.’’ 29
This final rule does not directly regulate
signal system equipment or signalrelated technology (such as wayside
detection devices). Instead, the signal
employee certification regulations in
this part are intended to ensure that
signal employees who install,
troubleshoot, test, repair, or maintain
signal system components and signalrelated technology (such as wayside
detection devices) receive sufficient
training to perform these tasks in a safe
manner. Therefore, FRA disagrees with
AAR and ASLRRA that the signal
certification requirements in this final
rule should not apply to signal
employees who work on wayside
detection equipment because an RSAC
Working Group has been created to
consider and review issues related to
wayside detectors.
Given changes that have been made to
the scope of this rulemaking since the
proposed rule stage (see the section-bysection analysis for § 246.3 above), this
final rule contains a definition for the
phrase ‘‘tourist, scenic, historic, or
excursion operations that are not part of
the general railroad system of
transportation.’’. This phrase means a
tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operation (‘‘tourist operation’’)
conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose. However,
even if a tourist operation has a switch
connecting it to the general railroad
system of transportation (general
railroad system), FRA does not consider
29 FRA
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Technical Bulletin S–19–01, page 5.
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the tourist operation part of the general
railroad system if the tourist operation’s
trains do not enter the general railroad
system and general system railroads do
not use the tourist operation’s tracks for
any purpose other than delivering or
picking up shipments from the tourist
operation.
Section 246.11 Penalties and
Consequences for Noncompliance
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.11 and 242.11, explains that FRA
may impose civil penalties on any
person, including a railroad or a
contractor (or a subcontractor) providing
goods or services to a railroad, who
violates any requirement of this rule.
IBEW expressed support for the
language in this section which states
that individuals should only be subject
to civil penalties for willful violations.
In their comments on this section,
NRC suggested that violations of FRA
regulations involving gross negligence, a
pattern of repeated violations, or death
or injury should be grounds for
permanent revocation of signal
employee certification. However, as
indicated by paragraph (c) of this
section, FRA reserves the right to take
enforcement action against any person
who causes or contributes to noncompliance with FRA’s rail safety
regulations by assessing a civil penalty
or issuing an order prohibiting an
individual from temporarily or
permanently performing safety-sensitive
functions in the rail industry. Therefore,
FRA finds it unnecessary to revise this
provision.
Subpart B—Program and Eligibility
Requirements
Section 246.101
Required
Certification Program
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.101 and 242.101, requires railroads
to have written certification programs
comprised of multiple elements, each of
which comports with specific regulatory
provisions in the rule related to that
element. This section has been revised
in the final rule to include a reference
to § 246.120, which was added in this
final rule and requires railroads to
qualify persons who work on their
signal systems and signal-related
technology.
Paragraph (c) requires version control
for certification programs. Therefore,
railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) are required to maintain an
up-to-date, detailed list or index
tracking every change made to their
FRA-approved certification programs.
FRA encourages railroads and parent
companies to maintain ‘‘redlined’’
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
versions, clearly reflecting revisions and
indicating the year of the version against
which the revisions appear, of their
certification programs to reflect changes
that have been made over the years.
Section 246.103 FRA Review of
Certification Programs
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.103 and 242.103, describes FRA’s
process for reviewing and approving
signal employee certification programs.
BRS and TTD submitted comments
contending that the deadlines in
paragraph (a) of this section should be
revised. BRS asserted that Class II and
Class III railroads should be required to
adhere to the same deadline for
submitting their certification programs
to FRA as the Class I railroads. Since
Class I railroads and commuter service
railroads are required to submit their
certification programs to FRA within
eight months of the effective date of this
rule, BRS asserted that aligning the
certification program submission
deadlines would promote regulatory
consistency, while sending a clear
message that all railroads, regardless of
their size, are equally responsible for
meeting the certification requirements
within a defined timeframe.
TTD commented that FRA should
require Class II railroads to submit their
certification programs to FRA within
eight months of the effective date of this
rule. IBEW submitted a similar
comment asserting that several Class II
railroads have the capability and
resources to develop certification
programs within eight months and those
Class II railroads should do so to avoid
unnecessary delays in implementing
this rule.
Despite these comments, FRA has
decided to retain the program
submission schedule in the proposed
rule. In the eight months between the
deadlines referenced in paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section, FRA will
be devoting its resources to reviewing
approximately 40 certification programs
from Class I and commuter railroads 30
and is unlikely to have the capacity to
begin its review of programs submitted
by Class II railroads until after the 16month deadline. Also, FRA is concerned
that the eight-month deadline proposed
by the unions may put too much of a
strain on some Class II and III railroads.
Thus, while FRA shares the unions’
desire for speedy implementation of this
rule, FRA does not believe that giving
Class II and III railroads 16 months to
develop and submit their certification
30 Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Certification
of Signal Employees Final Rule, Docket No. FRA–
2022–0020, p. 15.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
programs to FRA will delay
implementation.
Paragraph (c) of this section requires
railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) to submit their certification
programs and their requests for FRA
approval (which are described in greater
detail in § 246.106(a)) by emailing them
to FRASIGNALCERTPROG@dot.gov.
Paragraph (c) has been revised in the
final rule to allow parent companies to
submit certification programs on behalf
of one or more of their subsidiary
railroads. Paragraph (c) has also been
revised to require railroads and parent
companies to submit their certification
programs and requests for FRA approval
to a specified email address. In the
NPRM, this paragraph stated that signal
employee certification programs should
be uploaded to a secure document
submission site. However, after further
consideration, FRA determined that it
would be easier for both railroads and
the agency if certification programs and
requests for FRA approval are submitted
to a dedicated FRA email address.
When a railroad or parent company
submits its certification program to
FRA, paragraph (d) of this section also
requires the railroad or parent company
to submit a copy of the program and the
request for FRA approval to the
president of each labor organization that
represents the railroad’s signal
employees and to all of the railroad’s
signal employees who would be subject
to this part. In their comments, AAR
and ASLRRA assert that railroads
should not have to have their
certification programs approved by the
labor union president and all of the
railroad’s signal employees. AAR and
ASLRRA claim such a requirement
would be a substantial change from
FRA’s locomotive engineer and
conductor certification rules and would
be arbitrary and capricious. AAR and
ASLRRA also expressed concern that a
labor union president could potentially
hold up approval forcing the railroad to
miss deadlines. In addition, AAR and
ASLRRA contend that requiring
approval of the labor union president
creates an inherent conflict of interest
because FRA is allowing the labor union
president to approve and exercise
control over when and how the railroad
uses contractors to perform work on
certain signal equipment.
AAR and ASLRRA’s concern with
respect to paragraph (d) of this section
is unwarranted. This rule does not
require railroads to obtain approval of
their certification programs from labor
union presidents or their signal
employees. Paragraph (d) only provides
these individuals with the opportunity
to review and comment on these
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44845
programs. FRA believes the source of
AAR and ASLRRA’s confusion was the
reference to a ‘‘request for approval’’ in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section in the
proposed rule. However, this document,
which is described in greater detail in
§ 246.106, is a request for approval from
FRA, not from a union president or
signal employee. To avoid further
confusion, FRA has revised references
to ‘‘request for approval’’ in this section
to ‘‘request for FRA approval.’’
Several labor organizations, including
BRS, IBEW, and TTD expressed concern
about the 45-day comment period for
railroad certification programs in
paragraph (e). They are particularly
concerned about the initial influx of
programs they will have to review after
this rule takes effect, especially if
multiple railroads submit their signal
employee certification programs on or
about the same date, and contend that
45 days will not be enough time to
thoroughly review and assess each
railroad’s certification program. TTD
specifically noted its experience with
FRA’s PTC dockets, asserting that it has
been rushed to provide comments on
amendments to the critical safety
systems described in PTC Safety Plan
Requests for Application in fewer than
three weeks, due to delays in posting
notices in the Federal Register that
announce the submission of these
documents to FRA. Therefore, these
labor organizations request that the
comment period be extended to 90 days.
Based on these comments from labor
organizations, FRA has extended the
comment period from 45 days to 60
days. This change will provide
commenters with additional time to
draft and submit meaningful comments
to assist FRA in its review of these
programs. However, in an effort to avoid
further delays to the implementation of
this rule, FRA is declining to extend the
comment period to 90 days. FRA
understands that labor organizations are
particularly concerned about the initial
influx of programs they will need to
review when this rule first goes into
effect, but once the effective date of this
rule is established, labor organizations
will have several months to plan how to
efficiently allocate their resources when
they anticipate receiving a large number
of programs to review. Also, FRA will
consider late-filed comments to the
extent practicable and will extend
comment periods on a case-by-case
basis if circumstances warrant
(especially during these initial periods
where there is a high volume of
programs to review).
AAR and ASLRRA are also opposed
to FRA’s review and approval process in
paragraph (f) of this section.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44846
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Specifically, AAR and ASLRRA contend
that the proposed process allows FRA
‘‘to arbitrarily hold railroads in limbo
for an indefinite time period even if
their programs are fully compliant’’ 31
and does nothing to ensure that FRA’s
review process is handled
expeditiously. Instead, AAR and
ASLRRA recommend that FRA
implement the same review and
approval process found in parts 240 and
242, whereby a certification program or
material modification is considered
approved 30 days after it was submitted
unless FRA notifies the railroad in
writing that its program has been
disapproved.
FRA is, however, declining to adopt
this suggestion as it is untenable
following a 2020 decision from the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit). In
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
and Trainmen v. Federal Railroad
Administration, the D.C. Circuit
invalidated FRA’s passive approval of a
modification to Kansas City Southern
Railway’s locomotive engineer
certification program. In its decision,
the court noted that the Administrative
Procedure Act ‘‘requires agencies to
reasonably explain to reviewing courts
the bases for the actions they take and
the conclusions they reach.’’ 32 The
court found FRA’s passive approval
system allowed for a ‘‘complete absence
of any accompanying explanation for
the agency’s approval’’ of the
certification program.33 Since the
administrative record did not contain
any explanation or reasoning for the
determinations made by FRA in
approving the program, the court
vacated and remanded the case for FRA
to provide a more complete explanation
of the agency’s action or to take new
agency action altogether.34
Given the D.C. Circuit’s criticism of
the passive approval system in part 240,
it would be ill-advised for FRA to
include a similar system in this rule.
Therefore, paragraph (f) of this section
creates a new system in which a
certification program is not considered
approved by FRA until the agency
issues an approval letter to the railroad
or parent company. Contrary to AAR
and ASLRRA’s comment, FRA will not
arbitrarily hold railroads in limbo for an
indefinite period of time. FRA will
make every effort to meet its goal of
31 FRA–2022–0020–0035.
32 Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers &
Trainmen v. Fed. R.R. Admin., 972 F.3d 82, 115
(D.C. Cir. 2020).
33 Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers &
Trainmen, 972 F.3d at 116–17.
34 Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers &
Trainmen, 972 F.3d at 117.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
issuing a decision on a program within
120 days of submission. (This goal was
90 days in the NPRM.) However, as
noted above, FRA is extending the
comment period on signal employee
certification programs to 60 days in this
final rule. Accordingly, 120 days for
FRA to complete its review of these
programs is a more realistic goal. As
FRA acknowledged in the NPRM,
meeting this goal will not always be
feasible and will be especially difficult
during the initial implementation of this
rule when FRA will receive several
programs to review at the same time.
During this time, railroads will be able
to continue to operate as they did before
this rule went into effect so it is unclear
how railroads will be harmed by such
delays.
Paragraph (g) of this section addresses
the process for railroads and parent
companies that wish to make a material
modification to their previously
approved programs. AAR and ASLRRA
assert that the definition of ‘‘material
modification’’ in paragraph (g)(1) of this
section is vague and should be revised
to avoid stifling innovations in safety
systems. In particular, AAR and
ASLRRA recommend that FRA ‘‘allow
railroads to use different delivery
methods and to incorporate new
technology without treating those
changes as material modifications.’’
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that
FRA should limit material modifications
to significant content-based changes that
are likely to impact safety, as opposed
to treating edits to test questions,
structure, and timelines as material
modifications.35
However, the term ‘‘material
modification’’ is intended to cover any
change in an approved certification
program that significantly affects the
certification process. This may include
alterations to the training curriculum;
modifications to testing or assessment
methods; changes to the duration of the
program or program components (such
as training); changes to the number of
test questions or the scoring system; or
any other change that would
substantially impact the way signal
employees are trained, evaluated, and
certified. It is vital that FRA and
stakeholders have the opportunity to
review these proposed changes to a
certification program to ensure they
align with the overall goals of
maintaining safety and compliance.
There are significant safety concerns
at play when incorporating new
technologies. If new technologies do not
receive an appropriate level of
oversight, safety risks can be introduced
35 FRA–2022–0020–0035.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
into the system which could also
undermine public confidence in
railroad safety. Therefore, FRA and
stakeholders must be engaged in the
review of modifications to certification
programs as provided in paragraph (g) of
this section. Railroads and parent
companies should not introduce new
signal technologies without considering
them to be material modifications to
their signal employee certification
programs.
Paragraph (h) of this section describes
the process to resubmit a program or
material modification that was
previously disapproved by FRA. TTD
expressed support for paragraph (h)(3)
of this section which states that
railroads with operational signal
systems as of the effective date of this
final rule must resubmit their
certification program within 30 days, if
notified by FRA that their program has
been disapproved. TTD cited to
instances of railroads not bringing their
certification programs into compliance
with parts 240 and 242 of this chapter,
specifically referencing recent accidents
involving Norfolk Southern Railway
Company as support for their position.
TTD also recommended that FRA
amend this section to authorize the
issuance of fines against railroads that
‘‘repeatedly are not compliant with the
certification requirements.’’ 36 FRA
appreciates TTD’s comment; however,
such an amendment is unnecessary, as
§ 246.11 authorizes FRA to issue civil
penalties for violations of this part. FRA
will publish a civil penalty schedule for
this part on its website.
Section 246.105 Implementation
Schedule for Certification Programs
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.201 and 242.105, contains the
timetable for implementation of this
final rule. APTA commented that
railroads should be allowed to designate
individuals who are in an initial
training program when this rule goes
into effect so that they can become
certified signal employees upon
completion of the training program.
APTA contends that implementing
certification requirements in the middle
of a training program would be
disruptive to the participants and
instructors.
In response to APTA’s comment,
paragraph (d) of this section allows
railroads to continue to designate as
certified signal employees those
individuals who have been authorized
by the railroad to perform the duties of
a signal employee until FRA approves
the railroad’s certification program.
36 FRA–2022–0020–0032,
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
p.8.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Therefore, railroads will be able to
continue to designate individuals as
certified signal employees for several
months after the effective date of this
rule, which should include any person
who is in a signal employee training
program on the effective date of this
rule. However, railroads will no longer
be able to designate persons as certified
signal employees under paragraph (d)
once FRA approves the railroad’s
program. FRA understands that some
individuals will likely be in the middle
of a training program when this occurs,
but railroads will have several months
to prepare for this occurrence and to
figure out the best way to minimize any
disruption.
FRA is revising paragraph (d) from the
proposed rule to clarify that railroads
are only allowed to ‘‘designate’’ persons
as certified signal employees in
accordance with paragraph (d) between
March 17, 2025 and the date FRA
approves the railroad’s certification
program. Once FRA approves a
railroad’s certification program, the
designation system described in
paragraph (d) will no longer be allowed
and individuals will be required to
obtain certification pursuant to the
railroad’s certification program.
AAR and ASLRRA submitted
comments recommending that FRA
create an exception for circumstances in
which non-certified railroad employees
perform minor or routine corrections to
signal systems. In support of this
recommendation, AAR and ASLRRA
pointed to circumstances in which
maintenance of way personnel are
tasked with disabling signals. AAR and
ASLRRA assert that activities of this
nature should not require signal
employee certification.
FRA would like to clarify that tasks
associated with disabling signal
systems, which are performed outside
the signal bungalow, are not considered
to be signal covered service for purposes
of the Federal hours of service law.
Therefore, maintenance of way
employees engaged in tasks performed
outside the signal bungalow to disable
the signal system are not considered to
be performing signal system work that
requires signal employee certification.
However, tasks associated with
disabling signal systems that are
performed inside the signal bungalow
are considered to be signal covered
service under the Federal hours of
service law and, therefore, signal system
work that requires signal employee
certification pursuant to this part.
To address the issue of designated
signal employees who will be eligible to
retire within three years of the date FRA
approves their railroad’s certification
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
program, paragraphs (f)(1) through (3)
allow signal employees who are eligible
to receive a retirement pension to
submit a request to their railroad that
they not be certified, in accordance with
subpart B of this part, until three years
from the date FRA approves the
railroad’s program.
AAR and ASLRRA recommended,
however, that FRA eliminate paragraphs
(f)(1) through (3), as they contend these
provisions are contrary to FRA’s safety
rationale for this rule and would allow
a signal employee to forego certification
for up to six years. AAR and ASLRRA
also assert that these provisions will be
burdensome on railroads, as they will
have to keep track of a special category
of employees and establish special
protocols for them.
However, after considering those
comments, FRA is retaining paragraphs
(f)(1) through (3) in this final rule. These
paragraphs simply allow signal
employees who meet the requirements
of paragraph (f)(1) to request that their
employing railroad not make them go
through the full certification process
until their designated certification
expires (three years after FRA approves
the railroad’s certification program).
From FRA’s perspective, it does not
appear to be an efficient use of railroad
resources to require designated signal
employees who are going to retire before
the end of their designation period to
complete the full certification process.
However, except as provided in
paragraph (f)(2), railroads are not
required to grant these requests.
Paragraph (f)(2) of this section states
that, if a railroad grants any such
request, the railroad must grant all other
requests from eligible persons ‘‘to every
extent possible.’’ In addition, this
paragraph does not create a loophole
where a signal employee could continue
to work on railroad signal systems and
signal-related technology for up to six
years without a mentor and forego
certification. Paragraph (f) plainly states
that no person shall be allowed to
perform service as a certified signal
employee more than three years after
their railroad’s certification program is
approved by FRA without being tested
and evaluated in accordance with
procedures that comply with subpart B
of this part.
Section 246.106 Requirements for
Certification Programs
This section contains the
organizational requirements and a
narrative description of what must be
included in a railroad’s (or parent
company’s) certification program. This
section has been revised in the final rule
to address the submission of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44847
certification programs by parent
companies. The International
Transportation Learning Center (ITLC)
submitted comments recommending
that FRA authorize the use of model
signal employee certification programs,
which could be transferable between
railroads. FRA anticipates that a nonprofit industry association will likely
develop a model signal employee
certification program template, which
can be adopted for use by Class III
railroads. However, after considering
ITLC’s comment, FRA has decided to
authorize the submission of signal
employee certification programs by
parent companies on behalf of one or
more of their subsidiary railroads.
Therefore, the requirements in this part
that apply to railroads subject to this
part also apply to parent companies
who submit signal employee
certification programs to FRA for
approval on behalf of one or more of
their subsidiary railroads.
Paragraph (a) of this section addresses
what must be included in a certification
program submission to FRA. The
railroad or parent company must
include two documents in its
submission: (1) a request for FRA
approval; and (2) the certification
program. If a railroad is submitting its
initial certification program, the request
for FRA approval can be a brief
document that simply states the railroad
is submitting its initial signal employee
certification program to FRA for
approval. However, if a parent company
is submitting a certification program on
behalf of one or more of its subsidiary
railroads, the parent company must
provide a list of the railroads that will
utilize the certification program. Also,
as stated in paragraph (a)(1)(iii), by
submitting a certification program on
behalf of one or more subsidiary
railroads, the parent company assumes
responsibility for compliance with this
part for all railroads identified on its list
that will utilize the parent company’s
certification program.
If a railroad or parent company would
like to make a material modification to
a signal employee certification program
that has previously been approved by
FRA, the request for FRA approval must
include a copy of the modified
certification program that identifies all
of the proposed changes from the last
FRA-approved version of the program.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires
that signal employee certification
programs identify the appropriate
person to be contacted in the event FRA
needs to discuss an aspect of the
railroad’s program. Paragraph (b)(1) also
requires that railroads (and parent
companies, if applicable) submit a
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44848
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
statement electing either to accept
responsibility for training persons not
previously certified as signal employees
(‘‘initial signal employee training’’) or to
not accept this responsibility.
If the railroad or parent company
elects to not accept responsibility for
providing initial signal employee
training, the railroad or parent company
will be limited to certifying signal
employees previously certified by
another railroad. Prior to certifying
these signal employees, however, the
railroad or parent company is required
by § 246.125 to determine that the signal
employee: (a) is qualified on the signal
system equipment and signal-related
technology deployed on the railroad
territory where the signal employee is
expected to work; and (b) has
demonstrated sufficient knowledge of
the certifying railroad or parent
company’s signal standards, test
procedures, and instructions for the
installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of the certifying railroad or parent
company’s signal system equipment and
signal-related technology.
On the other hand, if the railroad or
parent company elects to accept
responsibility for providing initial
signal employee training to persons not
previously certified as signal employees,
paragraph (b)(1)(iii) requires the railroad
or parent company to submit
information in their certification
program explaining how such persons
will be trained. The railroad or parent
company has two options. The first
option is to provide training through a
program developed by the railroad or
through a training program adopted by
the railroad. The second option is to
authorize another railroad or nonrailroad entity (which may include a
railroad association or rail-labor
organization) to provide training.
However, if the railroad or parent
company chooses the second option, the
railroad or parent company will be
responsible for ensuring that the
training provider adheres to the training
program submitted in the railroad or
parent company’s FRA-approved
certification program. A railroad or
parent company that chooses to
authorize another railroad or nonrailroad entity to provide the training
must also provide the name of the
training provider in its certification
program.
For railroads and parent companies
that elect to classify their certified signal
employees into more than one
occupational category or subcategory by
class, task, location, or other suitable
terminology, paragraph (b)(1)(iv)
requires the railroad or parent company
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
to provide detailed information about
each occupational category (and
subcategory, if applicable) of certified
signal employee service in Section One
of its certification program.
Paragraph (b)(2) requires railroads
(and parent companies, if applicable) to
address in Section Two of their
certification programs how they will
provide training for previously certified
signal employees. A matter of particular
concern to FRA is how each railroad
will ensure previously certified signal
employees receive sufficient training on
the signal systems and signal-related
technology deployed on the railroad’s
territory. Railroads have the latitude to
select the specific subject matters to be
covered, the duration of continuing
education sessions, the methods of
presenting the information, and the
frequency with which continuing
education will be provided. However,
railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) must describe in this section
how they will ensure their certified
signal employees maintain the
necessary knowledge and skills and
receive up-to-date and comprehensive
training on their signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology (including new or modified
equipment and software modifications)
so as to ensure their certified signal
employees are qualified on the
equipment and technology and
compliant with the training standards
set forth in § 246.119.
Time and circumstances can diminish
both abstract knowledge and the proper
application of that knowledge to
discrete events. Time and circumstances
can also alter the value of previously
obtained knowledge and the application
of that knowledge. Therefore, certified
signal employees also need to have their
fundamental knowledge of applicable
Federal railroad safety laws and
regulations, as well as railroad signal
system safety rules and practices,
refreshed periodically. Therefore,
railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) must also describe in
Section Two how they will ensure their
certified signal employees remain
knowledgeable about the safe discharge
of their responsibilities, in accordance
with § 246.119. In addition, railroads
(and parent companies, if applicable)
must explain in Section Two how
training will be administered for
previously certified signal employees
who have had their certification expire.
(This requirement was included in
§ 246.125(b) in the NPRM.) If the
railroad or parent company fails to
address in Section Two of its
certification program how training will
be administered to these signal
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
employees, the railroad or parent
company must require completion of its
entire training program by previously
certified signal employees who have
had their certification expire.
Section Three of the certification
program must address requirements for
the testing and evaluation of previously
certified signal employees. Paragraph
(b)(3)(i) requires railroads (and parent
companies, if applicable) to address
how their certification programs will
comply with the standards found in
§ 246.121. Section 246.121 requires
railroads to employ a written or
electronic test containing objective
questions that address the following
subject matters: (i) compliance with all
applicable Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders governing signal
systems and signal-related technology;
(ii) compliance with all applicable
railroad safety and operating rules; and
(iii) compliance with all applicable
railroad standards, procedures, and
instructions for the installation,
operation, testing, maintenance,
troubleshooting, and repair of the
railroad’s signal systems and related
technology. In addition, the test must
include a practical demonstration
component. Paragraph (b)(3)(ii) requires
railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) to explain their procedures
for testing visual and hearing acuity and
for ensuring that their medical
examiners have sufficient information to
make determinations on whether
candidates for signal employee
certification or recertification can safely
work as certified signal employees.
Section Four of the certification
program addresses the requirements for
training, testing, and evaluating persons
not previously certified as signal
employees. Railroads and parent
companies that elect, in Section One of
the certification program, to not accept
responsibility for providing initial
signal employee training can skip this
section. Paragraph (b)(4) requires
railroads and parent companies that
elect to provide training to persons who
have not been previously certified as
signal employees to provide details in
Section Four of their certification
programs on how they will train, test,
and evaluate these individuals to ensure
they acquire and demonstrate sufficient
knowledge and skills to safely perform
the job of a certified signal employee.
Railroads and parent companies can
authorize non-railroad entities
(including signal contractors) to provide
the required training. Railroads and
parent companies that choose to
authorize non-railroad entities to
provide the required training will likely
find that most, if not all, existing signal
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
employee training programs approved
by FRA pursuant to part 243 of this
chapter will need to be revised to
comply with the additional training and
knowledge testing requirements in this
part that specifically apply to signal
employees.
Railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) are also required by
paragraph (b)(4)(iv) to explain how
training will be administered to
previously uncertified signal employees
who have extensive signal experience.
This requirement was previously
contained in § 246.125(b) in the
proposed rule. If a railroad or parent
company elects to provide training to
persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees, but fails to
specify how it will train these signal
employees, the railroad or parent
company must require previously
uncertified signal employees with
extensive signal experience to complete
its entire training program.
Paragraph (b)(5) requires railroads
(and parent companies, if applicable) to
discuss in Section Five of their
certification programs how they monitor
the operational performance of their
certified signal employees in accordance
with § 246.123. In particular, the
railroad or parent company must
discuss the processes and procedures it
will use for ensuring that such
monitoring and testing is performed.
This must include a description of the
scoring system the railroad or parent
company will employ during
monitoring observations and
unannounced tests.
Finally, paragraph (b)(6) requires
Section Six of a railroad or parent
company’s certification program to
address how the railroad or parent
company will perform routine
administration of the program. This
section must include a summary of how
the program will comply with each of
the regulatory provisions listed in
paragraph (b)(6).
Section 246.107 Signal Service
Classifications
This section allows, but does not
require, railroads to issue certificates for
one or more occupational categories or
subcategories of certified signal
employee service. While some railroads
with only one type of signal employee
service might not have any interest in
certifying multiple types of signal
employee service, larger railroads that
have already established multiple
categories of signal employee service
(such as signal maintainers, signal
inspectors, locomotive signal/electrical
technicians, etc.) on their territories may
find it beneficial to issue certificates for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
multiple types of signal employee
service. Therefore, by allowing railroads
to classify their certified signal
employees into multiple occupational
categories or subcategories, railroads
will have the flexibility to shape the
structure of their certification programs
to highlight the specific tasks and
responsibilities for each category and
subcategory of certified signal employee
working on their territories.
A railroad that classifies its certified
signal employees into separate
categories, such as signal maintainers,
signal inspectors, and locomotive
signal/electrical technicians, can issue
specific certificates for each category of
signal employee service. This section
also permits railroads to certify signal
employees for signal system work on
specific railroad divisions or
subdivisions, as opposed to issuing one
universal signal employee certificate
that would certify the signal employee
to perform signal system work anywhere
on the certifying railroad’s territory. As
further explained in the section-bysection analysis of § 246.106(b),
railroads that choose to classify their
certified signal employees into multiple
occupational categories and
subcategories are required by
§ 246.106(b)(1)(iv) to provide detailed
information about each occupational
category (and subcategory, if applicable)
of its certified signal employees.
The Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission (UTC)
recommended, in their comments, that
FRA require railroads to have multiple
classifications of signal employees.
Noting that there are many technical
differences in signal job categories, as
well as varying signal employee
experience and skill levels, UTC
asserted that requiring signal employee
classification will ensure signal
employees are trained to work only on
the signal system for which they are
certified. FRA shares UTC’s concern
with railroad practices that result in
signal employees working on signal
systems on which they have not been
sufficiently trained.
Accordingly, paragraph (b) of this
section requires individuals to
immediately notify the railroad (or their
employer, if they are not employed by
a railroad) if they are called to work on
a signal system or signal-related
technology on which they have not been
certified. However, even more
importantly, when notified that a person
has been called to work on a signal
system or signal-related technology on
which they have not been certified,
paragraph (c) prohibits the railroad from
requiring the person to work on the
signal system or signal-related
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44849
technology unless the person is allowed
to work under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor in accordance with § 246.124.
FRA believes these requirements, in
addition to the overarching requirement
that railroads develop signal employee
certification programs with training,
knowledge testing, and operational
performance monitoring components for
FRA approval, will address UTC’s
concern regarding signal employees
who are instructed to work on signal
systems on which the signal employee
has not been sufficiently trained.
With respect to paragraph (c), BRS
expressed concern that the wording in
this paragraph may cause confusion.
FRA has therefore revised paragraph (c)
to provide clarification. After a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program has been approved by FRA,
paragraph (c) prohibits the railroad from
requiring any person to work on a signal
system or signal-related technology on
which the person has not been certified
and qualified, unless the person works
under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor.
Section 246.109 Determinations
Required for Certification and
Recertification
This section lists the determinations
that railroads are required to make when
evaluating a candidate’s eligibility to be
certified or recertified as a signal
employee. This section has been revised
in the final rule by including a reference
to the qualification requirements in
§ 246.120. An additional minor revision
has also been made to replace the
reference to ‘‘vision . . . acuity
standards’’ in paragraph (a)(3) of the
NPRM with a reference to ‘‘visual . . .
acuity standards’’ in this final rule.
Section 246.111 Prior Safety Conduct
as Motor Vehicle Operator
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.111, 240.115, and 242.111, contains
the requirements and procedures that
railroads are required to follow when
evaluating the motor vehicle driving
records of a candidate for signal
employee certification or recertification.
BRS, IBEW, and TTD submitted
comments on this section expressing
concern that a 60-day time period may
not allow enough time to request and
obtain driving records as part of the
recertification process, due to
administrative delays outside the
recertification candidate’s control.
However, paragraph (c) requires
candidates for signal employee
recertification to request their driving
records at least 60 days prior to the date
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44850
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
on which their certification expires.
Therefore, at least 120 days will elapse
between the date on which candidates
for recertification requests their driving
records and the end of the 60-day period
‘‘grace period’’ authorized by paragraph
(c). However, if a candidate for signal
employee certification or recertification
is unable to obtain their driving records,
despite the grace period provided in
paragraph (c), paragraph (e) authorizes
either the railroad or the candidate for
signal employee certification or
recertification to submit a waiver
petition for regulatory relief.
BRS and TTD recommended that FRA
differentiate requirements for obtaining
driving records based on the position a
signal employee occupies and whether
the signal employee is required to
operate a motor vehicle. In addition to
BRS and TTD, IBEW and NRC expressed
concern that requiring railroads to
include a review of driving records in
their certification programs may
inadvertently result in barring certified
signal employees and otherwise perfect
candidates for signal employee
certification who have unsatisfactory
driving records from obtaining signal
employee certification and
recertification.
The intent of this section is not to
ensure that every certified signal
employee can operate company
vehicles, if required to do so. Instead,
the intent of this section is to obtain and
review motor vehicle records to identify
candidates for signal employee
certification and recertification who
have either been convicted of (or subject
to the cancellation, revocation,
suspension, or denial of a motor vehicle
driver’s license for) operating a motor
vehicle while under the influence of, or
impairment by, alcohol or a controlled
substance. By identifying these
individuals, they can be referred for
evaluation (and potentially treatment)
for an active substance abuse disorder,
given the safety sensitive nature of
certified signal employee work on
railroad signal systems and other signalrelated technology. Accordingly, as
explained in paragraph (m) of this
section, the only motor vehicle
incidents railroads may consider are
related to being under the influence of,
or impaired by, alcohol or a controlled
substance. This means railroads are not
allowed to consider a person’s speeding
violations or other aspects of their motor
vehicle driving record that are not
related to alcohol or drug use when
making a determination for signal
employee certification.
In the NPRM, paragraph (h)(2) of this
section required all persons seeking
certification or recertification to request
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
driving records from the chief of the
driver licensing agency of any
jurisdiction, including states or foreign
countries, that issued or reissued that
person a driver’s license in the past five
years. This paragraph mirrored 49 CFR
240.111(c)(2).37 However, FRA
determined that a five-year lookback
period was unnecessary in this final
rule because paragraph (l)(2) of this
section only allows railroads to consider
motor vehicle driving incidents that
occurred within the three years prior to
the date of the railroad’s certification
decision. Thus, FRA changed the
lookback period to three years.
Furthermore, rather than focusing on
when a jurisdiction issued or reissued a
driver’s license, FRA thinks the more
appropriate inquiry is whether a person
held a driver’s license from the
jurisdiction within the previous three
years. Therefore, this paragraph has
been revised in accordance with these
changes.
Paragraph (k) of this section requires
certified signal employees and
candidates seeking signal employee
certification to notify their certifying
railroad of motor vehicle incidents
described in paragraphs (m)(1) and (2)
(i.e., drug and alcohol offenses) of this
section within 48 hours of conviction or
completed state action to cancel, revoke,
suspend, or deny the employee or
candidate’s motor vehicle driver’s
license for operating a motor vehicle
while under the influence of, or
impairment by, alcohol or a controlled
substance or refusal to undergo such
testing. Paragraph (k) also provides that,
for purposes of signal employee
certification, a railroad cannot have a
more restrictive company rule requiring
a signal employee to report a conviction
or completed state action to cancel,
revoke, suspend, or deny a motor
vehicle driver’s license in less than 48
hours. AAR and ASLRRA criticized the
language in this provision that
precludes railroads from having more
restrictive company rules requiring
signal employees to report a conviction
or completed State action to cancel,
revoke, or deny a motor vehicle driver’s
license in less than 48 hours. AAR and
ASLRRA assert that, as a practical
matter, railroads should be able to
request notification in less than 48
hours as a matter of company policy if
they determine notification is in the
safety interest of the railroad. AAR and
ASLRRA further assert that they could
37 The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 1998
required the five-year lookback period for persons
seeking locomotive engineer certification. Public
Law 100–342, sec. 4, 102 Stat. 624, 625 (1988).
However, no such requirement applies to this rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
easily envision a scenario where safety
would be decreased because an
employee takes advantage of the 48hour grace period after being convicted
to delay notification. After considering
these concerns, FRA is declining to
adopt this requested change. By keeping
this requirement in paragraph (k), a
railroad cannot revoke, deny, or
otherwise make a person ineligible for
certification until that person has
received due process from the state
agency taking action against their motor
vehicle driver’s license. However, this
48-hour restriction only applies to
actions taken against a person’s signal
employee certification and has no effect
on a person’s right to be employed by
that railroad. By keeping this restriction,
paragraph (k) maintains conformity with
49 CFR 240.111(h) and 242.111(l).38
Paragraph (l) of this section prohibits
railroads from considering motor
vehicle driving incidents that occurred
prior to the effective date of this rule or
more than three years before the date of
the railroad’s certification decision.
AAR and ASLRRA commented that
there is no safety reason to limit the
review of motor vehicle records to three
years as this limitation makes it difficult
to establish a pattern of safety abuses.
However, the three-year limit on
motor vehicle driving records that can
be reviewed for purposes of this rule is
based on practical considerations. The
three-year limit in paragraph (l) is
intended to be consistent with
minimum record retention practices of
state driver licensing agencies. The
three-year limit is also consistent with
49 CFR parts 240 and 242.
With respect to FRA’s decision to
prohibit railroads from considering
safety conduct that occurred prior to the
effective date of this rule, FRA is guided
both by fairness and by the law. While
retroactive effects are not completely
prohibited by the Administrative
Procedure Act, the U.S. Supreme Court
has stated that ‘‘[r]etroactivity is not
favored in the law.’’ 39 Moreover, even if
there were a substantial justification for
the retroactive application of a
rulemaking, ‘‘courts should be reluctant
to find such authority absent an express
statutory grant.’’ 40 Given that there is no
express statutory grant of authority for
this rule to have retroactive effects, FRA
has decided not to allow railroads to
38 This issue was also addressed and discussed 25
years ago when FRA was amending its locomotive
engineer certification rule. See 63 FR 50626, 50639
(Sept. 22, 1998).
39 Bowen v. Georgetown University Hosp., 488
U.S. 204, 208 (1988).
40 Bowen, 488 U.S. at 208–09.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
consider safety conduct that occurred
prior to the effective date of this rule.
Section 246.117 Visual Acuity
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.121, 240.207, and 242.117, contains
requirements for visual acuity testing
that railroads must incorporate in their
signal employee certification programs.
As an initial matter, in the NPRM, FRA
used the terms ‘‘visual acuity’’ and
‘‘vision acuity.’’ In the interest of
consistency, FRA is using the term
‘‘visual acuity’’ throughout this final
rule, which includes changing the title
of this section to ‘‘visual acuity.’’ 41
FRA solicited comments in the NPRM
on whether visual acuity standards are
necessary for certified signal employees
and if so, whether they should be as
stringent as existing standards for
locomotive engineers and conductors.
Multiple comments were submitted,
including comments from labor
organizations and railroad industry
associations. Most commenters,
including BRS and TTD, expressed
support for requiring individuals to
meet the distant visual acuity standard
of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye
when initially hired to work as a signal
employee. Noting that vision and
hearing standards are critical to job
performance, NRC commented that the
visual and hearing acuity standards for
certified signal employees should be the
same as FRA’s visual and hearing acuity
standards for certified locomotive
engineers and conductors.
In contrast, AAR and ASLRRA
submitted comments urging FRA to
consider whether the visual acuity
requirements are tailored to the work
performed by signal employees. AAR
and ASLRRA recommended that, prior
to implementing visual and hearing
acuity requirements, FRA should
analyze the components of a signal
employee’s duties and address how
particular visual and hearing acuity
requirements impact the ability of signal
employees to safely perform their work.
In response to these comments, FRA
closely reviewed the tasks performed by
signal employees and determined that a
signal employee’s visual acuity is a
critical component of a signal
employee’s roles and responsibilities. In
recent years the equipment on which
signal employees work has significantly
evolved. Historically, employees were
required to interpret circuit plans,
manuals, railroad standards, relay
positions, and the color of signals. North
41 ‘‘Visual acuity’’ appears to be the term used in
the medical field. See Visual Acuity, American
Optometric Association, found at https://
www.aoa.org/healthy-eyes/vision-and-visioncorrection/visual-acuity?sso=y.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
American signals generally fall into
three categories of multi-head
electrically lit units. These are the
searchlight, color light, position light/
color position light. Each of these units
requires a colored lens or roundel to be
installed in front of the light. Visual
acuity is therefore critical to a person
performing signal employee work. Being
able to distinguish the color of signal
lenses/roundels utilized in the industry
signals is critical to ensure the correct
signal aspect is presented as intended to
the train crew. In the past, the color of
a signal lens/roundel was often
embossed on the lens itself, which
helped signal employees ensure the
correct lens was placed in the proper
position within a signal head. However,
some lenses/roundels are not marked in
a manner to indicate their color. So, it
is incumbent on the signal employee
installing the lenses/roundels to be able
to distinguish its color.
With the introduction of light
emitting diodes (LED), a signal
employee must be able to distinguish
the actual color the LED emits. When
testing, this must be accomplished a
significant distance away from the
signal. LED technology also allows a
signal head to display a variety of signal
colors. Therefore, it is critical for signal
employees to distinguish the color of
signals and not simply the position of
the signal head being lit. When testing
earlier versions of signals or the current
LED versions, this must be
accomplished a significant distance
away from the signal.
With the introduction of
microprocessor equipment, signal
employees need to see the position of
micro-switches and the color of microindicators located on circuit boards.
These items, which are often very small
(sometimes less than an 1/8-inch in
size), are prevalent on microprocessor
equipment used within both signal and
highway-rail grade crossing warning
systems. In addition, signal employees
need to be able to distinguish the correct
color of proposed circuit changes on
circuit plans. Proposed circuit changes
are often indicated by lines of different
colors on a circuit plan.
Therefore, after taking a closer look at
the safety-sensitive tasks performed by
signal employees, FRA decided to retain
the visual acuity standards proposed in
the NPRM. These visual acuity
standards are consistent with the visual
acuity standards for other modal
professionals throughout the
transportation industry, such as air
traffic controllers and pilots.42
42 14
PO 00000
CFR 67.303.
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44851
FRA also received comments that
were critical of FRA’s proposal in
paragraph (b)(3) in the proposed rule to
periodically test signal employees
seeking recertification on their ability to
recognize and distinguish between the
colors of railroad signals. BRS explained
that after the first year of employment,
the emphasis on color distinction
becomes less relevant. BRS asserted that
signal workers quickly become familiar
with blueprints, enabling them to
determine the intended aspect to be
illuminated without solely relying on
color identification. IBEW expressed
concern that FRA’s proposal to test both
initial hires and signal employees
seeking recertification on their ability to
recognize and distinguish between the
colors of railroad signals would
unnecessarily penalize and disqualify
signal workers who are colorblind.
To accommodate signal employees
who develop color vision deficiencies
during the course of their employment,
BRS, IBEW, and TTD recommended that
FRA establish an alternative assessment.
More specifically, BRS and TTD
recommended FRA establish an
alternative assessment that evaluates an
employee’s knowledge of signal aspects
and their ability to interpret blueprints
accurately to help ensure railroads
retain a skilled signal workforce.
FRA acknowledges that some
individuals may not be able to meet the
threshold visual acuity standards in this
section but may be able to compensate
in other ways that will allow them to
safely perform their duties as a certified
signal employee. However, FRA has
determined that the flexibility afforded
by paragraph (d) of this section is
preferable to establishing an alternative
assessment.
Paragraph (d) of this section permits
a railroad to have procedures whereby
doctors can evaluate individuals who
cannot meet the threshold visual acuity
standards in this section and make
discrete determinations about the
individual’s ability to compensate in
ways that will allow them to safely
perform their tasks as a signal employee.
If the railroad’s medical examiner
concludes that the individual could
safely serve as a certified signal
employee, the railroad can certify that
person after the railroad obtains the
medical examiner’s professional
medical opinion to that effect. If
necessary, medical examiners can
condition their opinion on certain
circumstances or restrictions, such as
the use of corrective lens.
APTA expressed support for the
flexibility provided by paragraph (d)
and asserted this flexibility should be
maintained so that signal employees
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44852
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
who have the ability to recognize and
distinguish the different aspects of
railroad signals can remain eligible for
certification. While IBEW expressed
concern that paragraph (d) gives too
much discretion to railroad medical
examiners, FRA disagrees. Whether a
person meets the standards for visual
acuity in this final rule is a medical
determination. Therefore, it is
appropriate for a medical professional to
determine whether a person can safely
perform as a certified signal employee.
Second, a medical examiner will only
exercise discretion pursuant to this
section if a person does not satisfy the
objective visual acuity criteria in
paragraph (c) of this section. Finally,
railroad medical examiners have been
handling these issues for over 30 years
for locomotive engineer certification
and for over 10 years for conductor
certification. To date, FRA is unaware of
any significant problems involving the
exercise of this discretion.
Section 246.118 Hearing Acuity
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.121, 240.207, and 242.117, contains
requirements for hearing acuity testing
that railroads must incorporate in their
signal employee certification programs.
Paragraph (c) of this section contains
the general hearing standards that a
person must satisfy to be certified as a
signal employee unless they are
determined to have sufficient hearing
acuity under paragraph (d) of this
section. The standards in paragraph (c)
mirror the hearing acuity standards for
locomotive engineers and conductors in
49 CFR parts 240 and 242.
In the proposed rule, FRA solicited
comments on whether hearing acuity
standards are necessary for certified
signal employees and if so, whether
they should be as strict as the standards
for locomotive engineers and
conductors. FRA received a range of
comments in response to these
questions. BRS noted in their comments
that railroaders encounter high noise
levels during their day-to-day work, due
to a variety of sources of noise in their
work environment, including
locomotive engines, train horns, heavy
equipment operations, and rail grinding.
While the use of earplugs is common
practice to mitigate noise exposure, BRS
asserted that earplugs can only provide
a certain level of protection against
hearing loss throughout a railroader’s
career. Accordingly, BRS acknowledged
the value of hearing acuity tests for
monitoring and detecting hearing loss.
BRS and IBEW contended, however,
that hearing acuity tests should be
limited to testing candidates for signal
employee certification and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
recertification to verify that they can
accurately differentiate important
auditory cues or signals. In addition,
IBEW expressed concern that this
section gives too much discretion to
railroad medical examiners. On the
other hand, NRC contended that vision
and hearing standards are critical to job
performance. NRC commented that the
visual and hearing acuity standards for
certified signal employees should be the
same as FRA’s visual and hearing acuity
standards for certified locomotive
engineers and conductors.
AAR and ASLRRA recommended that
FRA consider whether the hearing
acuity requirements are tailored to the
work performed by signal employees.
AAR and ASLRRA also asserted that,
prior to implementing vision and
hearing requirements, ‘‘FRA needs to
analyze the components of a signal
employee’s duties and address how
particular vision and [hearing] acuity
requirements impact the ability of signal
employees to safely perform their
work.’’ 43
Given the range of comments on this
issue, FRA closely reviewed the tasks
performed by signal employees and
determined that a signal employee’s
hearing acuity is critical to their
personal safety and the safety of others.
A signal employee must be able to
communicate with a dispatcher to
ensure on-track safety has been properly
established for themselves or others.
Signal employees often rely on the
sound of a locomotive horn when they
utilize train approach warning as a form
of protection for tasks that are
performed near the track. On-track
safety is a key item covered in the
required job briefings. Signal employees
must be able to understand the job
briefing prior to fouling the track.
Signal employees must also
communicate safety sensitive
instructions to the dispatcher to obtain
protection for defective signal system
equipment, such as a stop and flag order
to protect a malfunctioning highway-rail
grade crossing warning system. In
addition, signal employees need to hear
other signal employees when they
perform signal tests. Employees are
often called upon to call out signal
aspects while locking tests are
performed. With the evolution of
microprocessor equipment, signal
employees also need to be able to hear
the distinct codes being transmitted by
the equipment, such as micro-lock or
electrocode. Signal employees listen for
unusual sounds while inspecting signal
system equipment, such as switch
machines and gate mechanisms, as such
43 FRA–2022–0020–0035,
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
pp. 28–29.
Sfmt 4700
sounds can indicate a need for
additional investigation or maintenance.
FRA acknowledges that some
individuals may not be able to meet the
threshold hearing acuity standards in
this section but may be able to
compensate in other ways that will
allow them to safely perform their
duties as a certified signal employee.
However, FRA has determined that the
flexibility afforded by paragraph (d) of
this section is preferable to limiting
hearing acuity tests to verifying that the
individual can accurately differentiate
between auditory cues or signals.
Therefore, after close review of the
safety-sensitive tasks performed by
signal employees, FRA decided to retain
the hearing acuity standards proposed
in the NPRM. For the reasons explained
in the section-by-section analysis for
§ 246.117 above, FRA does not share
IBEW’s concern that this section gives
too much discretion to a railroad
medical examiner.
Section 246.119 Training
Requirements
This section requires railroads to
provide initial, periodic, and
qualification training to certified signal
employees. Such training is necessary to
ensure certified signal employees have
the knowledge, skills, and abilities
necessary to safely perform all of the
safety-related duties mandated by
Federal law, regulations, and orders.
As an initial matter, FRA deleted
paragraph (b) of this section in the
proposed rule. In the proposed rule,
paragraph (b) would have required the
railroad to state in its certification
program whether the railroad elects to
accept responsibility for training
persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees or only
certify persons who have been
previously certified by other railroads.
FRA removed this language from this
section because it is duplicative of what
is already required under
§ 246.106(b)(1). Accordingly, paragraph
(b) in this final rule focuses on training
requirements that apply to railroads or
parent companies that elect to accept
responsibility for training persons who
have not been previously certified as
signal employees.
NRC commented that FRA should set
minimum standards for training
program design and issue those
standards in a circular or other
supplemental guidance. However, FRA
does not plan to issue a circular or
supplemental guidance (such as an
appendix to this part) at this time
because § 246.106 addresses NRC’s
concern. Section 246.106, which is
derived from appendix B to part 240
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
and appendix B to part 242, provides
railroads with more information on how
to design and structure their programs.
Section 246.106 provides a description
of what information should be included
in each section of the program. FRA has
found through its experience with
locomotive engineer and conductor
certification that issuing a separate
circular or appendix is unnecessary as
railroads can look to the appendices in
parts 240 and 242 for guidance on how
to satisfy the requirements of those
rules. Thus, FRA does not see a need for
issuing a separate circular or appendix
with respect to signal employee
certification.
If a railroad (or parent company)
accepts responsibility for training
persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees, paragraph
(b) of this section requires the railroad
or parent company to state in its
certification program whether it will
conduct the training or whether it will
authorize a third party to provide the
training on its behalf.
This section gives railroads (and
parent companies, if applicable) the
latitude to design and develop the
training and delivery methods they will
employ. Pursuant to paragraph (c), a
railroad or parent company that elects to
accept responsibility for training
persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees is required
to explain how training will be
structured, developed, and delivered,
including an appropriate combination of
classroom, simulator, computer-based,
correspondence, practical
demonstration, on-the-job training, or
other formal training. Paragraph (c)(3)
also requires railroads (and parent
companies, if applicable) to review and
modify their training programs
whenever new safety-related railroad
laws, regulations, orders, and
procedures are issued, as well as
whenever new signal system equipment
or signal-related technology are
introduced into the workplace.
TTD submitted comments expressing
concern that many railroads are not
providing an acceptable level of training
to employees. IBEW expressed a similar
concern and asserted that § 246.125
allows one railroad to rely upon a signal
employee’s certification awarded by
another railroad. Accordingly, IBEW
recommended that FRA require 160
hours of on-the-job training, at least half
of which should be in the field.
FRA acknowledges these concerns
and suggestions and is taking this
opportunity to clarify some of the
requirements of this subpart. FRA agrees
that recent industry trends have resulted
in declining quality and/or quantity of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
training and testing, a concern FRA has
voiced to the industry on multiple
occasions including recent disapproval
of conductor certification programs.
These instances reveal that some
railroads have misinterpreted the
discretion provided to them in parts 240
and 242 as permission to submit
certification programs that are sparse on
details. Such railroads are mistaken as
to what is required under parts 240 and
242, and FRA audits have highlighted
significant issues with these programs
and underscored the critical need for
railroads to provide detailed and
comprehensive submissions.
While FRA believes railroads should
be provided some flexibility in the
design of their certification programs to
address specific signal-related risks and
unique needs, FRA’s review and
approval process outlined in § 246.103
is meant to ensure that railroads do not
abuse this discretion with respect to
their signal employee certification
programs. This rule requires a railroad
to document the details of its training
and testing program and § 246.106
mandates that each certification
program include sufficient detail for
effective evaluation. FRA will
disapprove programs that are vague or
insufficiently detailed, in accordance
with § 246.103(f)(2).
While every railroad is different and
the training needed to be certified signal
employee for a Class I railroad may vary
significantly from the training needed to
be a certified signal employee for a short
line railroad, FRA will review each
signal employee certification program
and determine, on a case-by-case basis,
whether the program contains sufficient
on-the-job training. Railroads are
required to provide enough detail in
their certification programs to allow for
effective evaluation of the training that
will be provided (including on-the-job
training) to ensure that their certified
signal employees can safely perform
their assigned duties.
Also, as will be discussed further in
the section-by-section analysis of
§ 246.125, this final rule does not allow
railroads to rely completely on the
signal employee certification awarded
by another railroad. Each railroad is
required to certify the signal employees
who will be working on their signal
systems and signal-related technology
(or require that non-certified persons
perform work on their signal systems
and signal-related technology under the
direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor).
Paragraph (e) of this section contains
the requirements a person, not
previously certified as a signal
employee, has to satisfy in order to
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44853
become a certified signal employee.
Paragraph (e)(2) states that the person
must successfully complete on-the-job
training and demonstrate on-the-job
proficiency by successfully completing
the tasks and using the signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology necessary to be a certified
signal employee on the certifying
railroad. The paragraph has been
revised in this final rule to clarify that,
if the railroad has elected to classify its
certified signal employees into more
than one occupational category or
subcategory, the person must
successfully complete the tasks
applicable to the signal employee
occupational category or subcategory in
which the person is seeking to be
certified.
NRC asked for clarification on
whether railroads that accept
responsibility for providing initial
signal employee training are required by
paragraph (e) to structure their training
programs to ensure candidates for initial
signal employee certification
demonstrate on-the-job proficiency
using wayside signal equipment, as well
as signal technology in the operations
control center. However, the type of
equipment used by candidates for initial
signal employee certification to
demonstrate on-the-job proficiency will
vary depending upon the nature of the
work each candidate will be assigned to
perform. As discussed earlier, FRA
considers individuals who maintain
signal technology in the operations
control center (such as electronic
control system technicians and CTC
maintainers) to be signal employees for
purposes of this part. Therefore, FRA
expects that railroads who accept
responsibility for providing initial
signal employee training and have
employees or contractors maintain
signal technology in their operations
control centers will require candidates
for signal employee certification to
demonstrate on-the-job proficiency
using signal technology in the
operations control center if there is a
reasonable possibility that the candidate
may be assigned to work there.
Paragraph (g) requires railroads,
regardless of their election in paragraph
(b) of this section, to provide
comprehensive training on the
installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, and repair of the signal
systems and signal-related technology
deployed on their territory. This
training must include training on both
signal software and signal equipment.
To implement this requirement,
paragraph (g) requires railroads to
address in their certification program
how such training will be provided and
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44854
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
how the railroad will ensure that each
certified signal employee is qualified on
the signal system equipment and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad’s territory before the employee
is required to install, operate, test,
maintain, or repair that equipment or
technology.
UTC staff and NRC expressed support
for this requirement in their comments
on the proposed rule. UTC staff
contended that comprehensive training
should include all new and existing
signal systems and signal-related
technologies. NRC recommended that
comprehensive training include
common principles, in addition to the
specifics of the equipment that the
railroad’s certified signal employees
will work on. As reflected in this
section, railroads must provide
comprehensive training that includes
detailed training on the specific signal
system equipment and signal-related
technology that the signal employee will
be required to use, as well as detailed
training on any new signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology that will be deployed on the
railroad’s territory before the employee
is required to install, operate, test,
maintain, or repair the equipment or
technology.
NRC recommended that
comprehensive training for certified
signal employees include some level of
design knowledge as a functional role.
NRC also recommended that installation
staff and maintenance staff not be
trained on tasks that they will not
perform as part of their job duties.
While FRA agrees that it would be
beneficial for certified signal employees
to understand the functional role of the
design of the signal systems and signalrelated technology on which they are
assigned to work, FRA has not
incorporated this recommendation as an
explicit requirement in this final rule. In
addition, this rule allows railroads the
flexibility to decide whether to classify
their certified signal employees into
multiple categories (and subcategories),
as well as the flexibility to decide which
tasks will be performed by their
employees. Therefore, while FRA has
not included a regulatory provision that
would prohibit railroads from training
installation and maintenance staff on
tasks they are unlikely to perform as
part of their job duties, railroads are
only required by § 246.119(g) to ensure
that each certified signal employee is
qualified on the signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology deployed on their territory
before the certified signal employee is
required to install, operate, test,
maintain, or repair it.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Paragraph (g)(3) requires railroads to
discuss, in their training programs, the
maximum amount of time that a
certified signal employee can be absent
from performing work on signal systems
or signal-related technology that
requires certification before
requalification will be required. This
time period cannot exceed 12 months.
However, railroads may choose a shorter
time period if they desire.
IBEW commented on this provision in
the proposed rule, recommending that
FRA reduce the maximum period of
time during which signal employees can
be absent from performing safetysensitive work on signal systems before
refresher training will be required to six
months. IBEW also recommended that
FRA require railroads to provide 16
hours of on-the-job training, as part of
the required refresher training. IBEW
recommended that FRA increase the
number of required hours of on-the-job
training to 24 hours, if the signal
employee is absent from performing
safety-sensitive work for 12–23 months.
In addition, for signal employees who
are absent from performing safetysensitive work for 24 months or more,
IBEW recommended that FRA require
recertification. FRA strongly
recommends that railroads provide
refresher on-the-job training to signal
employees who fail to successfully
complete the unannounced compliance
test required by § 246.123 after returning
to work on the railroad’s signal systems
and signal-related technology that
requires certification. However, if a
certified signal employee has not
performed work on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
that requires certification for more than
12 months, they will no longer be
qualified on signal system equipment or
signal-related technology as set forth in
§ 246.120(c). Therefore, when the
certified signal employee returns to
work on the railroad’s signal systems
and signal-related technology that
requires certification, they will be
required to work under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor until
they become qualified on signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology pursuant to
§ 246.106(b)(2)(v). In addition, railroads
are required to submit their signal
employee certification programs to FRA
for approval. Therefore, FRA will
evaluate railroad plans to provide
refresher training as discussed in their
signal employee certification programs
on a railroad-by-railroad basis.
Paragraph (h) of this section (which
was paragraph (i) in the proposed rule)
addresses transfers of railroad
ownership. NRC commented on
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
paragraph (i) in the proposed rule, and
suggested that instead of saying signal
employees of the acquiring company
‘‘may receive familiarization training’’
from the selling company, the paragraph
should state that signal employees of the
acquiring company ‘‘will receive
training from the selling company’’.44
Whether a selling company will provide
familiarization training to the acquiring
company’s signal employees is,
however, a decision that should be
made by both parties. If FRA were to
make the permissive language in this
paragraph mandatory, it would
essentially entangle itself in the contract
negotiations between the two parties
which is not FRA’s role. FRA’s main
concern with respect to this issue is that
the training is performed properly, not
who performs the training. FRA does
not see a compelling reason for
mandating that the selling company
provide this training and since NRC did
not provide a rationale for this
suggested change, FRA is not adopting
this suggestion. By not adopting this
suggestion, paragraph (h) in this final
rule will remain consistent with the
analogous provisions found at 49 CFR
240.123(d)(1) and 242.119(i).
NRC also contends paragraph (h)
should apply when there is a change in
the private operator of a commuter
railroad. Since NRC did not provide a
rationale for why such a change would
be necessary or beneficial, FRA is not
adopting this suggestion. However, FRA
notes that in situations involving a
change in the operator of a commuter
railroad, there is nothing in part 246
that would prohibit the prior operator
from providing familiarization training
to the signal employees of the new
operator.
Paragraph (i) of this section requires
each railroad to provide for the
continuing education of its certified
signal employees to ensure each
certified signal employee maintains the
necessary knowledge concerning
compliance with all applicable Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders; compliance with all applicable
railroad safety and operating rules; and
compliance with all applicable
standards, procedures, and instructions
for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of new and existing signal
systems and new and existing signalrelated technology deployed on its
territory.
44 FRA–2022–0020–0027.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Section 246.120
Qualification
Requirements for
Section 246.120 has been added to the
final rule to clarify that railroads are
required to provide sufficient training
on the signal system equipment and
signal-related technology that have been
deployed on their territories to ensure
their certified signal employees are
qualified on the railroad’s signal
systems and signal-related technology,
and, therefore, may reasonably be
expected to be proficient on their
operation and use. Prior to attaining
qualification, all individuals assigned to
work on the railroad’s signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology are required by paragraph
(a)(2) of this section to work under the
direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor or qualified instructor.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Section 246.121
Knowledge Testing
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.125, 240.209, and 242.121, requires
railroads to include procedures for the
initial and periodic testing of certified
signal employees in their certification
programs. Paragraph (b) of this section
outlines the general requirements for
such testing. This testing must
effectively examine a signal employee’s
knowledge of: (a) all applicable Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders governing signal systems and
signal-related technology; (b) all
applicable railroad safety and operating
rules; and (c) all applicable railroad
standards, procedures, and instructions
for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of the railroad’s signal systems
and related technology.
With respect to written tests used by
railroads to determine whether
candidates for certification have
sufficient knowledge of their signal
systems and signal-related technology,
BRS, ITLC and TTD recommended that
FRA require railroads provide
accommodations to employees who
require them, including giving
candidates for signal employee
certification the option to request
having the test questions read aloud to
them. TTD also recommended that
railroads be required to provide
additional time to prepare, access to
reference materials, and extended time
for testing, to employees who require
these accommodations. IBEW requested
language advising that all employees
subject to tests required by this part are
covered by all applicable facets of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
In this subpart, FRA is establishing
general parameters for the testing that
must be conducted to determine
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
whether candidates for certification
have the skills and knowledge necessary
to perform the tasks that are assigned to
certified signal employees by the
certifying railroad. FRA has determined
that, in general, a person needs to be
able to read and comprehend written
instructions to safely perform the job of
a certified signal employee. FRA is not,
however, creating or administering the
tests required by this part. Railroads
continue to have the flexibility to
determine how to develop and
administer testing in accordance with
Federal anti-discrimination laws,
including Title I of the ADA. Therefore,
FRA finds it unnecessary to include
language in this final rule to remind
railroads that they need to comply with
Federal anti-discrimination laws.
In their joint comments on paragraph
(b)(1) of this section, AAR and ASLRRA
noted the requirement to test knowledge
of ‘‘[t]he railroad’s rules and standards
for disabling and removing signal
systems from service.’’ AAR and
ASLRRA recommended FRA clarify that
it does not intend to restrict tasks
related to the disabling of signal systems
to signal employees with this
rulemaking. Therefore, FRA clarifies
that those tasks associated with
disabling signal systems that are
performed outside the signal bungalow
are not considered signal covered
service for purposes of the Federal
hours of service law. Therefore,
employees engaged in tasks performed
outside the signal bungalow are not
performing signal system work that
requires signal employee certification.
However, tasks associated with
disabling signal systems that are
performed inside the signal bungalow
are considered signal covered service
under the Federal hours of service law
and, therefore, signal system work that
requires signal employee certification
pursuant to this part.
This section allows railroads the
discretion to design the tests that will be
employed. For most railroads, this will
entail modifying their existing ‘‘book of
rules’’ examination to include new
subject areas. This section does not
specify the minimum number of
questions to be asked or the passing
score to be obtained. IBEW submitted
comments on this provision,
recommending that FRA require
railroads to establish 80% as the
minimum passing grade on tests
required by the railroad’s signal
employee certification program.
However, FRA has decided to refrain
from requiring railroads to establish
80% as the minimum passing grade on
tests required by their signal employee
certification programs. Under this final
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44855
rule, the testing procedures and
requirements selected by railroads will
be discussed in the certification
programs, which the railroads must
submit to FRA for approval and provide
a copy of to the president of each labor
organization representing its signal
employees and to all of the railroad’s
signal employees subject to this part.
Therefore, labor organizations and
signal employees may comment on
proposed tests, and FRA will monitor
the exercise of discretion being afforded
to railroads by this section.
Paragraph (b)(6) in the proposed rule
would have required that tests be
conducted without open reference
books unless use of such materials is
part of a test objective. BRS commented
on this provision, noting that some
railroads allow open book testing per
existing agreements. TTD and NRC also
commented on this paragraph and
recommended that FRA require
railroads to provide access to reference
materials during knowledge testing. In
addition, AAR and ASLRRA
recommended that FRA allow for
greater use of open reference books and
other materials. Therefore, FRA reevaluated its position on open book
testing, as reflected in the final rule.
Unlike locomotive engineers who
cannot refer to reference materials while
actively operating trains, signal
employees are often encouraged to refer
to reference materials when they have a
question about the relevant standard or
threshold that needs to be met during
maintenance or testing of a signal
system or signal-related technology.
Accordingly, unlike §§ 240.125 and
242.121 in this chapter which limit the
use of open book testing for locomotive
engineers and conductors, this final rule
has been revised to allow railroads the
flexibility to administer open book
knowledge tests. However, railroads are
required by paragraph (b)(6) to address
in their certification programs how they
will use open book knowledge tests. In
extending this flexibility to railroads,
FRA expects that open book tests will be
used for the primary purpose of testing
certification candidates’ ability to use
written materials. Nonetheless, since the
testing procedures and requirements
selected by railroads will be submitted
to FRA for approval, FRA will monitor
the exercise of discretion being afforded
to railroads by this section.
Paragraph (c) of this section has been
revised to require the railroad to provide
the person(s) being tested with an
opportunity to consult with a mentor,
signal instructor, or qualified instructor
to explain one or more test questions.
This revision has been made to expand
the scope of individuals who are
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44856
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
authorized to explain test questions to
persons being tested.
If a person fails a test administered in
accordance with this section, paragraph
(d) of this section prohibits the railroad
from allowing that person to work as a
certified signal employee until they
achieve a passing score on
reexamination. The railroad will decide
how much time, if any, must pass after
a test failure before a certification
candidate can be reexamined.
Furthermore, the railroad will decide
what additional training, if any, a
candidate will receive after a test
failure. The railroad will also have
discretion to decide whether there
should be a limit on the number of
times a candidate can retake a test, and
if so, the number of test retakes the
railroad will allow.
Section 246.123 Monitoring
Operational Performance
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.129 and 242.123, requires railroads
subject to this part to describe in their
certification programs how they will
monitor the operational performance of
their certified signal employees.
Paragraph (a) of this section requires
railroads to include procedures in their
certification programs for giving each
certified signal employee at least one
unannounced compliance test each
calendar year on the railroad’s signal
standards and test procedures or Federal
regulations concerning signal systems.
Paragraph (a)(3) requires railroads to
describe the actions they will take if
they find deficiencies in a certified
signal employee’s performance during
an unannounced compliance test. IBEW
commented on this provision,
recommending that FRA prohibit
railroads from assessing discipline if
such deficiencies are found (with the
exception of violations of § 246.303(e)),
so that railroads will focus on providing
the signal employee with coaching,
counseling, and/or additional training,
if needed. However, FRA believes it is
up to each railroad to decide the
appropriate action to take in light of
various factors, including collective
bargaining agreements.
To avoid restricting the options
available to railroads and employee
representatives to develop processes for
handling test failures, FRA designed
this regulation to be as flexible as
possible. There are a variety of actions
and approaches that a railroad can take,
such as developing and providing
formal remedial training for certified
signal employees who fail tests or have
deficiencies in their performance.
Railroads can also implement formal
procedures whereby certified signal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
employees are given the opportunity to
explain, in writing, the factors that they
believe caused their test failure or
performance deficiency. These
explanations could help railroads
identify areas on which to focus training
or perhaps discover that the reason for
the failure/deficiency was due to
something other than a lack of skills.
FRA believes there are numerous
approaches that could be considered
and evaluated by railroads and their
certified signal employees. Railroads
have the ability to adopt an approach
that is best for their organizations.
Paragraph (a)(4) requires railroads to
describe how they will monitor the
performance of signal-related tasks by
their certified signal employees. For
example, railroad monitoring could
include unaccompanied, postinstallation inspections of signal cutovers (conducted within three days of
the installation) to verify that the
certified signal employee properly
installed and tested the signal system, in
accordance with the railroad’s signal
standards.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires
railroads to have certified signal
employees administer the unannounced
compliance tests required by this
section once a railroad’s certification
program has been approved by FRA.
Thus, at the latest, FRA expects
railroads to perform these unannounced
compliance tests on their certified signal
employees during the calendar year
immediately following the year their
certification program is first approved
by FRA. For example, if FRA approves
one railroad’s program in January 2025
and another railroad’s program in
December 2025, both railroads would be
required to perform unannounced
compliance tests on their certified signal
employees in 2026. While FRA
encourages these railroads to perform
unannounced tests after their programs
are approved in 2025, FRA recognizes it
may not be practical to perform
unannounced tests by the end of 2025,
especially for the railroad whose
program was not approved until
December 2025.
Paragraph (d) of this section reflects
FRA’s recognition that some certified
signal employees may not be performing
tasks that require certification.
Therefore, railroads would not be
required to give those certified signal
employees an unannounced compliance
test. For example, a certified signal
employee may be on furlough, in
military service, off with an extended
illness, or working in another craft. In
situations like these where a certified
signal employee is not performing tasks
that require certification, the railroad
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
would not have to give an unannounced
compliance test. However, when the
certified signal employee resumes work
on signal systems that requires
certification, the railroad is required to
provide an unannounced compliance
test within 30 days, if the certified
signal employee has not been given an
unannounced compliance test each
calendar year pursuant to the railroad’s
procedures as described in the railroad’s
certification program. Moreover, the
railroad is required to retain a written
record documenting the dates on which
the certified signal employee stopped
performing work requiring certification,
the date the certified signal employee
resumed signal system work requiring
certification, and the date the certified
signal employee received their
unannounced compliance test following
their resumption of signal system work
requiring certification.
BRS recommended that FRA extend
this 30-day period to six months (and
TTD expressed support for this
recommendation) to allow more time for
signal employees to reacquaint
themselves with the environment and
signal system equipment before being
subjected to a compliance test by
railroad management. In addition, IBEW
recommended that FRA revise this
provision to prohibit railroads from
conducting unannounced compliance
tests within 15 days of the signal
employee’s return to signal system work
that requires certification. However,
FRA anticipates that this 30-day period
will only apply to a small number of
certified signal employees—namely,
certified signal employees who have not
performed work that requires
certification on signal systems and
signal-related technology for an
extended period and who have not been
given an unannounced compliance test
each calendar year.
In addition, if a certified signal
employee has not performed work that
requires certification on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
for more than 12 months, they will no
longer be qualified on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
as set forth in § 246.120(c). Therefore,
when the certified signal employee
returns to signal system work that
requires certification, they will be
unable to work on the railroad’s signal
system equipment and signal-related
technology unless they work under the
direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor or qualified instructor. The
certified signal employee must continue
to work under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor until they become qualified
on signal system equipment and signal-
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
related technology pursuant to
§ 246.106(b)(2)(v). Thus, even without
revising paragraph (d) of this section, a
returning certified signal employee will
perform work on signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or
qualified instructor which should help
reacquaint the employee prior to the
unannounced compliance test.
FRA’s conductor certification
regulations in 49 CFR part 242 contain
a similar 30-day period within which
the railroad must conduct an
unannounced compliance test for
conductors who have not performed
work requiring certification for an
extended period, and FRA is not aware
of any significant hardship caused by
this requirement. Therefore, given the
availability of FRA’s waiver process to
address any hardship that could
potentially be caused by administering
an unannounced compliance test within
30 days of a certified signal employee’s
return to signal system work, FRA has
not extended the 30-day unannounced
compliance testing requirement in
paragraph (d) of this section or limited
railroads to conducting the
unannounced compliance test within
15–30 days of the signal employee’s
return to signal system work requiring
certification.
Section 246.124 Mentoring
This section requires railroads to
include in their certification programs
procedures for mentoring persons who
have not been certified by the railroad
(such as employees of a signal
contractor who have not been certified
by the railroad). Paragraph (a) of this
section also requires railroads to
identify potential scenarios in which
non-certified persons may work on the
railroad’s signal system and signalrelated technology in their certification
programs. In addition, paragraph (e) of
this section requires railroads to address
in their certification programs how
mentoring will be provided to each
person or persons they are mentoring to
allow the mentor to take immediate
action to prevent a violation of
§ 246.303(e) from occurring.
These requirements to identify
potential scenarios in which noncertified persons may perform work on
the railroad’s signal system and signalrelated technology and to explain how
mentoring will be provided were added
in response to comments submitted by
APTA, BRS, and TTD. APTA noted that
the proposed rule might inadvertently
prevent contractors from installing
signal system equipment until the
railroad trains the contractor’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
employees on the signal system. While
APTA expressed concern that requiring
qualified instructors to have at least one
year of experience might lead to this
unintended result, railroads can have
their own certified signal employees
serve as mentors to uncertified signal
contractors who are hired to work on
the railroad’s signal system or signalrelated technology. In addition,
depending on the length of the project
and the frequency with which the signal
contractor is hired to work on the
railroad’s signal system and signalrelated technology, the signal contractor
and railroad may decide to have one or
more of the signal contractor’s
employees complete the railroad’s
certification program and become
certified to work on the railroad. In this
scenario, the signal contractor’s
employees, who are certified to work on
the railroad, could serve as mentors to
the signal contractor’s uncertified signal
employees. Nonetheless, as stated in
paragraph (b) of this section, after FRA
has approved the railroad’s certification
program, the railroad is prohibited from
allowing uncertified persons to work on
its signal system and signal-related
technology unless the uncertified
person works under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or
qualified instructor.
TTD expressed concern that one year
of experience does not provide enough
time for an employee to demonstrate
real proficiency in the signal craft and
foster skill development by their
mentees. As noted earlier, BRS
commented that, after the first year of
implementing this final rule, mentors
should be required to have at least three
years of experience working with
sophisticated signal systems. While FRA
agrees that it would, in most cases, be
beneficial for mentors to have more than
one year of certified signal employee
experience, FRA does not have
sufficient data to determine the
potential impact on rail safety of
requiring signal employees to have at
least three years of certified signal
employee experience to serve as
mentors. However, to ensure that a
signal mentor is not assigned to
supervise multiple work groups
scattered over a job site, FRA is
requiring railroads to explain in their
certification programs how mentoring
will be provided to ensure each mentor
is located in close proximity to each
person or persons they are mentoring to
allow the mentor to take immediate
action to prevent a violation of
§ 246.303(e) from occurring.
ITLC and BRS would have FRA exert
more oversight over railroad mentors, as
they expressed support in their
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44857
comments for requiring railroads to
establish structured mentorship
programs. ITLC noted in its comments
that just because someone knows how to
do a job does not mean they have the
skillset necessary to reinforce lessons
and learning objectives in a supportive
way for another employee.
This rule establishes minimum
requirements to ensure, among other
things, that signal employees receive
sufficient training before they are
certified to work on signal systems and
signal-related technology. As noted
above, FRA revised this section to
require railroads to identify scenarios in
which uncertified persons would work
on the railroad’s signal system and
signal-related technology and to explain
how mentoring will be provided to
ensure each mentor is located in close
proximity to each person or persons
they are mentoring to allow the mentor
to take immediate action to prevent a
violation of § 246.303(e) from occurring.
FRA also revised the definition of
‘‘mentor’’ in this final rule to require
mentors to exercise ‘‘direct and
immediate supervision’’ over the work
performed by the signal employees they
mentor. This approach is consistent
with the approach taken in FRA’s
regulations on the Training,
Qualification, and Oversight for SafetyRelated Railroad Employees (codified in
49 CFR part 243). As noted in the
preamble to FRA’s final rule on training
and qualification standards, on-the-job
training should include instruction and
hands-on experience, as well as
‘‘sufficient opportunity for practice and
feedback.’’ 45
FRA encourages railroads to utilize
structured mentorship programs to help
train their mentors, in addition to the
training that they provide to their signal
employees. However, FRA declines to
require railroads to establish structured
mentorship programs, in addition to
signal employee certification programs.
FRA has determined that requiring
railroads to establish structured
mentorship programs falls outside the
scope of this rulemaking, given the lack
of currently available data illustrating
the effect of structured mentorship
programs on signal system safety.
After a railroad’s certification program
has been approved by FRA, paragraph
(b) of this section prohibits the railroad
from allowing uncertified persons to
work on signal systems or signal-related
technology that requires certification
unless the person is working under the
direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor or qualified instructor.
45 79
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
FR 66460, 66479 (Nov. 7, 2014).
21MYR3
44858
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Paragraph (c) of this section applies to
railroads who elect to classify their
certified signal employees into more
than one occupational category or
subcategory, in accordance with
§ 246.107. These railroads are required
by paragraph (c) to address in their
certification programs how mentoring
will be provided for certified signal
employees who move into a different
occupational category or subcategory of
certified signal service. This paragraph
has also been revised in the final rule to
require that the mentor be certified
within the occupational category or
subcategory for the tasks being
performed by the person or persons
working under their direct and
immediate supervision.
Paragraph (d) has been revised to state
that, if allowed by the railroad’s
certification program, any work on a
signal system performed by a person
whose signal employee certification has
been revoked shall be performed under
the direct and immediate supervision of
a mentor or qualified instructor. The
proposed rule referred to mentors
providing direct oversight and
supervision of signal employees whose
certification had been revoked.
Paragraph (e) of this section reflects
FRA’s intent that mentors are held
accountable for the work performed by
the persons working under their direct
and immediate supervision. Therefore,
in addition to requiring railroads to
address how mentoring will be provided
to ensure each mentor is located in close
proximity to each person or persons
they are mentoring to allow the mentor
to take immediate action to prevent a
violation of § 246.303(e) from occurring,
paragraph (e) also requires railroads to
address in their certification programs
how they will hold mentors accountable
for the work performed by persons
working under their direct and
immediate supervision. This paragraph
has been revised in the final rule to
require that tests performed by persons
working under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor reflect the
mentor’s name.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Section 246.125 Certification
Determinations Made by Other
Railroads
This section of the rule, derived from
49 CFR 240.225 and 242.125, contains
requirements that apply when a
certified signal employee is about to
begin work for a different railroad. This
section allows a railroad or parent
company to rely on determinations
made by another railroad or parent
company concerning a person’s signal
employee certification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
This section has been revised in the
final rule to reflect that parent
companies are authorized to certify
signal employees if they submit and
obtain FRA approval of a signal
employee certification program on
behalf of their subsidiary railroads. In
addition, the requirements in paragraph
(b) of this section in the proposed rule,
which pertain to specific training for
previously uncertified signal employees
with extensive signal experience and for
previously certified signal employees
whose certification has expired, have
been moved to § 246.106(b).
Paragraph (c) in the proposed rule is
now paragraph (b) in the final rule. This
paragraph has been revised to require
the certifying railroad or parent
company to determine that the person is
qualified on the signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology deployed on the railroad
territory on which the person is
expected to work. This change has been
made to incorporate the newly-added
regulatory requirements in § 246.120,
which require a railroad to make the
determination that a person is qualified
on the signal system equipment and
signal-related technology deployed on
the railroad territory on which the
person is expected to work prior to
certifying them.
Subpart C—Administration of the
Certification Program
Section 246.201
Certification
Time Limitations for
This section contains various time
constraints to preclude railroads from
relying on stale information when
evaluating a candidate for certification
or recertification. Paragraph (a)(3) in the
NPRM stated that railroads could not
rely on knowledge tests that were
conducted more than one year before
the date of the railroad’s certification
decision and paragraph (a)(4) stated that
the knowledge test must have been
conducted no more than two years prior
to the certification decision if the
railroad administers knowledge tests at
intervals that do not exceed two years.
For the final rule, FRA decided to
combine these two paragraphs into
paragraph (a)(3).
Section 246.205 List of Certified Signal
Employees and Recordkeeping
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.221 and 242.205, requires each
railroad subject to this part to maintain
a list of its certified signal employees.
NRC submitted comments on this
section asserting that FRA should
require each railroad to maintain a list
of active certified signal employees and
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
their competencies. FRA agrees that
railroads who classify their certified
signal employees into occupational
categories or subcategories by class,
task, location, or other suitable
terminology pursuant to § 246.107
should be required to indicate the
occupational categories and
subcategories in which each certified
signal employee is certified to perform
service. Therefore, paragraph (a) of this
section has been revised accordingly.
However, Class III railroads generally do
not classify their signal employees into
occupational categories and
subcategories, as these signal employees
generally perform whatever signal work
is needed. Therefore, this section has
not been revised to require all railroads
subject to this part to maintain a list of
the occupational categories and
subcategories in which each of their
certified signal employee is certified to
perform service.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires
railroads to update their lists of certified
signal employees at least annually, and
to make their lists of certified signal
employees available, upon request, to
FRA representatives in a timely manner.
In their comments, BRS and TTD
recommended that the final rule require
railroads to share their lists of certified
signal employees with the national
office of each designated labor
organization representing their signal
employees. Similarly, IBEW
recommended that FRA require
railroads to share their lists of certified
signal employees with labor
organizations upon request. BRS, TTD,
and IBEW contend that requiring
railroads to share their lists of certified
signal employees with the designated
labor organizations that represent their
signal employees would create a
collaborative approach to safety, as well
as a level of transparency and
communication that would contribute
significantly to the overall safety culture
and reinforce the collective goals of
supporting accident prevention and the
well-being of signal employees.
While FRA has no objection to
railroads providing these lists to their
employees and their designated
employee representatives, it is unclear
how this proposed requirement would
advance the safety interests of this rule.
Sharing the lists of certified signal
employees is an internal matter that
should be resolved between railroads
and their designated employee
representatives. Thus, FRA does not see
a compelling reason to mandate a
particular approach.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Section 246.207 Certificate
Requirements
This section contains requirements for
the certificate that railroads are required
to issue to each certified signal
employee. The requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
section, which pertain to the minimum
content for certificates and
authorization of each person who would
be designated to sign the certificates, are
derived from 49 CFR 240.223 and
242.207.
Paragraph (a) of this section specifies
that railroads have the option of issuing
certificates electronically or in paper
form. FRA is making a minor change to
paragraph (a)(1) in the proposed rule, by
allowing the signal employee certificate
to identify either the railroad or the
parent company issuing the certificate.
This change acknowledges that, in some
cases, a parent company may have one
signal employee certification program
for one or more of the parent company’s
subsidiary railroads. In this scenario,
the certificate must identify the parent
company as having issued the
certificate, as well as each of the parent
company’s subsidiary railroads on
which the person has been certified as
a signal employee. This change brings
this paragraph into conformity with
parts 240 and 242.
Individuals who are certified by
multiple railroads that are not owned by
the same parent company must receive
a signal employee certificate from each
railroad that certifies them (or each
parent company of the railroad that
certifies them). For railroads who
choose to classify their certified signal
employees into occupational categories
or subcategories, pursuant to § 246.107,
paragraph (a)(2) requires the railroad to
list the specific signal employee
category(ies) or subcategory(ies) in
which the person has been certified.
AAR and ASLRRA commented that
railroads should not be required to
include a person’s year of birth on a
signal employee certificate. After
consideration of this comment, FRA
agrees that including the year of birth on
the signal employee certificate is
unnecessary and is removing this
requirement in the final rule. The
purpose of the requirements in
paragraph (a)(3) is to identify a certified
signal employee, and, as AAR and
ASLRRA stated, the birth year provides
little to no assistance in confirming a
person’s identity, and there are other
ways, such as a physical description or
photograph of the certified signal
employee, which is already included in
paragraph (a)(3), that better serve this
goal. AAR and ASLRRA added that,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
instead of the birth year, FRA could add
a person’s hire date to the list of
requirements on the certificate.
However, the hire date provides even
less relevant information than the birth
year in terms of identification. Thus,
FRA sees no reason to require the hire
date on a signal employee certificate.
Paragraph (f), derived from 49 CFR
240.301 and 242.211, requires a railroad
to promptly replace a person’s signal
employee certificate, at no cost to the
person, if the certificate is lost, stolen,
mutilated, or becomes unreadable.
However, unlike § 242.211(b), this
section does not contain detailed
requirements for temporary replacement
certificates. Temporary replacement
certificates generally contain most of the
information provided on official
certificates. Therefore, it does not
appear to be especially burdensome for
railroads to issue temporary certificates
to replace certificates that have been
lost, stolen, mutilated, or become
unreadable. Nonetheless, by refraining
from proposing a formal process for the
issuance of temporary replacement
certificates, FRA is allowing railroads to
decide how and when to issue
temporary replacement certificates.
APTA commented that paragraph (f)
could create a situation in which an
employee regularly loses their
certificate. Accordingly, APTA
recommended that FRA clarify that this
provision does not preclude use of the
railroad’s progressive disciplinary
process for accountability purposes.
FRA agrees that paragraph (f) is not
intended to preclude the use of
reasonable discipline by railroads, in
response to signal employees who
frequently lose their certificates.
Section 246.213
Certifications
Multiple
This section addresses various issues
involving persons who have, or are
seeking to obtain, multiple
certifications.
Paragraph (d) discusses how the
revocation of a person’s signal employee
certification would affect a person’s
ability to work in another railroad craft
that requires certification, and vice
versa. The general rule articulated in
paragraph (d) is that if a person’s signal
employee certification is revoked for an
alcohol or drug violation, they may not
work in another certified craft during
the period of revocation, and vice versa.
However, if a person’s signal employee
certification is revoked for a violation
that does not involve alcohol or drugs,
the person may work in another
certified craft during the revocation
period, and vice versa.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44859
AAR and ASLRRA commented that if
a person’s signal employee certificate is
revoked for any reason, that person
should not be allowed to work in
another certified craft during the period
of revocation, and vice versa. Their
stated rationale is that if a person
commits a safety violation in one craft,
that shows ‘‘a disregard for process, and
there should not be an assumption that
the employee’s disregard is function or
craft specific.’’ 46 The associations also
contend that 49 CFR 240.308(f) and 49
CFR 242.213(h) do not allow a
decertified conductor to work as a
locomotive engineer or vice versa.
As an initial matter, the assertion by
AAR and ASLRRA that parts 240 and
242 do not allow a decertified conductor
to work as a locomotive engineer is not
accurate. Under 49 CFR 240.308(f) and
49 CFR 242.213(h), if a person’s
conductor certification is revoked for a
violation described in 49 CFR
242.403(e)(6) through (11), they may
still work as a locomotive engineer
during the revocation period. FRA’s
rationale for this distinction is that 49
CFR 242.403(e)(6) through (11) involve
violations of 49 CFR part 218, subpart
F, and since locomotive engineers
cannot have their certifications revoked
for such violations, ‘‘it would be unfair
to prohibit a person from working as an
engineer for a violation that currently
would not result in the revocation of his
or her engineer certificate.’’ 47 For
similar reasons, FRA finds that it would
be unfair to prohibit a person from
working as a certified signal employee
because they passed a stop signal while
working as a locomotive engineer, or
because they committed some other
violation that would not otherwise
result in the revocation of their signal
employee certificate. AAR and
ASLRRA’s proposal would lead to
unfair treatment between persons with a
single certification and persons who are
certified in multiple crafts. For the
reasons stated above, FRA believes that
the proposed rule adopted the same
approach taken in parts 240 and 242
and does not see a reason to make any
changes to this section in the final rule.
Furthermore, as noted in the NPRM,48
the tasks performed by a certified signal
employee are so inherently different
from the tasks performed by persons in
other certified crafts that it does not
automatically follow that a person’s
revocable event as a signal employee
indicates they are more likely to have a
revocable event while performing
another certified craft, and vice versa.
46 FRA–2022–0020–0035.
47 76
48 88
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
FR 69802, 69825 (Nov. 9, 2011).
FR 35654.
21MYR3
44860
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Therefore, under this final rule, a
certified signal employee may continue
to work as a certified signal employee if
their certification is revoked for any of
the violations described in 49 CFR
240.117(e) or 49 CFR 242.403(e) that do
not involve use of alcohol or drugs.
Similarly, a person can continue to
work in another certified craft if their
signal employee certification has been
revoked for a violation described in
§ 246.303(e)(1) through (10).
Section 246.215 Railroad Oversight
Responsibilities
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.309 and 242.215, requires each
Class I railroad (including the National
Railroad Passenger Corporation), each
railroad providing commuter service,
and each Class II railroad to conduct an
annual review and analysis of its
program for responding to detected
instances of poor safety conduct by
certified signal employees. FRA has
formulated the information collection
requirements of this section to ensure
that railroads collect data on signal
employee safety behavior and feed that
information into their operational
monitoring efforts, thereby enhancing
safety.
FRA has, however, also revised
paragraph (d) of this section to facilitate
sharing of this information and to
promote communication and
collaboration between railroads and
labor organizations to improve railroad
safety. Paragraph (d) has been revised in
the final rule to allow for the president
of a labor organization that represents
the railroad’s signal employees to
request that the railroad provide them a
report of the findings and conclusions
reached during the railroad’s annual
review and analysis required under this
section. In the interest of fairness, FRA
is also allowing the railroad’s certified
signal employees who are not
represented by a labor organization to
make such a request.
Paragraph (e)(7) has also been revised
in the final rule to include a reference
to incidents involving noncompliance
with FRA’s blue signal regulations in
part 218 of this chapter, in addition to
noncompliance with FRA’s roadway
worker regulations in part 214 of this
chapter. This change has been made to
more accurately reflect the list of
revocable events in § 246.303(e).
Subpart D—Denial and Revocation of
Certification
This subpart parallels part 240 and
part 242’s approach to adverse decisions
concerning certification (i.e., decisions
to deny certification or recertification
and revoke certification). With respect
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
to denials, the approach of this rule is
predicated principally on the theory
that decisions to deny certification or
recertification will come at the
conclusion of a prescribed evaluation
process conducted in accordance with
the provisions set forth in this subpart.
Thus, this rule contains specific
procedures designed to ensure that a
person in jeopardy of being denied
signal employee certification or
recertification will be given a reasonable
opportunity to examine and respond to
negative information that may serve as
the basis for being denied certification
or recertification.
When considering revocation, this
rule mandates that decisions to revoke
certification will only occur for the
reasons specified in this subpart. Since
revocation decisions by their very
nature involve a clear potential for
factual disagreement, this subpart is
structured to ensure that such decisions
will only be made after a certified signal
employee has been afforded an
opportunity for an investigatory hearing
at which the presiding officer
determines whether there is sufficient
evidence to establish that the person’s
conduct warranted revocation of their
signal employee certification.
This subpart also provides for
certificate suspension in certain
circumstances. Certificate suspension
will be employed in instances where
there is reason to think the certificate
should be revoked or made conditional,
but time is needed to resolve the
situation. Certificate suspension will be
applicable in instances where a person
is awaiting an investigatory hearing to
determine whether that person violated
certain provisions of FRA’s alcohol and
drug control rules, or committed a
violation of certain signal standards,
procedures, or practices, and situations
in which the person is being evaluated
or treated for an active substance abuse
disorder.
Section 246.303 Criteria for Revoking
Certification
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.117, 240.305, and 242.403,
identifies the circumstances in which
certified signal employees may have
their certification revoked.
Paragraph (c) has been revised in the
final rule to reiterate that a certified
signal employee who is assigned to
monitor, mentor, or instruct a person is
responsible for the work performed by
that person. (For purposes of this part,
the definition of the term ‘‘person’’ in
§ 246.7 includes railroad employees, as
well as employees of a railroad
contractor or subcontractor.)
Accordingly, a certified signal employee
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
who is monitoring, mentoring, or
instructing a person and fails to take
appropriate action to prevent a violation
of paragraph (e) of this section will have
their certification revoked. FRA expects
each mentor to be actively involved in
the tasks that are performed by the
person(s) they are mentoring, as these
tasks must be performed under the
direct and immediate supervision of the
mentor. Mentors must be located in
close proximity to each person or
persons they are mentoring to allow the
mentor to take immediate action to avert
a violation of paragraph (e) of this
section from occurring. Similarly,
qualified instructors who are engaged in
evaluating or monitoring a person
performing signal employee tasks must
also pay close attention to the work
being performed and be located in close
proximity to the person performing
signal employee tasks to allow the
qualified instructor to take immediate
action to avert a violation of paragraph
(e) of this section from occurring. Thus,
FRA anticipates that a verbal warning
provided by a mentor or qualified
instructor without any other action will
not, in most cases, be sufficient to allow
the mentor or qualified instructor to
avoid responsibility for a violation of
paragraph (e) of this section caused by
the work performed by the person(s)
being monitored, mentored, or
instructed. Therefore, paragraph (c) has
been revised in the final rule by
removing language in the proposed rule
which indicated that, in general, a
verbal warning would constitute
appropriate action.
Paragraph (e) provides the eleven
types of rule infractions that could
result in certification revocation. The
infractions listed in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (11) are derived in part from the
revocable events provided in 49 CFR
242.117(e) but have been modified to
account for the duties and
responsibilities of a certified signal
employee.
AAR and ASLRRA commented on the
rule infractions in paragraphs (e)(5) and
(e)(7). Paragraph (e)(5) refers to a
certified signal employee’s failure to
restore power to a train detection or
highway-rail or pathway grade crossing
warning device or system after manual
interruption of the power source. For
violations of this nature, railroads are
directed to consider only those
violations that result in activation
failure. AAR and ASLRRA assert that it
would be better to proactively address
the certified signal employee’s
misconduct before an activation failure
occurs. AAR and ASLRRA also assert
that FRA regulations do not require FRA
to wait for an activation failure before
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
citing the railroad in such a scenario.
However, FRA disagrees. A situation
involving failure to restore power to a
grade crossing warning system does not
constitute a violation of FRA’s grade
crossing regulations in part 234 of this
chapter, in the absence of an activation
failure, unless the standby source of
power was also insufficient. Therefore,
paragraph (e)(5) has not been revised.
AAR and ASLRRA also commented
on the rule infractions in paragraph
(e)(7), which refers to a certified signal
employee’s failure to comply with
FRA’s Roadway Worker Protection
regulations in 49 CFR part 214. AAR
and ASLRRA noted that, given the
language in paragraph (e)(7) in the
proposed rule, revocation of signal
employee certification for a person who
ascertains that on-track safety needs to
be provided but fails to do so would not
be allowed. FRA has revised paragraph
(e)(7) in the final rule to close this
inadvertent loophole and require
railroads to consider violations
involving a person who failed to obtain
proper on-track safety before fouling the
railroad track.
NRC also commented on paragraph
(e)(7), recommending revocation of the
person’s roadway worker certification
(instead of revoking signal employee
certification) in response to a violation
of FRA’s Roadway Worker Protection
regulations in 49 CFR part 214.
However, a person, whose signal
employee certification is revoked, loses
their ability to perform work as a
certified signal employee for the
duration of the revocation period, not
just their ability to perform the specific
task or activity in which they were
engaged when the revocable incident
occurred. In addition, railroads
generally do not have roadway worker
certification programs, so this
recommendation was not adopted.
Paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) refer to
a certified signal employee’s failure to
comply with FRA’s Railroad Operating
Practices regulations related to work
performed on, under, or between rolling
equipment. BRS and TTD asserted that
the regulatory provisions cited in
paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) do not
apply to signal employees and
recommended that FRA remove
references to these regulatory
provisions.
However, as discussed earlier, the
signal employee certification
requirements in this part apply to any
person who meets the definition of
signal employee contained in § 246.7,
regardless of the fact that the person
may have a job classification title other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
than that of signal employee.49
Therefore, electricians who are engaged
in testing locomotive cab signal
equipment are considered to be signal
employees (when engaged in this task)
for purposes of this part. Accordingly,
railroads must address electricians who
test locomotive cab signal equipment in
their signal employee certification
programs, if applicable. Also,
electricians who are engaged in testing
locomotive cab signal equipment will be
subject to revocation of their signal
employee certification if they fail to
comply with § 218.25, 218.27, or 218.29
during such testing.
APTA noted that the revocable
offenses listed in paragraphs (e)(7)
through (10) are related to an
individual’s personal safety, as opposed
to the safety of the railroad system, and
therefore should be removed. TTD
submitted similar comments, asserting
that the revocable offenses listed in
paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) do not
apply to signal employees. However,
most signal employees are required to
work on or near the railroad tracks to
perform their assigned tasks. Therefore,
FRA does not view compliance with its
roadway worker regulations in 49 CFR
part 214 as being solely related to an
individual’s personal safety. Similar to
the revocable offense for conductors
who fail to take appropriate action to
prevent the locomotive engineer of the
train to which the conductor is assigned
from occupying a segment of main track
without proper authority or permission,
failure to comply with FRA’s roadway
worker regulations in 49 CFR part 214
could impact not only the safety of the
individual whose actions are noncompliant, but the safety of each
member of a signal work gang who is
relying on the roadway worker
protection obtained by the designated
roadway worker-in-charge.
Human factors are also one of the
leading causes of train accidents and
incidents. Therefore, the revocable
offenses listed in paragraphs (e)(8)
through (10), which involve noncompliance with FRA’s blue signal
protection requirements in subpart B of
part 218 of this chapter, are intended to
reduce the number of human factorcaused accidents and incidents
involving individuals who work on cab
signal and PTC equipment. In sum, the
revocable offenses listed in paragraphs
(e)(7) through (10) are intended to
reduce fatalities and injuries caused by
non-compliance with FRA’s roadway
worker and operating practice
regulations.
49 See
PO 00000
§ 246.1(c).
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44861
Paragraph (i) of this section prohibits
a railroad from revoking a person’s
signal employee certification if the
revocable event occurred during an
operational test that was not conducted
in conformance with part 246, the
railroad’s operating rules, or the
railroad’s program under 49 CFR 217.9.
AAR and ASLRRA commented that FRA
should take into consideration the type
of error that occurred and whether it
harmed the certified signal employee. If
the error was a minor procedural error
that did not cause substantial harm to
the certified signal employee, AAR and
ASLRRA contend there is no safety
basis to preclude railroads from
revoking the person’s signal employee
certification if the person committed a
revocable offense during such test. FRA
disagrees. When railroads perform
operational tests, they have a duty to
ensure the tests are done properly under
both Federal law and the railroad’s own
rules. Keeping paragraph (i) in its
current form will incentivize railroads
to fulfill this duty. If FRA adopted the
associations’ suggestion, it would create
a gray area where one did not
previously exist. It would also
complicate the job of the Certification
Review Board (CRB) as some
individuals would presumably raise this
issue in their petitions to the CRB. The
CRB would then have to determine
whether an error on an operational test
caused the person substantial harm.
FRA finds that with respect to this
issue, a bright-line rule is preferable. It
should not be a heavy burden for
railroads to properly perform these
operational tests. Thus, FRA is not
making any changes to this paragraph
from the proposed rule.
Section 246.305
Periods of Ineligibility
In this section FRA describes how a
railroad must determine a person’s
period of ineligibility if they have their
signal employee certification revoked.
For certified signal employees,
paragraph (a) explains that the period of
revocation will begin on the date of the
railroad’s written notification to the
person that recertification has been
denied or certification has been
suspended.
Paragraph (b) of this section provides
that the revocation period will be based
on the number of revocable violations a
person has committed over a certain
period of time. AAR and ASLRRA
requested that FRA ‘‘clarify that the 36month period is on a rolling basis such
that each new revocation has the
potential to extend the 36-month
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44862
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
clock.’’ 50 The 36-month period in
paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) is a lookback
period from the most recent violation.
For example, if a certified signal
employee committed a violation
described in § 246.303(e)(1) through (11)
on January 1, 2028, the railroad would
have to determine how many revocable
violations the certified signal employee
committed from January 1, 2025, to
January 1, 2028. If the certified signal
employee had two additional revocable
events during this time period (making
the violation on January 1, 2028 the
third such violation), then paragraph
(b)(3) would apply and the railroad
would have to revoke the person’s
certification for one year.
In their joint comment, AAR and
ASLRAA also criticized the periods of
ineligibility in this section for being too
lenient and recommended that FRA
revise paragraph (b)(4) so that if a
certified signal employee has four
revocable events in a 36-month period,
they are no longer eligible to be
certified. As an initial matter, this
section only addresses how long a
person is ineligible to work as a certified
signal employee following an incident
described in § 246.303(e). This section
does not limit the discipline a railroad
can issue in response to a revocable
event, other than limiting the amount of
time the railroad can revoke the
person’s signal employee certification.
For example, if a certified signal
employee commits a violation described
in § 246.303(e)(1) and the certified
signal employee has no prior history of
committing a revocable event, paragraph
(b)(1) of this section prohibits the
railroad from revoking the person’s
signal employee certification for more
than 30 days. However, the railroad can
choose to hold the person out of service
for longer than 30 days or can terminate
its employment of the person, if the
railroad thinks such discipline is
warranted.
FRA is declining to adopt AAR and
ASLRRA’s recommendation to revise
paragraph (b)(4) so that four revocable
events in a 36-month period would
render a person permanently ineligible
to hold certification. FRA thinks a threeyear revocation period is a reasonable
penalty and it aligns with the discipline
structure found in parts 240 and 242.
Furthermore, FRA already has an
established process in place for
disqualifying persons from performing
safety-sensitive work on either a
temporary or permanent basis. If a
railroad finds a person’s actions are so
egregious that they warrant
disqualification, the railroad can refer
50 FRA–2022–0020–0035.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
the case to FRA, and the agency can
determine whether to initiate the
disqualification procedures proscribed
in 49 CFR part 209, subpart D. FRA
believes the process outlined in part 209
is preferable to creating a blanket
requirement in this rule that would
permanently disqualify a person from
working as a certified signal employee.
Section 246.307 Process for Revoking
Certification
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.307 and 242.407, covers the
procedures a railroad must follow to
revoke a person’s signal employee
certification.
Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section
have been revised in the final rule to
include references to violations of
Federal regulatory provisions when
discussing actions by a certified signal
employee that could result in revocation
of signal employee certification. FRA
would also like to clarify that if the
certifying railroad determines a certified
signal employee violated a Federal
regulatory provision, railroad test
procedure, signal standard or practice
described in § 246.303(e), the railroad is
required to revoke signal employee
certification even if the person’s
employment by the railroad is
terminated during the certification
revocation process, so that the person
will be unable to work as a certified
signal employee for another railroad
during the period of revocation.
Paragraph (b)(1) of this section
requires a railroad to immediately
suspend a person’s signal employee
certification upon receipt of reliable
information regarding a violation of
§ 246.303(e). Prior to, or upon
suspending, the signal employee
certificate, paragraph (b)(3) requires
railroad to provide either verbal or
written notice of the reason for the
suspension, the pending revocation, and
an opportunity for a hearing. If the
initial notice was verbal, then the notice
would have to be promptly confirmed in
writing. The amount of time the railroad
has to confirm the verbal notice in
writing depends on whether or not a
collective bargaining agreement is in
effect and applicable. In the absence of
such an agreement, a railroad has four
days to provide written notice. If a
notice of suspension is amended after a
hearing is convened, or does not contain
citations to all Federal regulatory
provisions, railroad test procedures,
signal standards, and practices that may
apply to the potentially revocable event,
the CRB, if asked to review the
revocation decision, might subsequently
find that this constitutes procedural
error pursuant to § 246.405.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Paragraph (b)(5) of this section in the
NPRM provided that no later than the
start of the hearing, the railroad would
be required to provide the certified
signal employee with a copy of the
written information and a list of
witnesses that the railroad would
present at the hearing. BRS and TTD
submitted comments criticizing this
paragraph, contending that it put the
certified signal employee in a
disadvantaged position, unable to
adequately prepare their case or mount
a proper defense. BRS strongly
recommended that the language in this
provision be modified to require the
railroad to provide the certified signal
employee with the necessary written
information and a comprehensive list of
witnesses upon request. Similarly, TTD
requested that this provision be revised
to require that the certified signal
employee and their labor representative,
if applicable, ‘‘receive a copy of all
information and a list of witnesses
sufficiently in advance of the hearing in
order to properly develop a defense.’’ 51
After considering these concerns, FRA
is amending paragraph (b)(5) to require
railroads to provide certified signal
employees with a copy of the written
information and a list of witnesses they
will present at the hearing at least 72
hours before the start of the hearing.
FRA thinks this change promotes
fairness and will provide a certified
signal employee and their representative
with sufficient time to prepare a proper
defense. However, if an applicable
collective bargaining agreement allows
for railroads to provide this information
less than 72 hours before the start of the
hearing, the railroad will be in
compliance with this paragraph as long
as it satisfies the requirements of the
applicable collective bargaining
agreement.
Paragraph (b)(5) in the NPRM also
stated that if an employee of the railroad
provided information that will be
presented at the hearing, the railroad
must make that employee available for
examination at the hearing. TTD
commented that this provision should
be modified to require any witness upon
which the railroad is relying to support
its allegations against the certified signal
employee to be present at the hearing
for questioning by the certified signal
employee and/or their representative.
However, FRA is declining to make this
change, as FRA recognizes that railroads
are limited in their ability to compel
non-employees to testify at these
hearings. FRA is, however, adding
language to paragraph (b)(5) to clarify
that railroads must make an employee
51 FRA–2022–0020–0032.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
available for examination at the hearing
if the employee provided information
that will be used by the railroad at the
hearing, regardless of whether an
applicable collective bargaining
agreement addresses this issue.
FRA is also making some other
changes to this section, from what
appeared in the proposed rule, to align
with parts 240 and 242. Paragraph (b)(6)
of this section states that after the
hearing, the railroad must determine,
based on the hearing record, whether
certificate revocation is warranted. FRA
is adding language from 49 CFR
240.307(b)(5) and 242.407(b)(5) to this
paragraph noting that the railroad must
also state the basis for its decision
which is discussed in more detail in
paragraph (e). Similarly, FRA added
language to paragraph (d)(8) stating that
while a railroad can consolidate a
revocation hearing with a disciplinary
hearing, it must still make a separate
finding regarding revocation and it must
ensure that the railroad official making
the finding(s) is not the investigating
officer. This new language, found in 49
CFR 240.307(e) and 242.407(e), clarifies
for railroads that the requirements in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section still
apply when the revocation hearing is
consolidated with a disciplinary
hearing.
In addition, FRA added language not
found in the NPRM to clarify what is
required under paragraph (j) of this
section. Paragraph (j) requires railroads
to keep records of evidence that lead the
railroad to not revoke a person’s signal
employee certification in accordance
with paragraph (h) or (i). In this final
rule, FRA is acknowledging that this
requirement does not just apply if this
information comes to light during a
revocation hearing. Railroads must also
retain this evidence if it becomes
available before the railroad suspends
the person’s signal employee
certification or before the revocation
hearing is convened. The language FRA
added to this final rule mirrors language
found in 49 CFR 240.307(j) and
242.407(j).
Subpart E—Dispute Resolution
Procedures
This subpart details the opportunities
and procedures for a person to challenge
a railroad’s decision to deny
certification or recertification or to
revoke a signal employee’s certification.
While the dispute resolution process for
signal employees largely mirrors the
processes for engineers under part 240
and conductors under part 242, FRA has
undertaken efforts to simplify these
regulations to make them clear and
comprehensible to all interested parties.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Section 246.403
Petition Requirements
This section contains requirements for
obtaining FRA review of a railroad’s
decision to deny or revoke certification
or deny recertification.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires
petitioners to seek review in a timely
fashion once the adverse decision is
served on them. In the interest of
consistency and uniformity with parts
240 and 242, petitioners have 120 days
from the date the adverse decision was
served upon them to file a petition for
review by the CRB.
Paragraph (b)(6) requires petitioners
or their representatives to state the facts
and arguments in support of their
petition. In other words, they need to
explain to the CRB why they think the
railroad was incorrect in denying or
revoking the petitioner’s certification.
Paragraph (b)(7) requires petitioners to
submit all documents related to the
railroad’s decision that are in their
possession or reasonably available to
them. This may include the transcript
and exhibits from the petitioner’s denial
or revocation hearing. In most cases,
these documents will be essential to the
Board’s ability to make an informed
decision on the petition.
IBEW commented that FRA should
add language to this section requiring
railroads to produce all records
requested by the petitioner. However,
FRA does not think such a change is
necessary because IBEW’s concern is
already addressed by § 246.405(b) which
requires a railroad to supplement the
record with any relevant documents in
its possession that were not provided by
the petitioner. This helps ensure the
CRB will have a complete record when
the case is ready for their review.
Section 246.405 Processing
Certification Review Petitions
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.405 and 242.505, details how
petitions for review by the CRB will be
handled. Paragraph (a) of this section
notes that, when FRA receives a CRB
petition, FRA will send a written
notification to the parties involved in
the petition. FRA will send these
acknowledgments via email. If a
representative files a petition on behalf
of a petitioner, the petition must include
the petitioner’s email address if the
petitioner also wants to receive the
acknowledgment email and any other
correspondence (including the Board’s
decision) from FRA. The
acknowledgment email will include the
docket number for the petition, so that
both parties can access the documents
in the case on https://
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44863
www.regulations.gov. FRA will not send
a copy of the petition to the railroad.
Paragraph (b) of this section provides
railroads with the opportunity to
respond to a petition. While it is always
optional for a railroad to respond to a
petitioner’s arguments, if the petitioner
did not include relevant documents in
their petition, such as hearing
transcripts or exhibits, the railroad is
required to provide FRA with those
documents, even if it does not respond
to the arguments in the petition.
Railroads have 60 days, from the date
FRA sends the acknowledgment email,
to file a response to the petition in the
docket on https://www.regulations.gov.
Railroads are permitted to submit
responses after the 60-day deadline, but
the Board will only review such late
filings if practicable. In other words,
there is no guarantee that the Board will
review a late response prior to issuing
a decision. Thus, if a railroad wishes to
respond to a petition, it should meet the
60-day filing deadline. The railroad will
fulfill its requirement to serve a copy of
its response on the other parties by
sending its response via email to
petitioner, and the petitioner’s
representative (if any).
Paragraph (c) of this section explains
when a case will be referred to the
Board, and the Board’s authority. If a
railroad files a response before the 60day deadline in paragraph (b) of this
section, the petition will be referred to
the Board upon receipt of the response.
Otherwise, the petition will be referred
to the Board 60 days after the date FRA
sends the acknowledgment email. The
Board has the authority to grant a
petition (rule in favor of the petitioner),
deny a petition (rule in favor of the
railroad), or dismiss a petition. An
example of when the Board would
dismiss a petition would be if the
respondent railroad did not deny or
revoke the petitioner’s certification, and
thus, there was no case or controversy
before the Board. If there is insufficient
evidence in the record for the Board to
decide on the merits of a petition, the
Board may choose to remand a petition
or issue an interim order, so that
additional fact-finding can occur.
Paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this
section provide the standards of review
that the Board will employ for
procedural issues, factual issues, and
legal issues, respectively. These
standards mirror the standards of review
used to review locomotive engineer and
conductor petitions. The Board will not
correct all procedural errors committed
by a railroad. Instead, in such cases, the
Board will only grant a petition if the
respondent railroad’s procedural error
caused substantial harm to the
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44864
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
petitioner. For factual issues, the
petitioner is required to show that the
respondent railroad did not have
substantial evidence to support its
decision to deny or revoke the
petitioner’s certification. If the Board
must decide a legal issue, it will
conduct de novo review, meaning that it
would not give deference to any
decision or interpretation made by the
railroad.
Paragraph (g) of this section
acknowledges that the Board’s decisionmaking power is limited to granting or
denying a petition. In other words, the
Board is only empowered to make
determinations concerning
qualifications under this regulation. The
Board is not empowered to mitigate the
consequences of a railroad decision if
the decision is valid under this
regulation. The contractual
consequences, if any, of these
determinations will have to be resolved
under dispute resolution mechanisms
that do not directly involve FRA. For
example, FRA cannot order a railroad to
alter its seniority rosters or make an
award of back pay, in the event of a
finding that a railroad wrongfully
denied certification.
Paragraph (h) of this section requires
the Board to issue a written decision
that will be served on all affected
parties. FRA will send the decision to
the parties by email and it will also be
posted in the case’s docket on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Section 246.407 Request for a Hearing
This section, derived from 49 CFR
240.407 and 49 CFR 242.507, discusses
the process for requesting an
administrative hearing after a party has
been adversely affected by a CRB
decision. Paragraph (b) of this section
provides that the adversely affected
party must file their request for a
hearing within 20 days of service of the
CRB’s decision. Just like CRB petitions,
parties must file hearing requests
electronically. To file a hearing request,
the adversely affected party must
upload the request to the docket on
https://www.regulations.gov that was
used while the case was before the
Board. This docket will also be used to
file documents while the case is before
the hearing officer.
BRS, TTD, and IBEW commented on
paragraph (b) and recommended that
FRA increase the 20-day period for
filing a request for hearing. BRS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
recommended increasing the filing
period to 90 days, while TTD and IBEW
recommended a 60-day filing period. In
support of their recommendations, these
labor organizations asserted that 20 days
is an inadequate amount of time for the
aggrieved party to confer with their
representative, determine the best
course of action, and then compile the
information required in paragraph (c) to
complete a request.
However, the required contents for
hearing requests, as set forth in
paragraph (c) of this section, are
minimal, and are similar to the
requirements in § 246.403(b) for filing a
petition with the CRB. Thus, if the
certified signal employee is the
aggrieved party, most of the information
needed for the hearing request can be
found in their CRB petition. FRA does
not foresee any major hinderance that
would prevent a certified signal
employee or railroad from completing a
hearing request within the 20 days
currently allotted. Moreover, a similar
20-day deadline has been in effect for
over a decade for conductors and for
over 30 years for locomotive engineers.
FRA is unaware of any major issues
parties have had with meeting this
deadline, and therefore disagrees with
the recommendation to change this
deadline for certified signal employees.
Appendices
This final rule has two appendices.
Appendix A, derived from appendix C
to part 240 and appendix C to part 242,
provides a narrative discussion of the
procedures that a person seeking signal
employee certification or recertification
should follow to furnish a railroad with
information concerning their motor
vehicle driving record. Appendix B,
derived from appendix D to part 240
and appendix D to part 242, provides a
narrative discussion of the procedures
that a railroad will be required to
employ when administering the vision
and hearing requirements of §§ 246.117
and 246.118.
FRA made minor revisions to
appendix A from what appeared in the
proposed rule. In paragraph (2), FRA
added language noting that the
information in a certification
candidate’s motor vehicle driving
records that the railroad should
consider is described in § 246.111(m).
FRA also added language to paragraph
(4) to clarify that under § 246.301, a
railroad is only required to provide a
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
candidate for signal employee
certification or recertification with a
copy of their motor vehicle driving
records if the records contain
information that could be the basis for
denying certification (or recertification).
If no such adverse information exists,
the railroad is not required to provide
the candidate with a copy of these
records.
V. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 as Amended
by Executive Order 14094
This final rule is not a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866 as amended by
Executive Order 14094, Modernizing
Regulatory Review. Details on the
estimated costs of this final rule can be
found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA), which FRA has prepared and
placed in the docket (FRA–2022–0020).
FRA is issuing regulations
establishing a formal certification
process for railroad signal employees.
As part of that process, railroads will be
required to develop a program for
training current and prospective signal
employees, documenting and verifying
that the holder of the certificate has
achieved certain training and
proficiency, and creating a record of
safety compliance infractions that other
railroads can review when considering
individuals for certification. This final
rule will ensure that signal employees
are properly trained, are qualified to
perform their duties, and meet Federal
safety standards. Additionally, this
regulation is expected to improve
railroad safety by reducing the rate of
accidents/incidents.
The RIA presents estimates of the
costs likely to occur over the first 10
years of the final rule. The analysis
includes estimates of costs associated
with development of certification
programs, initial and periodic training,
knowledge testing, and monitoring of
operational performance. Additionally,
costs are estimated for vision and
hearing tests, review of certification
determinations made by other railroads,
and Government administrative costs.
FRA estimated 10-year costs of $9.4
million discounted at 7 percent. The
annualized cost will be approximately
$1.3 million discounted at 7 percent.
The following table shows the estimated
10-year costs of the final rule.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44865
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
TOTAL 10-YEAR DISCOUNTED COSTS
[2020 Dollars]
Present Value
7%
($)
Category
Present Value
3%
($)
Annualized
7%
($)
Annualized
3%
($)
Development of Certification Program ............................................................
Certification Eligibility Requirements ...............................................................
Recertification Eligibility Requirements ...........................................................
Training ............................................................................................................
Knowledge Testing ..........................................................................................
Vision and Hearing ..........................................................................................
Monitoring Operational Performance ...............................................................
Railroad Oversight Responsibilities .................................................................
Certification Card .............................................................................................
Petitions and Hearings ....................................................................................
Government Administrative Cost .....................................................................
1,504,135
202,952
243,632
2,079,835
746,865
1,097,523
1,178,812
267,530
103,175
181,733
1,780,113
1,541,874
227,006
310,417
2,379,911
898,884
1,320,891
1,408,753
326,714
124,175
217,183
2,065,541
214,155
28,896
34,688
296,122
106,337
156,263
167,836
38,090
14,690
25,875
253,448
180,755
26,612
36,390
278,998
105,377
154,849
165,149
38,301
14,557
25,460
242,144
Total ..........................................................................................................
9,386,306
10,821,350
1,336,399
1,268,592
The primary benefit of this final rule
is that it will ensure that railroads
properly train and monitor signal
employee performance to reduce the
risk of accidents caused by signal
employee error. This rule will allow
railroads to revoke certification of signal
employees who make serious safetyrelated violations.
This rule is expected to reduce the
likelihood of an accident occurring due
to signal employee error. FRA has
analyzed accidents over the past 10
years to categorize those where signal
employee training and certification
would have impacted the accident. FRA
estimated benefits from fewer train
accidents, grade crossing accidents, and
activation failures.
The following table shows the
estimated 10-year benefits of the final
rule. The total 10-year estimated
benefits will be $2.9 million (PV, 7%)
and annualized benefits will be $0.4
million (PV, 7%).
TOTAL 10-YEAR DISCOUNTED BENEFITS
[2020 Dollars]
Present Value
7%
($)
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Category
Present Value
3%
($)
Annualized
7%
($)
Annualized
3%
($)
Grade Crossing Accidents ...............................................................................
Train Accidents/Incidents .................................................................................
Business Benefits from Fewer Activation Failures (Railroad Industry) ...........
Business Benefits from Fewer Activation Failures (Government) ...................
1,766,028
960,671
53,817
87,985
2,064,676
1,123,127
62,917
102,863
251,443
136,778
7,662
12,527
242,043
131,665
7,376
12,059
Total ..........................................................................................................
2,868,501
3,353,584
408,410
393,142
FRA has quantified the monetary
impact from accidents reported on FRA
accident forms. However, some accident
costs are not required to be reported on
FRA accident forms (e.g., environmental
impact). For example, the cost of
property damage represents a portion of
the total cost of train accidents, such as,
the cost of direct labor and damage to
on-track equipment, track, track
structures, and roadbed. Other direct
accident costs, such as accident clean
up, third-party property damage, lost
lading, environmental damage, loss of
economic activity to the community,
and train delays are not included in
FRA’s accident/incident reportable
damages from the railroads. That impact
may account for additional benefits not
quantified in this analysis. If these costs
not covered by FRA data were realized,
accidents affected by this rulemaking
could have much greater economic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
impact than the quantitative benefit
estimates provided here.
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Executive Order 13272
1. Statement of the Need for, and
Objectives of, the Rule
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 52 and Executive Order 13272 53
require agency review of proposed and
final rules to assess their impacts on
small entities. FRA prepared this FRFA
to evaluate the impact of the final rule
on small entities and describe the effort
to minimize the adverse impact. The
estimated costs on small entities is not
significant as it represents less than one
percent of average annual revenue of
affected entities. Accordingly, the FRA
Administrator hereby certifies that this
final rule will not have a significant
FRA perceives the potential for signal
employee error to cause accidents, and
an existing lack of means to evaluate
and address this risk. Railroads’ signal
employee training programs may not be
covering all aspects of a signal
employee’s job responsibility.
Additionally, railroads may not be
testing signal employees and ensuring
that their knowledge is maintained
continuously.
DOT’s general authority states, in
relevant part, that the Secretary ‘‘as
necessary, shall prescribe regulations
and issue orders for every area of
railroad safety supplementing laws and
regulations in effect on October 16,
52 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
53 67
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44866
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
1970.’’ 54 The Secretary delegated this
authority to the Federal Railroad
Administrator.55 The RSIA required the
Secretary to submit a report to Congress
addressing whether certification of
certain crafts or classes of railroad
employees or contractors was necessary
to reduce the number and rate of
accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety. If the Secretary
determined certification of certain crafts
or classes was necessary to meet these
goals, Congress also authorized the
Secretary to promulgate regulations
requiring certification. In the report to
Congress, the Secretary noted that signal
repair employees, along dispatchers,
were the most viable candidates for
certification. This final rule will require
railroads to develop a signal employee
certification program. The final rule will
help ensure that signal employees are
properly trained, qualified to perform
their duties, and meet Federal safety
standards.
2. Significant Issues Raised by Public
Comments
FRA received several comments
related to the costs of the proposed rule.
ASLRRA and AAR submitted comments
related to the proposed rule. Issues not
concerning the economics of the rule
have been discussed above in the
discussion of comments and
conclusions. Comments were received
from ASLRRA relating to the cost
estimates for developing the
certification programs, petitions and
hearings, and annual monitoring. FRA
has revised costs for developing
certification programs, estimating 550
hours for ASLRRA to develop a model
or template program, as suggested by
ASLRRA in their comment.
Additionally, FRA has increased the
time for individual railroads to develop
their plan based on the template. The
estimated time per railroad has been
increased to 15 hours (from 8 hours in
the RIA for the proposed rule).
Further, FRA has revised the cost for
petitions and hearings, adding
additional job categories and slightly
increasing the time estimated per
petition and hearing.
3. Response to Comments Filed by the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration
FRA did not receive any comments
from the Small Business
Administration.
4. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Rule Will Apply
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires a review of proposed and final
rules to assess their impact on small
entities, unless the Secretary certifies
that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
‘‘Small entity’’ is defined in 5 U.S.C.
601 as a small business concern that is
independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field of operation.
The U.S. Small Business Administration
(SBA) has authority to regulate issues
related to small businesses, and
stipulates in its size standards that a
‘‘small entity’’ in the railroad industry is
a for profit ‘‘line-haul railroad’’ that has
fewer than 1,500 employees, a ‘‘short
line railroad’’ with fewer than 1,500
employees, a ‘‘commuter rail system’’
with annual receipts of less than $47.0
million dollars, or a contractor that
performs support activities for railroads
with annual receipts of less than $34.0
million.56
Federal agencies may adopt their own
size standards for small entities in
consultation with SBA and in
conjunction with public comment.
Under that authority, FRA has
published a proposed statement of
agency policy that formally establishes
‘‘small entities’’ or ‘‘small businesses’’
as railroads, contractors, and hazardous
materials shippers that meet the revenue
requirements of a Class III railroad as set
forth in 49 CFR part 1201, General
Instruction 1–1, which is $20 million or
less in inflation-adjusted annual
revenues,57 and commuter railroads or
small governmental jurisdictions that
serve populations of 50,000 or less.58
FRA is using this definition for the final
rule.
When developing the rule, FRA
considered the impact that the rule
would have on small entities. FRA has
provided additional time for Class III
railroads to comply with the final rule
as compared to Class I railroads.
The final rule would be applicable to
all railroads with signal systems.
However, some small railroads do not
have a signal system as part of their
operations. FRA estimates there are 744
Class III railroads, of which 704 operate
on the general system. These railroads
are of varying size, with some belonging
to larger holding companies.
Approximately 490 Class III railroads
will be impacted by this rulemaking
because they have a signal system. The
remaining Class III railroads do not have
a signal system, thus will have no need
for signal employee certification
program.
5. Description of the Projected
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Rule
The final rule requires Class III
railroads to develop and implement a
Signal Employee Certification Program.
This includes certifying and recertifying
signal employees, vision and hearing
tests, training, knowledge testing, and
monitoring operational performance.
The following table shows the
annualized costs for all provisions of the
final rule. The total annualized cost for
all Class III railroads is $434,884 (PV, 7
percent).
ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CLASS III RAILROADS
Annualized 7%
($)
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Category
Development of Certification Program ..............................................................................................................................................
Certification Eligibility Requirements .................................................................................................................................................
Recertification Eligibility Requirements .............................................................................................................................................
Training ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
Knowledge Testing ............................................................................................................................................................................
Vision and Hearing ............................................................................................................................................................................
Monitoring Operational Performance .................................................................................................................................................
54 49
U.S.C. 20103.
CFR 1.89(a).
56 U.S. Small Business Administration, ‘‘Table of
Small Business Size Standards Matched to North
American Industry Classification System Codes,’’
55 49
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
March 27, 2023. https://www.sba.gov/sites/sbagov/
files/2023-06/Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_
Effective%20March%2017%2C%20
2023%20%282%29.pdf.
57 The Class III railroad revenue threshold is
$46.3 million or less, for 2022. https://
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
110,011
7,224
8,672
74,030
26,584
156,263
41,959
www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-X/
subchapter-C/part-1201.
58 See 68 FR 24891 (May 9, 2003) (codified at
appendix C to 49 CFR part 209).
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44867
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CLASS III RAILROADS—Continued
Annualized 7%
($)
Category
Certification Card ...............................................................................................................................................................................
Petitions and Hearings ......................................................................................................................................................................
3,672
6,469
Total ............................................................................................................................................................................................
434,884
The industry trade organization
representing small railroads, ASLRRA,
reports the average freight revenue per
Class III railroad is $4.75 million.59 The
following table summarizes the average
annual cost and revenue for Class III
railroads.
ANNUAL CLASS III RAILROADS’ COST AND REVENUE
Total costs for all Class III railroads,
annualized 7 percent
($)
Number of Class III
railroads impacted
by final rule
Average annual cost
per Class III railroad
($)
Average Class III railroad
annual revenue
($)
Average annual
cost as percent
of revenue
a
b
c=a÷b
d
e=c÷d
434,884
535
813
4,750,000
0.02%
The estimated average annual cost for
a Class III railroad is $813. This
represents a small percentage (0.02%) of
the average annual revenue for a Class
III railroad.
6. A Description of the Steps the Agency
Has Taken To Minimize the Economic
Impact on Small Entities
This final rule requires railroads to
develop a signal employee certification
program. Small railroads may use a
template of a certification program
developed by ALSRRA to comply with
the final rule. Therefore, the burden on
small entities is mostly for certifying
signal employees. Many small railroads
contract signal employee service to a
third party. Signal employees will be
CFR
Section
Respondent
universe
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
246.9—Waivers—Petitions .............................
246.101/.103—Certification program required
and FRA review of certification program—
Development of signal employee certification program in accordance with this part
and procedures contained under § 246.106
(Note: Each certification program includes
procedure requirements under § 246.111
through § 246.124.).
—(d)(1) Signal employees certification submission—Copies of the program provided
to the president of each rail labor organization (RLO) that represents the railroad’s
employees that are subject to this part.
—(d)(2) Affirmative statements that the railroad has provided a copy of the program
to RLOs.
18:38 May 20, 2024
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements for part 246 are being
submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.60
This submission reflects adjustments in
response to comments on program
development costs discussed above.
These changes impacted the paperwork
burden under 49 CFR 246.101 and
246.103. The adjustments increased the
burden from 7,682 hours to 10,726
hours since the NPRM publication. This
table contains new information
collection requirements, and the
estimated time to fulfill each
requirement is as follows:
Total annual
responses
Average time
per responses
Total annual
burden hours
Wage
rate
Total cost
equivalent
(A)
(B)
(C) = A * B
(D) 1
(E) = C * D
553 railroads ........... 10.00 petition ...............
553 railroads +
182.66 plans (14 Class
ASLRRA and
I and commuter railholding companies.
roads plans + 0.33
generic program developed by ASLRRA
and holding companies plans + 168.33
Class II and III railroads plans).
553 railroads ........... 2 copies ........................
3 hours ....................
120 hours + 550
hours + 15 hours.
30.00
6,204.78
$77.44
115.24
$2,323.20
715,038.85
15 minutes ...............
.50
77.44
38.72
553 railroads ...........
15 minutes ...............
.50
77.44
38.72
59 American Short Line and Regional Railroad
Association, Short Line and Regional Railroad Facts
and Figures, p. 10 (2017 pamphlet).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
required to be certified by each railroad
that they work for, but the contractor
may be involved in the process which
would lessen the burden on individual
short line railroads.
FRA has allowed Class III railroads
additional time to develop their
certification programs. Class III railroads
will have 16 months after the effective
date of the final rule to submit a
certification program, whereas Class I
railroads must submit a plan within 8
months. FRA will also not require Class
III railroads to conduct annual reporting
as required by § 246.215 Railroad
Oversight Responsibilities.
Jkt 262001
60 44
PO 00000
2 affirmative statements
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44868
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
CFR
Section
Respondent
universe
Total annual
responses
Average time
per responses
Total annual
burden hours
Wage
rate
Total cost
equivalent
(A)
(B)
(C) = A * B
(D) 1
(E) = C * D
31 comments ...............
4 hours ....................
—(e) Comment Period—Affirmed comments
on a railroad’s program by any designated
representative of employees subject to this
part or any directly affected employee who
does not have a designated representative.
553 railroads ...........
—(g) Material Modifications of FRA-approved
program—Railroad to submit a description
of how it intends to modify the program
and a copy of the modified program to
FRA.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
—(h) Resubmission—Railroad can resubmit
its program or material modification as described in paragraph (f)(2) of this section
after addressing all of the deficiencies
noted by FRA and the resubmission must
conform with the procedures and requirements contained in § 246.106.
553 railroads ...........
—(i) Rescinding Prior Approval of Program—
Railroad to resubmit its certification program and the program must conform with
the procedures and requirements contained in § 246.106.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
246.105(c)(1) and (d)(1)—Implementation
schedule for certification programs—Designation of certified signal employee.
—(c)(2) and (d)(2) Issue a certificate that
complies with § 246.207 to each person
that it designates.
553 railroads ...........
3,781 designated lists ..
5 minutes .................
553 railroads ...........
3,781 issued certificates.
3 minutes .................
—(f) Written requests for delayed certification—Railroad may wait to recertify the
person making the request until the end of
the three-year period after FRA has approved the railroad’s certification program.
FRA anticipates zero submissions.
—(g) Testing and evaluation—Railroad shall
only certify or recertify a person as a signal
employee if that person has been tested
and evaluated in accordance with procedures that comply with subpart B of this
part.
The paperwork burden for testing and evaluation is included in the economic burden and the burden for certificates is
included under § 246.105.
246.106—Requirements for Certification Programs—Procedures for Submission and
Approval of Signal Employee Certification
Programs.
The paperwork requirements described in this section are accounted for throughout this table.
246.109(a)—Determinations required for certification and recertification—Eligibility requirements.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.111 through § 246.121 and § 246.303.
246.111(a) through (c)—Prior safety conduct
as motor vehicle operator—Eligibility requirements of this section involving prior
conduct as a motor vehicle operator.
—(e) If driver information is not obtained as
required pursuant to paragraph (g) of this
section, that person or the railroad certifying or recertifying that person may petition for a waiver in accordance with the
provisions of part 211 of this chapter.
553 railroads ...........
1,706 motor vehicle
records.
5 minutes .................
142.17
77.44
11,009.64
553 railroads ...........
2 waivers ......................
2 hours ....................
4.00
77.44
309.76
—(f) Individual’s duty—Consent to make information concerning driving record available to that railroad.
This is usual and customary procedure. The consent form is signed at the time of hiring to make driving information
available to the railroad.
—(g) and (h) Request to obtain driver’s license information from licensing agency.
553 railroads ...........
—(i) Requests for additional information from
licensing agency.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is included under § 246.111(g)–(h).
—(j) Notification to railroad by persons of
never having a license.
553 railroads ...........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
3.67 revised plans
Class I and commuter railroads.
2 notices .......................
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
77.44
9,602.56
77.44
5,684.10
315.08
77.44
24,399.80
189.05
77.44
14,640.03
20 hours ..................
1,706 written requests
I
124.00
73.40
5 minutes .................
I
10 minutes ...............
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
142.17
.33
I
21MYR3
59.00
I
77.44
8,388.03
I
25.56
44869
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
CFR
Section
Respondent
universe
Total annual
responses
Average time
per responses
Total annual
burden hours
Wage
rate
Total cost
equivalent
(A)
(B)
(C) = A * B
(D) 1
(E) = C * D
—(k) Report of motor vehicle incidents described in paragraphs (m)(1) and (2) of this
section to the employing railroad within 48
hours.
—(l) and (m) Evaluation of person’s driving
record by railroad.
—(n)(1) DAC referral by railroad after report
of driving drug/alcohol incident.
—(n)(2) DAC request and supply by persons
of prior counseling or treatment.
—(n)(3) Conditional certifications recommended by DAC.
553 railroads ...........
40 self-reports ..............
10 minutes ...............
6.67
77.44
516.52
553 railroads ...........
1,706 motor vehicle
record evaluations.
36 DAC referrals ..........
5 minutes .................
142.17
71.89
10,220.60
5 minutes .................
3.00
115.24
345.72
1 request and supplied
record.
3 conditional certification recommendations.
30 minutes ...............
.50
115.24
57.62
4 hours ....................
12.00
115.24
1,382.88
246.113(b)—Prior safety conduct as an employee of a different railroad—Certification
candidate has not been employed by any
other railroad in the previous five years,
they do not have to submit a request in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section,
but they must notify the railroad of this fact
in accordance with procedures established
by the railroad in its certification program.
This is usual and customary procedure and therefore there is no paperwork burden.
—(c) Person seeking certification or recertification under this part shall submit a written
request to each railroad that employed the
person within the previous five years.
—(e) Railroad shall provide the information
requested to the railroad designated in the
written request.
553 railroads ...........
43.00 requests .............
15 minutes ...............
10.75
77.44
832.48
553 railroads ...........
43.00 records ...............
15 minutes ...............
10.75
77.44
832.48
—(f) An explanation shall state why the railroad cannot provide the information within
the requested time frame or cannot provide
the requested information.
FRA anticipates zero submissions.
246.115(a)—Substance abuse disorders and
alcohol drug rules compliance—Determination that person meets eligibility requirements.
—(b) Written documents from DAC that person is not affected by a disorder.
—(c)(3) Fitness requirement—Voluntary selfreferral by signal employee for substance
abuse counseling or treatment under the
policy required by § 219.1001 of this chapter.
—(d)(1) and (2) Prior alcohol/drug conduct;
Federal rule compliance.
—(d)(3)(i) Written determination that most recent incident has occurred.
—(d)(3)(ii) Notification to person that recertification has been denied or certification suspended.
—(d)(4) Persons/conductors waiving investigation/de-certifications.
246.117(a) through (c)—Visual acuity—Determination visual acuity standards met—
Medical examiner certificate/record.
—(d)(1) Request for retest and another medical evaluation—Medical examiner certificate/record.
—(d)(2) Railroad to provide a copy of this
part to medical examiner.
—(d)(3) Consultations by medical examiners
with railroad officer and issue of conditional
certification.
—(g) Notification by certified signal employee
of deterioration of vision.
246.118(a) through (c)—Hearing acuity—Determination hearing standards met—Medical records.
—(d)(1) Request for retest and another medical evaluation—Medical examiner certificate/record.
—(d)(2) Railroad to provide a copy of this
part to medical examiner.
553 railroads ...........
1,535 determinations ...
2 minutes .................
51.17
77.40
3,960.56
553 railroads ...........
79 filed documents .......
30 minutes ...............
39.50
115.24
4,551.98
553 railroads ...........
2 self-referrals ..............
10 minutes ...............
.33
115.24
38.03
553 railroads ...........
1,535 certification reviews.
30 written determinations.
30 notifications .............
10 minutes ...............
255.83
115.24
29,481.85
1 hour ......................
30.00
115.24
3,457.20
30 minutes ...............
15.00
77.44
1,161.60
10 minutes ...............
3.33
77.44
257.88
553 railroads ...........
20 waived investigations.
400 records ..................
2 minutes .................
13.33
71.89
958.29
553 railroads ...........
10 records ....................
2 minutes .................
.33 hours
$71.89
$23.72
553 railroads ...........
400 copies ....................
5 minutes .................
33.33
71.89
2,396.09
553 railroads ...........
5 consultations + 5 conditional certifications.
30 minutes + 10
minutes.
3.33
71.89
239.39
553 railroads ...........
1 notification .................
10 minutes ...............
.17
71.89
12.22
553 railroads ...........
400 medical records ....
2 minutes .................
13.33
71.89
958.29
553 railroads ...........
10 records ....................
2 minutes .................
.33
71.89
23.72
553 railroads ...........
400 copies ....................
5 minutes .................
33.33
71.89
2,396.09
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44870
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
CFR
Section
Respondent
universe
Average time
per responses
Total annual
burden hours
Wage
rate
Total cost
equivalent
(A)
(B)
(C) = A * B
(D) 1
(E) = C * D
—(d)(3) Consultations by medical examiners
with railroad officer and issue of conditional
certification.
—(g) Notification by certified signal employee
of deterioration of hearing.
553 railroads ...........
5 consultations + 5 conditional certifications.
30 minutes + 10
minutes.
3.33
71.89
239.39
553 railroads ...........
25 notifications .............
10 minutes ...............
4.17
71.89
299.78
246.119(b)—Training requirements—A railroad’s election for the training of signal employees shall be stated in its certification
program.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.101/.103.
—(c) Initial training program for previously
untrained person to be a signal employee.
553 railroads ...........
553.00 hours
115.24
63,727.72
—(c)(3) Modification to training program
when new safety-related railroad laws, regulations and etc. are introduced into the
workplace.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
—(d) Relevant information or materials on
safety or other rules made available to certification candidates.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.101/.103.
—(e) Completion of initial training program by 553 railroads ...........
a previously untrained person being certified as a signal employee—Written documentation showing person completed training program and demonstrated qualification.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Total annual
responses
184 training programs ..
3,781 written documents or records.
3 hours ....................
10 minutes ...............
630.17
77.44
48,800.36
500.00
71.89
35,945.00
—(f) Completion of training program, demonstration of knowledge, on-the-job proficiency, and qualification—Written documentation for each signal employee certified by the railroad.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.119.
—(h) Familiarization training for signal employees of acquiring railroad from selling
company/railroad prior to commencement
of new operation.
FRA anticipates zero submissions.
—(i) Continuing education of certified signal
employees.
553 railroads ...........
246.120—Requirements for qualification
—Determining eligibility.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.119.
—(b) Notification by persons not qualified on
the signal system.
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.119.
246.121(a) through (c)—Knowledge testing—
Determining eligibility.
—(d) Reexamination of the failed test ............
246.123(d)—Monitoring operational performance—Unannounced compliance tests—
Retention of a written record.
553 railroads ...........
2,000 test records ........
5 minutes .................
166.67
77.44
12,906.92
553 railroads ...........
553 railroads ...........
20 examination records
7,348 records ...............
5 minutes .................
2 minutes .................
1.67
244.93
77.44
77.44
129.32
18,967.38
246.124—Mentoring .......................................
The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under § 246.101/.103.
246.125—Certification determinations made
by other railroads.
246.203(b)—Retaining information supporting
determination—Records.
—(g) Electronic records ..................................
553 railroads ...........
11.00 determinations ...
30 minutes ...............
5.50
77.44
425.92
553 railroads ...........
2,000 record retentions
15 minutes ...............
500.00
77.44
38,720.00
553 railroads ...........
2 amended record ........
15 minutes ...............
.50
77.44
38.72
246.205—List of certified signal employees
and recordkeeping..
The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under § 246.105(c)(1)–(d)(1).
246.207 (a) through (e)—Certificate requirements.
The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under § 246.105(c)(2)–(d)(2).
—(f) and (g) Replacement of certificates .......
553 railroads ...........
—(h) Notification by signal employees that
railroad request to serve exceeds certification.
246.213(c) through (h)—Multiple Certificates—Notification of denial of certification
or recertification by individuals holding multiple certifications.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
2,000 training records ..
15 minutes ...............
5 minutes .................
3.75
77.44
290.40
553 railroads ...........
45 replacement certificates.
110 notifications ...........
30 seconds ..............
.92
71.89
66.14
553 railroads ...........
3 notifications ...............
10 minutes ...............
.50
77.44
38.72
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44871
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
CFR
Section
Respondent
universe
Total annual
responses
Average time
per responses
Total annual
burden hours
Wage
rate
Total cost
equivalent
(A)
(B)
(C) = A * B
(D) 1
(E) = C * D
—(i) In lieu of issuing multiple certificates, a
railroad may issue one certificate to a person who is certified in multiple crafts.
The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under § 246.105.
246.215—Railroad oversight responsibilities—Review and analysis of administration of certification program.
—(d) Report of findings and conclusions
reached during annual review by railroad (if
requested in writing by FRA, RLO president, or certified signal employee not represented by a labor organization) review
and analysis effort.
246.301(a)—Denial of certification—Notification to candidate of information and provision of documents that form basis for denying certification and candidate response.
—(b) Denial Decision Requirements—Written
notification of denial of certification or recertification by railroad to candidate.
246.307(b)(1) through (5)—Process for revoking certification—Immediate suspension
of signal employee’s certification, notifications, and provision of written information
and list of witnesses.
553 railroads ...........
17.33 annual reviews
and analyses.
8 hours ....................
138.64
115.24
15,976.87
553 railroads ...........
2 reports .......................
4 hours ....................
8.00
115.24
921.92
553 railroads ...........
6 notices + 3 responses
1 hour ......................
9.00
77.44
696.96
553 railroads ...........
6 notifications ...............
1 hour ......................
6.00 hours
77.44
464.64
553 railroads ...........
15 suspended certification letters and
documentations.
30 minutes ...............
7.50
77.44
580.80
—(b)(6) Determinations based on the record
of the hearing, whether revocation of the
certification is warranted.
The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under § 246.307(e).
—(b)(8) Retention of record of the hearing for
three years after the date the decision is
rendered.
—(d)(9) Hearing Procedures—Written waiver
of right to hearing.
—(e) Revocation Decision Requirements—
Written decisions by railroad official.
553 railroads ...........
15 records ....................
15 minutes ...............
3.75
77.44
290.40
553 railroads ...........
3 written waivers ..........
10 minutes ...............
.50
59.00
29.50
553 railroads ...........
15 written decisions
and service of decisions.
3 revoked certifications
2 hours ....................
30.00
115.24
3,457.20
10 minutes ...............
.50
115.24
57.62
3.00
77.44
232.32
—(g) Revocation of certification based on in- 553 railroads ...........
formation that another railroad has done so.
—(j) Placing relevant information in record if
sufficient evidence meeting the criteria in
paragraph (h) or (i) of this section becomes
available.
The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under § 246.307(b)(7).
—(k) Good faith determination .......................
553 railroads ...........
Subpart E—Dispute Resolution Procedures—
§ 246.401 through § 246.411.
The requirements under these provisions are exempted from the PRA under 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2). Since these provisions pertain to an administrative action or investigation, there is no PRA burden associated with these requirements.
Appendix A to part 246—Procedures for Obtaining and Evaluating Motor Vehicle Driving Record Data.
The paperwork requirements described in this appendix are accounted for throughout this table.
Appendix B to part 246—Medical Standards
Guidelines.
The paperwork requirements described in this appendix are accounted for throughout this table.
Totals 2 .....................................................
3 good faith determinations.
553 railroads +
35,571 responses ........
ASLRRA and
holding companies.
1 hour ......................
N/A ..........................
10,726
N/A
1,098,908
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
1 Throughout the tables in this document, the dollar equivalent cost is derived from the 2020 Surface Transportation Board’s Full Year Wage A&B data series using
the appropriate employee group hourly wage rate that includes 75-percent overhead charges.
2 Totals may not add due to rounding.
All estimates include the time for
reviewing instructions; searching
existing data sources; gathering or
maintaining the needed data; and
reviewing the information. For
information or a copy of the paperwork
package submitted to OMB, contact Ms.
Arlette Mussington, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, at email:
arlette.mussington@dot.gov or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
telephone: 571–609–1285, or Ms. Joanne
Swafford, Information Collection
Clearance Officer, at email:
joanne.swafford@dot.gov or telephone:
at 757–897–9908.
OMB is required to decide concerning
the collection of information
requirements contained in this final rule
between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Federal Register. Therefore, a comment
to OMB is best assured of having its full
effect if OMB receives it within 30 days
of publication of this document. FRA is
not authorized to impose a penalty on
persons for violating information
collection requirements that do not
display a current OMB control number,
if required. The current OMB control
number for this rule is 2130–0638.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44872
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
D. Federalism Implications
Executive Order 13132, Federalism,61
requires FRA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and
timely input by State and local officials
in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ are defined in
the executive order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects 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.’’ Under
Executive Order 13132, to the extent
practicable and permitted by law, the
agency may not issue a regulation with
federalism implications that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs and
that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal Government provides the
funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and
local governments, the agency consults
with State and local governments, or the
agency consults with State and local
government officials early in the process
of developing the regulation. National
action limiting the policymaking
discretion of the States shall be taken
only where there is constitutional and
statutory authority for the action and the
national activity is appropriate in light
of the presence of a problem of national
significance. Where there are significant
uncertainties as to whether national
action is authorized or appropriate,
agencies shall consult with appropriate
State and local officials to determine
whether Federal objectives can be
attained by other means.
FRA has analyzed this final rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132. FRA has determined that this
final rule has no federalism
implications, other than the possible
preemption of State laws under 49
U.S.C. 20106. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements
of Executive Order 13132 do not apply,
and preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement for the rule
is not required.
E. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 62
prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. Legitimate domestic
objectives, such as safety, are not
61 64
62 19
FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999).
U.S.C. Ch. 13.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
considered unnecessary obstacles. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards. This final rule is purely
domestic in nature and is not expected
to affect trade opportunities for U.S.
firms doing business overseas or for
foreign firms doing business in the
United States.
F. Environmental Assessment
FRA has evaluated this final rule
consistent with the National
Environmental Policy Act 63 (NEPA), the
Council of Environmental Quality’s
NEPA implementing regulations,64 and
FRA’s NEPA implementing
regulations 65 and determined that it is
categorically excluded from
environmental review and therefore
does not require the preparation of an
environmental assessment (EA) or
environmental impact statement (EIS).
Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions
identified in an agency’s NEPA
implementing regulations that do not
normally have a significant impact on
the environment and therefore do not
require either an EA or EIS.66
Specifically, FRA has determined that
this rule is categorically excluded from
detailed environmental review.67
The main purpose of this rulemaking
is to establish certification requirements
for signal employees. This final rule will
not directly or indirectly impact any
environmental resources and will not
result in significantly increased
emissions of air or water pollutants or
noise. In analyzing the applicability of
a CE, FRA must also consider whether
unusual circumstances are present that
would warrant a more detailed
environmental review.68 FRA has
concluded that no such unusual
circumstances exist with respect to this
regulation and the final rule meets the
requirements for categorical
exclusion.69
Pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act and
its implementing regulations, FRA has
determined this undertaking has no
potential to affect historic properties.70
FRA has also determined that this
63 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
CFR parts 1500 through 1508.
65 23 CFR part 771.
66 40 CFR 1508.4.
67 See 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15) (categorically
excluding ‘‘[p]romulgation of rules, the issuance of
policy statements, the waiver or modification of
existing regulatory requirements, or discretionary
approvals that do not result in significantly
increased emissions of air or water pollutants or
noise’’).
68 23 CFR 771.116(b).
69 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15).
70 See 54 U.S.C. 306108.
64 40
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
rulemaking does not approve a project
resulting in a use of a resource protected
by Section 4(f).71 Further, FRA reviewed
this rule and found it consistent with
Executive Order 14008, ‘‘Tackling the
Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.’’
G. Environmental Justice
Executive Order 14096, ‘‘Revitalizing
Our Nation’s Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All,’’ which
expands on Executive Order 12898,
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations,’’ requires DOT agencies to
achieve environmental justice as part of
their mission by identifying 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 environmental justice
concerns. DOT Order 5610.2C (‘‘U.S.
Department of Transportation Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’) instructs DOT agencies to
address compliance with Executive
Order 12898 and requirements within
the DOT Order 5610.2C in rulemaking
activities, as appropriate, and also
requires consideration of the benefits of
transportation programs, policies, and
other activities where minority
populations and low-income
populations benefit, at a minimum, to
the same level as the general population
as a whole when determining impacts
on minority and low-income
populations.72 FRA has evaluated this
final rule under Executive Orders 14096
and 12898 and DOT Order 5610.2C and
has determined it will not cause
disproportionate and adverse human
health and environmental effects on
communities with environmental justice
concerns.
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
Under section 201 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995,73 each
Federal agency ‘‘shall, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, assess the effects of
Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and tribal governments, and the
private sector (other than to the extent
that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in
law).’’ Section 202 of the Act 74 further
71 See DOT Act of 1966, as amended (Pub. L. 89–
670, 80 Stat. 931); 49 U.S.C. 303.
72 Executive Order 14096 is not currently
referenced in DOT Order 5610.2C.
73 Public Law 104–4, 2 U.S.C. 1531.
74 2 U.S.C. 1532.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
requires that ‘‘before promulgating any
general notice of proposed rulemaking
that is likely to result in promulgation
of any rule that includes any Federal
mandate that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
1 year, and before promulgating any
final rule for which a general notice of
proposed rulemaking was published,
the agency shall prepare a written
statement’’ detailing the effect on State,
local, and tribal governments and the
private sector. This final rule will not
result in the expenditure, in the
aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more (as
adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year, and thus preparation of such
a statement is not required.
I. Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use,’’ requires Federal
agencies to prepare a Statement of
Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant
energy action.’’ 75 FRA evaluated this
final rule under Executive Order 13211
and determined that this regulatory
action is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ within the meaning of Executive
Order 13211.
J. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
FRA has evaluated this rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments, dated
November 6, 2000. This rule will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian Tribes, will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian Tribal governments, and will not
preempt Tribal laws. Therefore, the
funding and consultation requirements
of Executive Order 13175 do not apply,
and a Tribal summary impact statement
is not required.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 246
Administrative practice and
procedure, Signal employee, Penalties,
Railroad employees, Railroad safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Rule
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, FRA amends chapter II,
subtitle B, of title 49 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, by adding part 246
to read as follows:
■
75 66
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
PART 246—CERTIFICATION OF
SIGNAL EMPLOYEES
CFR 1.89; and Pub. L. 110–432, sec. 402, 122
Stat. 4884.
Sec.
Subpart A—General
Subpart A—General
246.1 Purpose and scope.
246.3 Application and responsibility for
compliance.
246.5 Effect and construction.
246.7 Definitions.
246.9 Waivers.
246.11 Penalties and consequences for
noncompliance.
§ 246.1
Subpart B—Program and Eligibility
Requirements
246.101 Certification program required.
246.103 FRA review of certification
programs.
246.105 Implementation schedule for
certification programs.
246.106 Requirements for certification
programs.
246.107 Signal service classifications.
246.109 Determinations required for
certification and recertification.
246.111 Prior safety conduct as motor
vehicle operator.
246.113 Prior safety conduct with other
railroads.
246.115 Substance abuse disorders and
alcohol drug rules compliance.
246.117 Visual acuity.
246.118 Hearing acuity.
246.119 Training requirements.
246.120 Requirements for qualification.
246.121 Knowledge testing.
246.123 Monitoring operational
performance.
246.124 Mentoring.
246.125 Certification determinations made
by other railroads.
Subpart C—Administration of the
Certification Program
246.201 Time limitations for certification.
246.203 Retaining information supporting
determinations.
246.205 List of certified signal employees
and recordkeeping.
246.207 Certificate requirements.
246.213 Multiple certifications.
246.215 Railroad oversight responsibilities.
Subpart D—Denial and Revocation of
Certification
246.301 Process for denying certification.
246.303 Criteria for revoking certification.
246.305 Periods of ineligibility.
246.307 Process for revoking certification.
Subpart E—Dispute Resolution Procedures
246.401 Review board established.
246.403 Petition requirements.
246.405 Processing certification review
petitions.
246.407 Request for a hearing.
246.409 Hearings.
246.411 Appeals.
Appendix A to Part 246—Procedures for
Obtaining and Evaluating Motor Vehicle
Driving Record Data
Appendix B to Part 246—Medical Standards
Guidelines
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20162,
21301, 21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 49
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
Jkt 262001
44873
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this part is to
ensure that only those persons who
meet minimum Federal safety standards
serve as certified signal employees, to
reduce the rate and number of accidents
and incidents, and to improve railroad
safety.
(b) This part prescribes minimum
Federal safety standards for the
eligibility, training, testing, certification
and monitoring of all signal employees
to whom it applies. This part does not
restrict a railroad from adopting and
enforcing additional or more stringent
requirements consistent with this part.
(c) The signal employee certification
requirements prescribed in this part
apply to any person who meets the
definition of signal employee contained
in § 246.7, regardless of the fact that the
person may have a job classification title
other than that of signal employee.
§ 246.3 Application and responsibility for
compliance.
(a) This part applies to all railroads,
except:
(1) Railroads that do not have a signal
system as defined in § 246.7;
(2) Railroads that operate only on
track inside an installation that is not
part of the general railroad system of
transportation (i.e., plant railroads, as
defined in § 246.7);
(3) Tourist, scenic, historic, or
excursion operations that are not part of
the general railroad system of
transportation as defined in § 246.7; or
(4) Rapid transit operations in an
urban area that are not connected to the
general railroad system of
transportation.
(b) Although the duties imposed by
this part are generally stated in terms of
the duty of a railroad, each person, as
defined in § 246.7, who performs any
function required by this part must
perform that function in accordance
with this part.
§ 246.5
Effect and construction.
(a) FRA does not intend, by use of the
term signal employee in this part, to
alter the terms, conditions, or
interpretation of existing collective
bargaining agreements that employ
other job classification titles when
identifying a person who is engaged in
installing, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of railroad signal
systems and signal-related technology.
(b) FRA does not intend by issuance
of these regulations to alter the authority
of a railroad to initiate disciplinary
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44874
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
sanctions against its employees,
including managers and supervisors, in
the normal and customary manner,
including those contained in its
collective bargaining agreements.
(c) Except as provided in § 246.213,
nothing in this part shall be construed
to create or prohibit an eligibility or
entitlement to employment in other
service for the railroad as a result of
denial, suspension, or revocation of
certification under this part.
(d) Nothing in this part shall be
deemed to abridge any additional
procedural rights or remedies not
inconsistent with this part that are
available to the employee under a
collective bargaining agreement, the
Railway Labor Act, or (with respect to
employment at will) at common law
with respect to removal from service or
other adverse action taken as a
consequence of this part.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.7
Definitions.
As used in this part:
Administrator means the
Administrator of the FRA or the
Administrator’s delegate.
Alcohol means ethyl alcohol (ethanol)
and includes use or possession of any
beverage, mixture, or preparation
containing ethyl alcohol.
Contractor means a person under
contract with a railroad, including but
not limited to, a prime contractor or a
subcontractor.
Controlled substance has the meaning
assigned by 21 U.S.C. 802 and includes
all substances listed on Schedules I
through V as they may be revised from
time to time (21 CFR parts 1301 through
1316).
Disable means to render a device or
system incapable of proper and effective
action or to materially impair the
functioning of that device or system.
Drug means any substance (other than
alcohol) that has known mind or
function-altering effects on a human
subject, specifically including any
psychoactive substance and including,
but not limited to, controlled
substances.
Drug and alcohol counselor (DAC)
means a person who meets the
credentialing and qualification
requirements of a ‘‘Substance Abuse
Professional’’ (SAP), as provided in 49
CFR part 40.
File, filed, and filing mean submission
of a document under this part on the
date when the Docket Clerk receives it,
or if sent by mail, the date mailing was
completed.
FRA means the Federal Railroad
Administration.
FRA representative means the FRA
Associate Administrator for Railroad
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Safety/Chief Safety Officer and the
Associate Administrator’s delegate,
including any safety inspector
employed by the Federal Railroad
Administration and any qualified State
railroad safety inspector acting under
part 212 of this chapter.
Ineligible or ineligibility means that a
person is legally disqualified from
serving as a certified signal employee.
The term covers a number of
circumstances in which a person may
not serve as a certified signal employee.
Revocation of certification pursuant to
§ 246.307 and denial of certification
pursuant to § 246.301 are two examples
in which a person would be ineligible
to serve as a certified signal employee.
A period of ineligibility may end when
a condition or conditions are met, such
as when a person meets the conditions
to serve as a certified signal employee
following an alcohol or drug violation
pursuant to § 246.115.
Knowingly means having actual
knowledge of the facts giving rise to the
violation or that a reasonable person
acting in the circumstances, exercising
due care, would have had such
knowledge.
Medical examiner means a person
licensed as a doctor of medicine or
doctor of osteopathy. A medical
examiner can be a qualified full-time
salaried employee of a railroad, a
qualified practitioner who contracts
with the railroad on a fee-for-service or
other basis, or a qualified practitioner
designated by the railroad to perform
functions in connection with medical
evaluations of employees. As used in
this rule, the medical examiner owes a
duty to make an honest and fully
informed evaluation of the condition of
an individual.
Mentor means a certified signal
employee who has at least one year of
experience as a certified signal
employee. For purposes of this part, a
mentor provides direct and immediate
supervision over the work of one or
more signal employees.
On-the-job training means job training
that occurs in the workplace, i.e., the
employee learns the job while doing the
job.
Person means an entity of any type
covered under 1 U.S.C. 1, including but
not limited to the following: a railroad;
a manager, supervisor, official, or other
employee or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any independent contractor or
subcontractor providing goods or
services to a railroad; and any employee
of such owner, manufacturer, lessor,
lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Physical characteristics means the
actual track profile of and physical
location for points within a specific
yard or route that affect the movement
of a locomotive or train. Physical
characteristics includes how signal
systems and related technology are
deployed within the territory, for
purposes of this part.
Plant railroad means a plant or
installation that owns or leases a
locomotive, uses that locomotive to
switch cars throughout the plant or
installation, and is moving goods solely
for use in the facility’s own industrial
processes. The plant or installation
could include track immediately
adjacent to the plant or installation if
the plant railroad leases the track from
the general system railroad and the lease
provides for (and actual practice entails)
the exclusive use of that trackage by the
plant railroad and the general system
railroad for purposes of moving only
cars shipped to or from the plant. A
plant or installation that operates a
locomotive to switch or move cars for
other entities, even if solely within the
confines of the plant or installation,
rather than for its own purposes or
industrial processes, will not be
considered a plant railroad because the
performance of such activity makes the
operation part of the general railroad
system of transportation.
Qualified means a person who has
successfully completed all instruction,
training and examination programs
required by the railroad, and the
applicable parts of this chapter and that
the person therefore may reasonably be
expected to be proficient on all safety
related tasks the person is assigned to
perform.
Qualified instructor means a person
who has demonstrated, pursuant to the
railroad’s written program, an adequate
knowledge of the subjects under
instruction and, where applicable, has
the necessary signal experience to
effectively instruct in the field, and has
the following qualifications:
(1) Is a certified signal employee
under this part; and
(2) Has been selected as such by a
designated railroad officer, in
concurrence with the designated
employee representative, where present;
or
(3) In the absence of concurrence
provided in paragraph (2) of this
definition, has a minimum of 12 months
service working as a signal employee.
If a railroad does not have designated
employee representation, then a person
employed by the railroad need not
comply with paragraph (2) or (3) of this
definition to be a qualified instructor.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Railroad means any form of
nonhighway ground transportation that
runs on rails or electromagnetic
guideways and any entity providing
such transportation, including:
(1) Commuter or other short-haul
railroad passenger service in a
metropolitan or suburban area and
commuter railroad service that was
operated by the Consolidated Rail
Corporation on January 1, 1979; and
(2) High speed ground transportation
systems that connect metropolitan areas,
without regard to whether those systems
use new technologies not associated
with traditional railroads; but does not
include rapid transit operations in an
urban area that are not connected to the
general railroad system of
transportation.
Railroad officer means any
supervisory employee of a railroad.
Serve or service, in the context of
serving documents, has the meaning
given in Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure as amended. Similarly,
the computation of time provisions in
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure as amended are also
applicable in this part. See also the
definition of ‘‘filing’’ in this section.
Signal employee means, for purposes
of this part, a person who is engaged in
installing, troubleshooting, testing,
repairing, or maintaining railroad signal
systems or related technology.
Signal instructor means, for purposes
of this part, a person who has
demonstrated, pursuant to the railroad’s
written signal employee certification
program, an adequate knowledge of the
subject matter under instruction and has
the necessary experience to effectively
provide formal training of the subject
matter.
Signal system, for purposes of this
part, includes software and equipment
for the following: block signal systems,
cab signal systems, train control
systems, positive train control systems,
highway-rail and pathway grade
crossing warning systems, unusual
contingency detection devices, powerassisted switches, broken rail detection
systems, switch point indicators, as well
as other safety-related devices,
appliances, technology, and systems
installed on the railroad in signaled or
non-signaled territory.
Substance abuse disorder refers to a
psychological or physical dependence
on alcohol or a drug, or another
identifiable and treatable mental or
physical disorder involving the abuse of
alcohol or drugs as a primary
manifestation. A substance abuse
disorder is ‘‘active’’ within the meaning
of this part if the person is currently
using alcohol or other drugs, except
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
under medical supervision consistent
with the restrictions described in
§ 219.103 of this chapter or has failed to
successfully complete primary
treatment or successfully participate in
aftercare as directed by a DAC or SAP.
Substance Abuse Professional (SAP)
means a person who meets the
qualifications of a substance abuse
professional, as provided in 49 CFR part
40.
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operations that are not part of the
general railroad system of
transportation means a tourist, scenic,
historic, or excursion operation
conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose (i.e., there
is no freight, intercity passenger, or
commuter passenger railroad operation
on the track).
Unusual contingency detection device
means a device used in the detection of
defective conditions on locomotives and
rolling stock (e.g., high-wide load, hot or
defective bearing, defective wheel
detectors) or other unsafe environmental
conditions (e.g., high-water, high wind,
sliding or slumping soil, rock or snow
slide detectors). These devices need not
be connected to a signal system for this
part to apply.
§ 246.9
Waivers.
(a) A person subject to a requirement
of this part may petition FRA for a
waiver of compliance with such
requirement. The filing of such a
petition does not affect that person’s
responsibility for compliance with that
requirement while the petition is being
considered.
(b) Each petition for a waiver under
this section must be filed in the manner
and contain the information required by
part 211 of this chapter.
(c) If FRA finds that a waiver of
compliance is in the public interest and
is consistent with railroad safety, FRA
may grant the waiver subject to any
conditions FRA deems necessary.
§ 246.11 Penalties and consequences for
noncompliance.
(a) Any person, as defined in § 246.7,
who violates any requirement of this
part or causes the violation of any such
requirement is subject to a civil penalty
of at least the minimum civil monetary
penalty and not more than the ordinary
maximum civil monetary penalty per
violation. However, penalties may be
assessed against individuals only for
willful violations, and a penalty not to
exceed the aggravated maximum civil
monetary penalty per violation may be
assessed, where:
(1) A grossly negligent violation, or a
pattern of repeated violations, has
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44875
created an imminent hazard of death or
injury to persons, or
(2) A death or injury has occurred.
See 49 CFR part 209, appendix A.
(b) Each day a violation continues
constitutes a separate offense.
(c) A person who violates any
requirement of this part or causes the
violation of any such requirement may
be subject to disqualification from all
safety-sensitive service in accordance
with part 209 of this chapter.
(d) A person who knowingly and
willfully falsifies a record or report
required by this part may be subject to
criminal penalties under 49 U.S.C.
21311.
(e) In addition to the enforcement
methods referred to in paragraphs (a)
through (d) of this section, FRA may
address violations of this part by use of
the emergency order, compliance order,
and/or injunctive provisions of the
Federal rail safety laws.
(f) FRA’s website at https://
railroads.dot.gov/ contains a schedule of
civil penalty amounts used in
connection with this part.
Subpart B—Program and Eligibility
Requirements
§ 246.101
Certification program required.
(a) Each railroad subject to this part
shall have a written signal employee
certification program.
(b) Each certification program shall
include all of the following:
(1) If applicable, an explanation and
discussion of the occupational
categories and subcategories of certified
signal service that comply with the
requirements in § 246.107;
(2) A procedure for evaluating prior
safety conduct as a motor vehicle
operator that complies with the criteria
established in § 246.111;
(3) A procedure for evaluating prior
safety conduct as an employee or
certified signal employee with other
railroads that complies with the criteria
established in § 246.113;
(4) A procedure for evaluating
potential substance abuse disorders and
compliance with railroad alcohol and
drug rules that complies with the
criteria established in § 246.115;
(5) A procedure for evaluating visual
and hearing acuity that complies with
the criteria established in §§ 246.117
and 246.118;
(6) A procedure for training that
complies with the criteria established in
§ 246.119;
(7) A procedure for qualifying persons
on its signal system and signal-related
technology that complies with the
criteria established in § 246.120;
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44876
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(8) A procedure for knowledge testing
that complies with the criteria
established in § 246.121;
(9) A procedure for monitoring
operational performance that complies
with the criteria established in
§ 246.123; and
(10) A procedure for mentoring
uncertified signal employees that
complies with the criteria established in
§ 246.124.
(c) Each certification program shall be
version controlled. Any change from the
previous FRA-approved version of the
certification program must be tracked.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.103 FRA review of certification
programs.
(a) Certification program submission
schedule for railroads with signal
systems in operation. With the
exception of railroads exempted by
§ 246.3(a), each railroad with a signal
system in operation as of July 22, 2024,
shall submit its signal employee
certification program to FRA, in
accordance with the procedures and
requirements contained in § 246.106,
according to the following schedule:
(1) All Class I railroads (including the
National Railroad Passenger
Corporation) and railroads providing
commuter service shall submit their
programs to FRA no later than March
17, 2025.
(2) All Class II railroads and Class III
railroads (including a switching,
terminal, or other railroad not otherwise
classified) shall submit their programs
to FRA no later than November 12,
2025.
(b) Certification program submission
for new railroads. Each railroad that
commences operations after July 22,
2024 shall submit to FRA, and obtain
FRA approval of, its written signal
employee certification program, in
accordance with the procedures and
requirements contained in § 246.106,
prior to installing, implementing, or
operating a signal system subject to this
part.
(c) Method for submitting certification
programs to FRA.
(1) Railroads must submit their
written certification programs and their
requests for FRA approval (described in
§ 246.106(a)) by emailing the program
and the request for FRA approval to
FRASIGNALCERTPROG@dot.gov.
(2) A parent company may submit a
written certification program on behalf
of one or more subsidiary railroads in
accordance with § 246.106(a).
(d) Notification requirements. Each
railroad or parent company that submits
a certification program to FRA must:
(1) Simultaneously with its
submission, provide a copy of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
program and the request for FRA
approval to the president of each labor
organization that represents the
railroad’s signal employees and to all of
the railroad’s signal employees who are
subject to this part; and
(2) Include in its submission to FRA,
a statement affirming that the railroad or
parent company has provided a copy of
the program and request for FRA
approval to the president of each labor
organization that represents the
railroad’s signal employees and to all of
the railroad’s signal employees who are
subject to this part, along with a list of
the names and email addresses of each
president of a labor organization who
was provided a copy of the program.
(e) Comment period. Any designated
representative of signal employees
subject to this part or any directly
affected person who does not have a
designated representative may comment
on a railroad’s or parent company’s
program provided that:
(1) The comment is submitted no later
than 60 days after the date the program
was submitted to FRA;
(2) The comment includes a concise
statement of the commenter’s interest in
the matter;
(3) The commenter affirms that a copy
of the comment was provided to the
railroad or parent company; and
(4) The comment was emailed to
FRASIGNALCERTPROG@dot.gov.
(f) FRA review period. Upon receipt of
a complete certification program, FRA
will commence a thorough review of the
program to ensure that it satisfies all of
the requirements under this part.
(1) If FRA determines that the
program satisfies all of the requirements
under this part, FRA will issue a letter
notifying the railroad or parent
company that its program has been
approved. Such letter will typically be
issued within 120 days of the date the
program was submitted to FRA.
(2) If FRA determines that the
program does not satisfy all of the
requirements under this part, FRA will
issue a letter notifying the railroad or
parent company that its program has
been disapproved. Such letter will
typically be issued within 120 days of
the date the program was submitted to
FRA and will identify the deficiencies
found in the program that must be
corrected before the program can be
approved. After addressing these
deficiencies, railroads and parent
companies can resubmit their programs
in accordance with paragraph (h) of this
section.
(3) If a railroad or parent company
does not receive an approval or
disapproval letter from FRA within 120
days of the date the program was
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
submitted to FRA, FRA’s decision on
the program will remain pending until
such time that FRA issues a letter either
approving or disapproving the program.
A certification program is not approved
until FRA issues a letter approving the
program.
(g) Material modifications. A railroad
or parent company that intends to make
one or more material modifications to
its FRA-approved program must submit
a request for approval (as described in
§ 246.106(a)(3)) of how it intends to
modify the program and a copy of the
modified program which indicates
changes from the last approved version.
(1) A modification is material if it
would affect the program’s conformance
with this part.
(2) The description of the
modification and the modified program
must conform with the procedures and
requirements contained in § 246.106.
(3) The process for submission and
review of material modifications shall
conform with paragraphs (c) through (f)
of this section.
(4) A railroad or parent company shall
not implement a material modification
to its program until FRA issues its
approval of the material modification in
accordance with paragraph (f)(1) of this
section.
(h) Resubmissions. If FRA
disapproves a railroad or parent
company’s program or material
modification, as described in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section, the railroad or
parent company may resubmit its
program or material modification after
addressing all of the deficiencies noted
by FRA.
(1) The resubmission must conform
with the procedures and requirements
contained in § 246.106.
(2) The process for submission and
review of resubmitted programs and
resubmitted material modifications shall
conform with paragraphs (c) through (f)
of this section.
(3) The following deadlines apply to
railroads and parent companies that
have their programs or material
modifications disapproved by FRA:
(i) For a railroad that submitted its
program pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section or a parent company that
submitted a program on behalf of one or
more subsidiary railroads pursuant to
the submission deadline in paragraph
(a) of this section, the railroad or parent
company must resubmit its program
within 30 days of the date that FRA
notified the railroad of the deficiencies
in its program. If a railroad or parent
company fails to resubmit its program
within this timeframe and continues its
rail operations, FRA may consider such
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
actions to be a failure to implement a
program.
(ii) For a railroad that submitted its
program pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this section, there is no FRA-imposed
deadline for resubmitting its program.
However, pursuant to § 246.105(b), the
railroad shall not install, implement, or
operate signal systems subject to this
part until its program has been
approved by FRA.
(iii) For a railroad or parent company
that submitted a material modification
to its FRA-approved program, there is
no FRA-imposed deadline for
resubmitting the material modification.
However, pursuant to paragraph (g)(4) of
this section, the railroad or parent
company cannot implement the material
modification until it has been approved
by FRA.
(i) Rescinding prior approval of
program. FRA reserves the right to
revisit its prior approval of a railroad or
parent company’s program at any time.
(1) If upon such review FRA discovers
deficiencies in the program, FRA shall
issue the railroad or parent company a
letter rescinding its prior approval of the
program and notifying the railroad or
parent company of the deficiencies in
its program that must be addressed.
(2) Within 30 days of FRA notifying
the railroad or parent company of the
deficiencies in its program, the railroad
or parent company must address these
deficiencies and resubmit its program to
FRA. The resubmitted program must
conform with the procedures and
requirements contained in § 246.106.
(3) The process for submission and
review of resubmitted programs under
this paragraph (i) shall conform with
paragraphs (c) through (f) of this section.
(4) If a railroad or parent company
fails to resubmit its program to FRA
within the timeframe prescribed in
paragraph (i)(2) of this section and the
railroad continues its rail operations,
FRA may consider such actions to be a
failure to implement a program.
(5) If FRA issues a letter disapproving
the railroad or parent company’s
resubmitted program, the railroad or
parent company shall resubmit its
program in accordance with this
paragraph (i).
(6) A program that has its approval
rescinded under paragraph (i)(1) of this
section may remain in effect until
whichever of the following happens
first:
(i) FRA approves the railroad or
parent company’s resubmitted program;
or
(ii) FRA disapproves the railroad or
parent company’s second attempt at
resubmitting its program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
(7) If FRA disapproves a railroad or
parent company’s second attempt at
resubmitting its program under this
paragraph and the railroad or parent
company continues its rail operations,
FRA may consider such actions to be a
failure to implement a program.
(j) Availability of Certification
Program Documents. The following
documents will be available on FRA’s
website (railroads.dot.gov):
(1) A railroad or parent company’s
originally submitted program, a
resubmission of its program, or a
material modification of its program;
(2) Any comments, submitted in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this
section, to a railroad or parent
company’s originally submitted
program, a resubmission of its program,
or a material modification of its
program; and
(3) Any approval or disapproval letter
issued by FRA in response to a railroad
or parent company’s originally
submitted program, a resubmission of
its program, or a material modification
of its program.
§ 246.105 Implementation schedule for
certification programs.
(a) Each railroad that submits its
signal employee certification program to
FRA in accordance with § 246.103(a),
may continue rail operations while it
awaits approval of its program by FRA.
However, if FRA disapproves a
railroad’s program on two occasions and
the railroad continues rail operations,
FRA may consider such actions to be a
failure to implement a program.
(b) Each railroad that submits its
signal employee certification program to
FRA in accordance with § 246.103(b),
must have its program approved by FRA
prior to installing, implementing, or
operating signal systems subject to this
part. If a railroad installs, implements,
or operates a signal system before its
program is approved by FRA, FRA may
consider such actions to be a failure to
implement a program.
(c) By March 17, 2025, each railroad
shall:
(1) In writing, designate as certified
signal employees all persons authorized
by the railroad to perform the duties of
a certified signal employee as of March
17, 2025; and
(2) Issue a certificate that complies
with § 246.207 to each person that it
designates.
(d) Between March 17, 2025 and the
date FRA approves the railroad’s
certification program, each railroad
shall:
(1) In writing, designate as a certified
signal employee any person who has
been authorized by the railroad to
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44877
perform the duties of a certified signal
employee between March 17, 2025 and
the date FRA approves the railroad’s
certification program; and
(2) Issue a certificate that complies
with § 246.207 to each person that it
designates.
(e) After March 17, 2025, no railroad
shall permit or require a person to
perform service as a certified signal
employee unless that person is a
certified signal employee.
(f) No railroad shall permit or require
a person, designated as a certified signal
employee under the provisions of
paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, to
perform service as a certified signal
employee for more than three years after
the date FRA approves the railroad’s
certification program unless that person
has been tested and evaluated in
accordance with procedures that
comply with subpart B of this part.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(f)(3) of this section, a person who has
been designated as a certified signal
employee under the provisions of
paragraph (c) or (d) of this section and
who is eligible to receive a retirement
pension in accordance with the terms of
an applicable agreement or in
accordance with the terms of the
Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. 231)
within three years from the date the
certifying railroad’s program is
approved, may request, in writing, that
a railroad not recertify that person,
pursuant to subpart B of this part, until
three years from the date the certifying
railroad’s program is approved.
(2) Upon receipt of a written request
pursuant to paragraph (f)(1) of this
section, a railroad may wait to recertify
the person making the request until the
end of the three-year period after FRA
has approved the railroad’s certification
program. If a railroad grants any request,
it must grant the request of all eligible
persons to every extent possible.
(3) A person who is subject to
recertification under part 240 or 242 of
this chapter may not make a request
pursuant to paragraph (f)(1) of this
section.
(g) After a railroad’s certification
program has been approved by FRA, the
railroad shall only certify or recertify a
person as a signal employee if that
person has been tested and evaluated in
accordance with procedures that
comply with subpart B of this part.
§ 246.106 Requirements for certification
programs.
(a) Railroad and parent company
certification program submission. (1)(i)
A railroad’s certification program
submission must include a copy of its
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44878
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
certification program and a request for
FRA approval.
(ii) Any parent company that submits
a single certification program for one or
more subsidiary railroads shall provide
a list of its railroads that will utilize the
program.
(iii) If a parent company submits a
certification program on behalf of one or
more of its subsidiary railroads, the
parent company shall assume
responsibility for compliance with this
part for all railroads identified on the
list required by paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of
this section.
(2) For a railroad or parent company’s
initial certification program submission,
the request for FRA approval can be in
letter or narrative format and shall
include a statement that the railroad or
parent company is seeking approval of
its program from FRA.
(3) If a railroad or parent company is
making a material modification to a
program that has been previously
approved by FRA, the request for FRA
approval can be in letter or narrative
format and shall include a copy of the
modified certification program that
identifies all proposed changes from the
last FRA-approved version of the
program.
(4) A railroad or parent company will
receive approval or disapproval notices
from FRA by email.
(5) FRA may electronically store any
materials required by this part.
(b) Organization of the certification
program. Each certification program
must be organized to present the
required information in paragraphs
(b)(1) through (6) of this section. Each
section of the certification program must
begin with the name, title, telephone
number, and email address of the
person to be contacted concerning the
matters addressed by that section. If a
person is identified in a prior section, it
is sufficient to merely repeat the
person’s name in a subsequent section.
(1) Section One of the certification
program: General information and
elections.
(i) The first section of the certification
program must contain the name of the
railroad or parent company submitting
the program, the person to be contacted
concerning the request for FRA approval
(including the person’s name, title,
telephone number, and email address),
and a statement electing either to accept
responsibility for training persons not
previously certified as signal employees
(‘‘initial signal employee training’’) or to
not accept this responsibility.
(ii) If a railroad or parent company
elects to not provide initial signal
employee training, the railroad or parent
company shall make the determinations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
required by § 246.125. The railroad or
parent company will be limited to
certifying signal employees previously
certified by another railroad. A railroad
or parent company can change its
election by obtaining FRA approval of a
material modification to its program, in
accordance with § 246.103(g).
(iii) If a railroad or parent company
elects to accept responsibility for
providing initial signal employee
training to persons not previously
certified as signal employees, the
railroad or parent company must submit
information explaining how such
persons will be trained but is not
required to perform such training. A
railroad or parent company that elects to
accept responsibility for providing
initial signal employee training may
authorize another railroad or nonrailroad entity to perform the training. A
railroad or parent company that
authorizes another railroad or nonrailroad entity to perform such training
must provide the name of the training
provider in its certification program but
shall remain responsible for ensuring
that the training provider adheres to the
training program submitted in the
railroad or parent company’s
certification program.
(iv) If a railroad or parent company
elects to classify its certified signal
employees into more than one
occupational category or subcategory by
class, task, location, or other suitable
terminology, the railroad or parent
company shall include the following in
the first section of its certification
program:
(A) An up-to-date list and description
of each occupational category or
subcategory of certified signal
employee;
(B) A statement of the roles and
responsibilities of each occupational
category or subcategory of certified
signal employee; and
(C) A detailed list of the safety-related
tasks and subtasks performed by each
occupational category or subcategory of
certified signal employee.
(2) Section Two of the certification
program: Training previously certified
signal employees. The second section of
the certification program must contain
information about the railroad or parent
company’s program for training
previously certified signal employees,
including all of the following
information:
(i) As provided for in § 246.119(i),
each railroad must have a program for
the ongoing education of its certified
signal employees to ensure that they
maintain the necessary knowledge
concerning applicable Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders;
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
railroad signal system safety and
operating rules; and applicable
standards, procedures, and instructions
for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of signal systems and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad. The railroad or parent
company must describe in this section
of the program how it will ensure that
its certified signal employees maintain
the necessary knowledge and skills to
safely discharge their responsibilities so
as to comply with the standard set forth
in § 246.119(i).
(ii) The railroad or parent company
must provide sufficient detail in this
section of its program to permit effective
evaluation of its training program in
terms of the subject matters covered, the
frequency and duration of training
sessions (including the interval between
attendance at such training sessions),
the training environment employed (for
example, use of classroom, use of
computer-based training, use of film or
slide presentations, and use of on-thejob training), and which aspects of the
training program will be voluntary or
mandatory.
(iii) The railroad or parent company
must explain how the training program
will address a certified signal
employee’s loss of retained knowledge
over time.
(iv) The railroad or parent company
must explain how the training program
will address changed circumstances
over time, such as the introduction of
new or modified signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology (including software
modifications), to ensure qualification
on the railroad’s signal system and
signal-related technology and
compliance with the training standard
set forth in § 246.119.
(v) The railroad or parent company
must explain how qualification training
will be provided, how long a certified
signal employee can be absent from
performing work on signal systems and
signal-related technology before needing
to be requalified (a time period that
cannot exceed 12 months), and once
that threshold is reached, how the signal
employee will acquire the needed
qualification.
(vi) The railroad or parent company
must explain how it will administer
training for previously certified signal
employees who have had their
certification expire. If a railroad or
parent company’s certification program
fails to specify how it will administer
training for these signal employees, then
the railroad or parent company shall
require them to successfully complete
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the railroad or parent company’s entire
training program.
(3) Section Three of the certification
program: Testing and evaluating
previously certified signal employees.
The third section of the certification
program must contain information about
the railroad or parent company’s
program for testing and evaluating
previously certified signal employees,
including all of the following
information:
(i) The railroad or parent company
must describe in this section how it will
ensure that its previously certified
signal employees demonstrate their
knowledge concerning the safe
discharge of their responsibilities, so as
to comply with the standards set forth
in § 246.121.
(ii) The railroad or parent company
must describe in this section how it will
have ongoing testing and evaluation to
ensure that its previously certified
signal employees have the necessary
visual and hearing acuity as provided
for in §§ 246.117 and 246.118. This
section must also address how the
railroad or parent company will ensure
that its medical examiners have
sufficient information concerning the
railroad’s operations, as well as the
certified signal employee’s safetyrelated tasks, to effectively form
appropriate conclusions about the
ability of a particular individual to
safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(4) Section Four of the certification
program: Training, testing, and
evaluating persons not previously
certified. Unless a railroad or parent
company has elected to not provide
initial signal employee certification
training, the fourth section of the
certification program must contain
information about the railroad or parent
company’s program for educating,
testing, and evaluating persons not
previously certified as signal employees,
including all of the following
information:
(i) As provided for in § 246.119, a
railroad or parent company that is
issuing an initial signal employee
certification to a person must have a
program for the training, testing, and
evaluation of its signal employee
certification candidates to ensure that
they acquire the necessary knowledge
and skills. A railroad or parent company
must describe in this section how it will
ensure that its signal employee
certification candidates acquire
sufficient knowledge and skills and
demonstrate their knowledge and skills
concerning the safe discharge of their
responsibilities. A railroad or parent
company must also discuss its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
procedures for mentoring candidates for
signal employee certification, in
accordance with § 246.124;
(ii) This section of the certification
program must contain the same level of
detail about the initial signal employee
training program and the testing and
evaluation of previously uncertified
signal employees as is required for
previously certified signal employees in
paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section
(Sections Two and Three of the
certification program);
(iii) Railroads and parent companies
that elect to rely on other entities to
conduct signal employee certification
training must explain how certification
candidates will be provided with the
required training on the signal systems
and signal-related technology deployed
on the railroad or parent company’s
territory.
(iv) This section of the certification
program must explain how the railroad
or parent company will administer the
training of previously uncertified signal
employees with extensive signal
experience. If a railroad or parent
company’s certification program fails to
specify how it will train these signal
employees, then the railroad or parent
company shall require them to
successfully complete the railroad or
parent company’s entire training
program.
(5) Section Five of the certification
program: Monitoring operational
performance by certified signal
employees. The fifth section of the
certification program must contain
information about the railroad or parent
company’s program for monitoring the
operational performance of its certified
signal employees, including all of the
following information:
(i) Section 246.123 requires that a
railroad conduct ongoing monitoring of
its certified signal employees and that
each certified signal employee
performing signal work that requires
certification have an annual
unannounced compliance test. A
railroad or parent company must
describe in this section of its
certification program its ongoing
program for monitoring that its certified
signal employees demonstrate their
skills concerning the safe discharge of
their responsibilities.
(ii) A railroad or parent company
must describe the scoring system used
by the railroad during an operational
monitoring observation or unannounced
compliance test administered in
accordance with the procedures
required under § 246.123.
(6) Section Six of the certification
program: Procedures for routine
administration of the signal employee
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44879
certification program. The final section
of the certification program must
contain a summary of how the railroad
or parent company’s program and
procedures will implement various
aspects of the regulatory provisions in
this part that relate to the routine
administration of its certification
program for signal employees.
Specifically, this section must address
the procedural aspects of the following
provisions and must describe the
manner in which the railroad or parent
company will implement its program so
as to comply with all of the following
provisions:
(i) Section 246.301, which provides
that each railroad must have procedures
for review and comment on adverse
information.
(ii) Sections 246.111, 246.113,
246.115, and 246.303, which require a
railroad to have procedures for
evaluating data concerning prior safety
conduct as a motor vehicle operator and
as a railroad worker.
(iii) Sections 246.109, 246.201, and
246.301, which place a duty on the
railroad to make a series of
determinations. When describing how it
will implement its certification program
to comply with those sections, a railroad
or parent company must describe: the
procedures it will utilize to ensure that
all of the necessary determinations have
been made in a timely fashion; who will
be authorized to conclude that a person
will or will not be certified; and how the
railroad or parent company will
communicate adverse decisions.
(iv) Sections 246.109, 246.117,
246.118, 246.119, and 246.121, which
place a duty on the railroad to make a
series of determinations. When
describing how it will implement its
program to comply with these sections,
a railroad or parent company must
describe how it will document the
factual basis the railroad or parent
company relied on in making
determinations under these sections.
(v) Section 246.124, which require
each railroad to have procedures for
mentoring signal employees who have
not been certified.
(vi) Section 246.125, which permits
reliance on signal employee certification
determinations made by other railroads.
(vii) Sections 246.207 and 246.307,
which contain the requirements for
replacing lost certificates and the
conduct of certification revocation
proceedings.
§ 246.107
Signal service classifications.
(a) A railroad may classify its certified
signal employees in occupational
categories or subcategories by class,
task, location, or other suitable
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44880
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
terminology, in accordance with an
FRA-approved certification program
that complies with the requirements of
this part.
(b) Any person called to work on a
signal system or signal-related
technology on which they have not been
certified shall immediately notify the
railroad or their employer that they are
not certified to work on the signal
system or signal-related technology.
(c) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s certification program pursuant
to this part, no railroad shall permit a
person to work on a signal system or
signal-related technology on which the
person has not been certified and
qualified, unless the person works
under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor in accordance with § 246.124.
§ 246.109 Determinations required for
certification and recertification.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program, the railroad, prior to initially
certifying or recertifying any person as
a signal employee, shall, in accordance
with its FRA-approved program,
determine in writing that:
(1) The individual meets the prior
safety conduct eligibility requirements
of §§ 246.111 and 246.113;
(2) The individual meets the
eligibility requirements of §§ 246.115
and 246.303;
(3) The individual meets the visual
and hearing acuity standards of
§§ 246.117 and 246.118;
(4) If applicable, the individual has
completed a training program that meets
the requirements of § 246.119;
(5) The individual meets the
qualification requirements of § 246.120;
and
(6) The individual has the necessary
knowledge, as demonstrated by
successfully completing testing and
practical demonstration that meet the
requirements of § 246.121.
(b) Nothing in this section, § 246.111,
or § 246.113 shall be construed to
prevent persons subject to this part from
entering into an agreement that results
in a railroad obtaining the information
needed for compliance with this subpart
in a different manner than that
prescribed in § 246.111 or § 246.113.
§ 246.111 Prior safety conduct as motor
vehicle operator.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b) through (e) of this section, after FRA
has approved a railroad’s signal
employee certification program, the
railroad, prior to certifying or
recertifying any person as a signal
employee, shall determine that the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
person meets the eligibility
requirements of this section involving
prior conduct as a motor vehicle
operator.
(b) A railroad shall certify a person as
a signal employee for 60 days if the
person:
(1) Requested the information
required by paragraph (g) of this section
at least 60 days prior to the date of the
decision to certify that person; and
(2) Otherwise meets the eligibility
requirements provided in
§ 246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(c) A railroad shall recertify a person
as a signal employee for 60 days from
the expiration date of that person’s
certification if the person:
(1) Requested the information
required by paragraph (g) of this section
at least 60 days prior to the date of the
decision to recertify that person; and
(2) Otherwise meets the eligibility
requirements provided in
§ 246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(d) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section, if a railroad who
certified or recertified a person for 60
days pursuant to paragraph (b) or (c) of
this section does not obtain and
evaluate the information requested
pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section
within those 60 days, that person will
be ineligible to perform as a certified
signal employee until the information
can be evaluated by the railroad.
(e) If a person requests the
information required pursuant to
paragraph (g) of this section but is
unable to obtain it, that person or the
railroad certifying or recertifying that
person may petition for a waiver of the
requirements of paragraph (a) of this
section in accordance with the
provisions of part 211 of this chapter. A
railroad shall certify or recertify a
person during the pendency of the
waiver request if the person otherwise
meets the eligibility requirements
provided in § 246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(f) Except for persons designated as
signal employees under § 246.105(c) or
(d) or for persons covered by paragraph
(j) of this section, each person seeking
certification or recertification under this
part shall, no more than one year prior
to the date of the railroad’s decision on
certification or recertification:
(1) Take the actions required by
paragraphs (g) through (i) of this section
to make information concerning their
driving record available to the railroad
that is considering such certification or
recertification; and
(2) Take any additional actions,
including providing any necessary
consent required by State, Federal, or
foreign law to make information
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
concerning their driving record
available to that railroad.
(g) Each person seeking certification
or recertification under this part shall
request, in writing, that the chief of each
driver licensing agency identified in
paragraph (h) of this section provide a
copy of that agency’s available
information concerning their driving
record to the railroad that is considering
such certification or recertification.
(h) Each person shall request the
information required under paragraph
(g) of this section from:
(1) The chief of the driver licensing
agency of any jurisdiction, including a
State or foreign country, which last
issued that person a driver’s license;
and
(2) The chief of the driver licensing
agency of any other jurisdiction,
including states or foreign countries,
where the person held a driver’s license
within the preceding three years.
(i) If advised by the railroad that a
driver licensing agency has informed
the railroad that additional information
concerning that person’s driving history
may exist in the files of a State agency
or foreign country not previously
contacted in accordance with this
section, such person shall:
(1) Request in writing that the chief of
the driver licensing agency which
compiled the information provide a
copy of the available information to the
prospective certifying railroad; and
(2) Take any additional action
required by State, Federal, or foreign
law to obtain that additional
information.
(j) Any person who has never
obtained a motor vehicle driver’s license
is not required to comply with the
provisions of paragraph (g) of this
section but shall notify the railroad of
that fact in accordance with procedures
established by the railroad in its
certification program.
(k) Each certified signal employee or
person seeking certification as a signal
employee shall report motor vehicle
incidents described in paragraphs (m)(1)
and (2) of this section to the certifying
railroad within 48 hours of being
convicted for, or completed State action
to cancel, revoke, suspend, or deny a
motor vehicle driver’s license for, such
violations. For purposes of this
paragraph (k) and paragraph (m) of this
section, ‘‘State action’’ means action of
the jurisdiction that has issued the
motor vehicle driver’s license, including
a foreign country. For purposes of signal
employee certification, no railroad shall
require reporting earlier than 48 hours
after the conviction, or completed State
action to cancel, revoke, suspend, or
deny a motor vehicle driver’s license.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(l) When evaluating a person’s motor
vehicle driving record, a railroad shall
not consider information concerning
motor vehicle driving incidents that
occurred:
(1) Prior to July 22, 2024; or
(2) More than three years before the
date of the railroad’s certification
decision; or
(3) At a time other than that
specifically provided for in § 246.111,
§ 246.113, § 246.115, or § 246.303.
(m) When evaluating a person’s motor
vehicle driving record, a railroad shall
only consider information concerning
the following types of motor vehicle
incidents:
(1) A conviction for, or completed
State action to cancel, revoke, suspend,
or deny a motor vehicle driver’s license
for operating a motor vehicle while
under the influence of, or impaired by,
alcohol or a controlled substance; or
(2) A conviction for, or completed
State action to cancel, revoke, suspend,
or deny a motor vehicle driver’s license
for refusal to undergo such testing as is
required by State or foreign law when a
law enforcement official seeks to
determine whether a person is operating
a vehicle while under the influence of
alcohol or a controlled substance.
(n) If such an incident, described in
paragraph (m) of this section, is
identified:
(1) The railroad shall provide the data
to the railroad’s Drug and Alcohol
Counselor (DAC), together with any
information concerning the person’s
railroad service record, and shall refer
the person for evaluation to determine
if the person has an active substance
abuse disorder.
(2) The person shall cooperate in the
evaluation and shall provide any
requested records of prior counseling or
treatment for review exclusively by the
DAC in the context of such evaluation.
(3) If the person is evaluated as not
currently affected by an active substance
abuse disorder, the subject data shall
not be considered further with respect
to certification. However, the railroad
shall, on recommendation of the DAC,
condition certification upon
participation in any needed aftercare
and/or follow-up testing for alcohol or
drugs deemed necessary by the DAC
consistent with the technical standards
specified in 49 CFR part 219, subpart H,
as well as 49 CFR part 40.
(4) If the person is evaluated as
currently affected by an active substance
abuse disorder, the provisions of
§ 246.115(c) will apply.
(5) If the person fails to comply with
the requirements of paragraph (n)(2) of
this section, the person shall be
ineligible to perform as a certified signal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
employee until such time as the person
complies with the requirements.
(o) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.113 Prior safety conduct with other
railroads.
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program, the railroad shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal
employee certificate, that the
certification candidate meets the
eligibility requirements of this section.
(b) If the certification candidate has
not been employed or certified by any
other railroad in the previous five years,
they do not have to submit a request in
accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section, but they must notify the
railroad of this fact in accordance with
procedures established by the railroad
in its certification program.
(c) Except as provided for in
paragraph (b) of this section, each
person seeking certification or
recertification under this part shall
submit a written request to each railroad
that employed or certified the person
within the previous five years to
provide the following information to the
railroad that is considering whether to
certify or recertify that person as a
signal employee:
(1) Information about that person’s
compliance with § 246.111 within the
three years preceding the date of the
request;
(2) Information about that person’s
compliance with § 246.115 within the
five years preceding the date of the
request; and
(3) Information about that person’s
compliance with § 246.303 within the
five years preceding the date of the
request.
(d) Each person submitting a written
request required by paragraph (c) of this
section shall:
(1) Submit the request no more than
one year before the date of the railroad’s
decision on certification or
recertification; and
(2) Take any additional actions,
including providing any necessary
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44881
consent required by State or Federal law
to make information concerning their
service record available to the railroad.
(e) Within 30 days after receipt of a
written request that complies with
paragraph (c) of this section, a railroad
shall provide the information requested
to the railroad designated in the written
request.
(f) If a railroad is unable to provide
the information requested within 30
days after receipt of a written request
that complies with paragraph (c) of this
section, the railroad shall provide an
explanation, in writing, of why it cannot
provide the information within the
requested time frame. If the railroad will
ultimately be able to provide the
requested information, the explanation
shall state approximately how much
more time the railroad needs to supply
the requested information. If the
railroad will not be able to provide the
requested information, the railroad shall
provide an adequate explanation for
why it cannot provide this information.
Copies of this explanation shall be
provided to the railroad designated in
the written request and to the person
who submitted the written request for
information.
(g) When evaluating a person’s prior
safety conduct with a different railroad,
a railroad shall not consider information
concerning prior safety conduct that
occurred:
(1) Prior to July 22, 2024; or
(2) At a time other than that
specifically provided for in § 246.111,
§ 246.113, § 246.115, or § 246.303.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program that complies
with the requirements of this section.
When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager,
supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer,
lessor, or lessee of railroad equipment,
track, or facilities; any employee of such
owner, manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program that complies with the
requirements of this subject, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.115 Substance abuse disorders and
alcohol drug rules compliance.
(a) Eligibility determination. After
FRA has approved a railroad’s signal
employee certification program, the
railroad shall determine, prior to issuing
any person a signal employee certificate,
that the person meets the eligibility
requirements of this section.
(b) Documentation. In order to make
the determination required under
paragraph (c) of this section, a railroad
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44882
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
shall have on file documents pertinent
to that determination, including a
written document from its DAC which
states their professional opinion that the
person has been evaluated as not
currently affected by a substance abuse
disorder or that the person has been
evaluated as affected by an active
substance abuse disorder.
(c) Fitness requirement. (1) A person
who has an active substance abuse
disorder shall be denied certification or
recertification as a signal employee.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section, a certified signal
employee who is determined to have an
active substance abuse disorder shall be
ineligible to hold certification.
Consistent with other provisions of this
part, certification may be reinstated as
provided in paragraph (e) of this
section.
(3) In the case of a current employee
of a railroad evaluated as having an
active substance abuse disorder
(including a person identified under the
procedures of § 246.111), the employee
may, if otherwise eligible, voluntarily
self-refer for substance abuse counseling
or treatment under the policy required
by § 219.1001(b)(1) of this chapter; and
the railroad shall then treat the
substance abuse evaluation as
confidential except with respect to
ineligibility for certification.
(d) Prior alcohol/drug conduct;
Federal rule compliance. (1) In
determining whether a person may be or
remain certified as a signal employee, a
railroad shall consider conduct
described in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section that occurred within a period of
five consecutive years prior to the
review. A review of certification shall be
initiated promptly upon the occurrence
and documentation of any incident of
conduct described in this paragraph (d).
(2) A railroad shall consider any
violation of § 219.101 or § 219.102 of
this chapter and any refusal to provide
a breath or body fluid sample for testing
under the requirements of part 219 of
this chapter when instructed to do so by
a railroad representative.
(3) A period of ineligibility described
in this section shall begin:
(i) For a person not currently certified,
on the date of the railroad’s written
determination that the most recent
incident has occurred; or
(ii) For a person currently certified, on
the date of the railroad’s notification to
the person that recertification has been
denied or certification has been
suspended.
(4) The period of ineligibility
described in this section shall be
determined in accordance with the
following standards:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
(i) In the case of one violation of
§ 219.102 of this chapter, the person
shall be ineligible to hold a certificate
during evaluation and any required
primary treatment as described in
paragraph (e) of this section. In the case
of two violations of § 219.102 of this
chapter, the person shall be ineligible to
hold a certificate for a period of two
years. In the case of more than two such
violations, the person shall be ineligible
to hold a certificate for a period of five
years.
(ii) In the case of one violation of
§ 219.102 of this chapter and one
violation of § 219.101 of this chapter,
the person shall be ineligible to hold a
certificate for a period of three years.
(iii) In the case of one violation of
§ 219.101 of this chapter, the person
shall be ineligible to hold a certificate
for a period of nine months (unless
identification of the violation was
through a qualifying referral program
described in § 219.1001 of this chapter
and the signal employee waives
investigation, in which case the
certificate shall be deemed suspended
during evaluation and any required
primary treatment as described in
paragraph (e) of this section). In the case
of two or more violations of § 219.101 of
this chapter, the person shall be
ineligible to hold a certificate for a
period of five years.
(iv) If a person refuses to provide a
breath or body fluid sample for testing
under the requirements of part 219 of
this chapter when instructed to do so by
a railroad representative, the person
shall be ineligible to hold a certificate
for a period of nine months.
(e) Future eligibility to hold certificate
following alcohol/drug violation. The
following requirements apply to a
person who has been denied
certification or who has had their
certification suspended or revoked as a
result of conduct described in paragraph
(d) of this section:
(1) The person shall not be eligible for
grant or reinstatement of the certificate
unless and until the person has:
(i) Been evaluated by a Substance
Abuse Professional (SAP) to determine
if the person currently has an active
substance abuse disorder;
(ii) Successfully completed any
program of counseling or treatment
determined to be necessary by the SAP
prior to return to service; and
(iii) In accordance with the testing
procedures of 49 CFR part 219, subpart
H, has had a return-to-duty alcohol test
with an alcohol concentration of less
than .02 and a return-to-duty body fluid
sample that tested negative for
controlled substances.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) A certified signal employee placed
in service or returned to service under
the conditions described in paragraph
(e)(1) of this section shall continue in
any program of counseling or treatment
deemed necessary by the SAP and shall
be subject to a reasonable program of
follow-up alcohol and drug testing
without prior notice for a period of not
more than five years following return to
service. Follow-up tests shall include
not fewer than six alcohol tests and six
drug tests during the first year following
return to service.
(3) Return-to-duty and follow-up
alcohol and drug tests shall be
performed consistent with the
requirements of 49 CFR part 219,
subpart H.
(4) This paragraph (e) does not create
an entitlement to utilize the services of
a railroad SAP, to be afforded leave from
employment for counseling or
treatment, or to employment as a signal
employee. Nor does it restrict any
discretion available to the railroad to
take disciplinary action based on
conduct described herein.
(f) Confidentiality protected. Nothing
in this part shall affect the responsibility
of the railroad under § 219.1003(f) of
this chapter to treat qualified referrals
for substance abuse counseling and
treatment as confidential; and the
certification status of a signal employee
who is successfully assisted under the
procedures of that section shall not be
adversely affected. However, the
railroad shall include in its referral
policy a provision that, at least with
respect to a certified signal employee or
a candidate for certification, the policy
of confidentiality is waived (to the
extent that the railroad shall receive
from the SAP or DAC official notice of
the substance abuse disorder and shall
suspend or revoke the certification, as
appropriate) if the person at any time
refuses to cooperate in a recommended
course of counseling or treatment.
(g) Complying with certification
program. Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.117
Visual acuity.
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program, the railroad shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal
employee certificate, that the person
meets the standards for visual acuity
prescribed in this section and appendix
B to this part.
(b) Any examination required under
this section shall be performed by or
under the supervision of a medical
examiner or a licensed physician’s
assistant.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph
(d) of this section, each certified signal
employee shall have visual acuity that
meets or exceeds the following
thresholds:
(1) For distant viewing, either:
(i) Distant visual acuity of at least 20/
40 (Snellen) in each eye without
corrective lenses; or
(ii) Distant visual acuity separately
corrected to at least 20/40 (Snellen) with
corrective lenses and distant binocular
acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in both
eyes with or without corrective lenses;
(2) A field of vision of at least 70
degrees in the horizontal meridian in
each eye; and
(3) The ability to recognize and
distinguish between the colors of
railroad signals as demonstrated by
successfully completing one of the tests
in appendix B to this part.
(d) A person not meeting the
thresholds in paragraph (c) of this
section shall, upon request of the
certification candidate, be subject to
further medical evaluation by a
railroad’s medical examiner to
determine that person’s ability to safely
perform as a certified signal employee.
In such cases, the following procedures
will apply:
(1) In accordance with the guidance
prescribed in appendix B to this part, a
person is entitled to:
(i) One retest without making any
showing; and
(ii) An additional retest if the person
provides evidence that circumstances
have changed since the last test to the
extent that the person may now be able
to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(2) The railroad shall provide its
medical examiner with a copy of this
part, including all appendices.
(3) If, after consultation with a
railroad officer, the medical examiner
concludes that, despite not meeting the
threshold(s) in paragraph (c) of this
section, the person has the ability to
safely perform as a certified signal
employee, the railroad may conclude
that the person satisfies the visual
acuity requirements of this section to be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
a certified signal employee. Such
certification will be conditioned on any
special restrictions the medical
examiner determines in writing to be
necessary.
(e) To make the determination
required under paragraph (a) of this
section, a railroad shall have on file the
following for each certification
candidate:
(1) A medical examiner’s certificate
that the candidate has been medically
examined and either does or does not
meet the visual acuity standards
prescribed in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(2) If necessary under paragraph (d) of
this section, a medical examiner’s
written professional opinion which
states the basis for their determination
that:
(i) The candidate can be certified,
under certain conditions if necessary,
even though the candidate does not
meet the visual acuity standards
prescribed in paragraph (c) of this
section; or
(ii) The candidate’s visual acuity
prevents the candidate from being able
to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(f) If the examination required under
this section shows that the person needs
corrective lenses to meet the standards
for visual acuity prescribed in this
section and appendix B to this part, that
person shall use corrective lenses at all
times while performing as a certified
signal employee unless the railroad’s
medical examiner subsequently
determines in writing that the person
can safely perform as a certified signal
employee without corrective lenses.
(g) When a certified signal employee
becomes aware that their vision has
deteriorated, they shall notify the
railroad’s medical department or other
appropriate railroad official of the
deterioration. Such notification must
occur prior to performing any
subsequent service as a certified signal
employee. The individual cannot return
to service as a certified signal employee
until they are reexamined and
determined by the railroad’s medical
examiner to satisfy the visual acuity
standards prescribed in this section and
appendix B to this part.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44883
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.118
Hearing acuity.
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program, the railroad shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal
employee certificate, that the person
meets the standards for hearing acuity
prescribed in this section and appendix
B to this part.
(b) Any examination required under
this section shall be performed by or
under the supervision of a medical
examiner or a licensed physician’s
assistant.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph
(d) of this section, each certified signal
employee shall have hearing acuity that
meets or exceeds the following
thresholds with or without use of a
hearing aid: The person does not have
an average hearing loss in the better ear
greater than 40 decibels at 500 hertz
(Hz), 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz. The
hearing test or audiogram used to show
a person’s hearing acuity shall meet the
requirements of one of the following:
(1) As required in 29 CFR 1910.95(h)
(Occupational Safety and Health
Administration);
(2) As required in § 227.111 of this
chapter; or
(3) Conducted using an audiometer
that meets the specifications of, and is
maintained and used in accordance
with, a formal industry standard such as
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) S3.6, ‘‘Specifications for
Audiometers.’’
(d) A person not meeting the
thresholds in paragraph (c) of this
section shall, upon request of the
certification candidate, be subject to
further medical evaluation by a
railroad’s medical examiner to
determine that person’s ability to safely
perform as a certified signal employee.
In such cases, the following procedures
will apply:
(1) In accordance with the guidance
prescribed in appendix B to this part, a
person is entitled to:
(i) One retest without making any
showing; and
(ii) An additional retest if the person
provides evidence that circumstances
have changed since the last test to the
extent that the person may now be able
to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(2) The railroad shall provide its
medical examiner with a copy of this
part, including all appendices.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44884
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(3) If, after consultation with a
railroad officer, the medical examiner
concludes that, despite not meeting the
threshold(s) in paragraph (c) of this
section, the person has the ability to
safely perform as a certified signal
employee, the railroad may conclude
that the person satisfies the hearing
acuity requirements of this section to be
a certified signal employee. Such
certification will be conditioned on any
special restrictions the medical
examiner determines in writing to be
necessary.
(e) To make the determination
required under paragraph (a) of this
section, a railroad shall have on file the
following for each certification
candidate:
(1) A medical examiner’s certificate
that the candidate has been medically
examined and either does or does not
meet the hearing acuity standards
prescribed in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(2) If necessary under paragraph (d) of
this section, a medical examiner’s
written professional opinion which
states the basis for their determination
that:
(i) The candidate can be certified,
under certain conditions if necessary,
even though the candidate does not
meet the hearing acuity standards
prescribed in paragraph (c) of this
section; or
(ii) The candidate’s hearing acuity
prevents the candidate from being able
to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(f) If the examination required under
this section shows that the person needs
a hearing aid to meet the standards for
hearing acuity prescribed in this section
and appendix B to this part, that person
shall use a hearing aid at all times while
performing as a certified signal
employee unless the railroad’s medical
examiner subsequently determines in
writing that the person can safely
perform as a certified signal employee
without a hearing aid.
(g) When a certified signal employee
becomes aware that their hearing has
deteriorated, they shall notify the
railroad’s medical department or other
appropriate railroad official of the
deterioration. Such notification must
occur prior to performing any
subsequent service as a certified signal
employee. The person cannot return to
service as a certified signal employee
until they are reexamined and
determined by the railroad’s medical
examiner to satisfy the hearing acuity
standards prescribed in this section and
appendix B to this part.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.119
Training requirements.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad
or parent company’s certification
program, the railroad or parent company
shall determine, prior to issuing any
person a signal employee certificate,
that the person has successfully
completed training, in accordance with
the requirements of this section.
(b) A railroad or parent company that
elects to accept responsibility to provide
initial signal employee training to
persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees shall state
in its certification program whether it
will conduct the training or authorize
another railroad or non-railroad entity
to provide the training.
(c) A railroad or parent company that
elects to accept responsibility to provide
initial signal employee training to
persons not previously certified as
signal employees shall submit a training
program which, at a minimum, includes
the following:
(1) An explanation of how training
will be structured, developed, and
delivered, including an appropriate
combination of classroom, simulator,
computer-based, correspondence,
practical demonstration, on-the-job
training, or other formal training. The
curriculum shall be designed to impart
knowledge of, and ability to comply
with, applicable Federal railroad safety
laws, regulations, and orders, as well as
any relevant railroad rules and
procedures promulgated to implement
those Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders. The training
shall document a person’s knowledge
of, and ability to comply with, Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders, as well as railroad rules and
procedures.
(2) An on-the-job training component
which shall include the following:
(i) A syllabus describing content,
required tasks, and related steps the
person learning the job shall be able to
perform within a specified timeframe. If
the railroad or parent company has
elected to classify its certified signal
employees into more than one
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
occupational category or subcategory,
this syllabus shall include all safetyrelated tasks and subtasks performed by
each category or subcategory of certified
signal employee;
(ii) A statement of the conditions (e.g.,
prerequisites, tools, equipment,
documentation, briefings,
demonstrations, and practice) necessary
for learning transfer; and
(iii) A statement of the standards by
which proficiency is measured through
a combination of task/step accuracy,
completeness, and repetition.
(3) A description of the processes to
review and modify its training program
when new safety-related railroad laws,
regulations, orders, procedures,
software, or new signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
are introduced into the workplace,
including how it is determined if
additional or refresher training is
needed.
(d) Prior to beginning the on-the-job
exercises discussed in paragraph (c)(2)
of this section, each railroad or parent
company shall make any relevant
information or materials, such as signal
standards, test procedures, operating
rules, safety rules, or other rules,
available for referencing by certification
candidates.
(e) Prior to a person not previously
certified as a signal employee being
certified as a signal employee, a railroad
or parent company shall require the
person to:
(1) Successfully complete the initial
signal employee training program
developed pursuant to paragraph (c) of
this section and any associated
examinations covering the skills and
knowledge the person will need to
perform the tasks necessary to be a
certified signal employee;
(2)(i) Successfully complete on-thejob training and demonstrate on-the-job
proficiency by successfully completing
the tasks and using the signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology necessary to be a certified
signal employee on the certifying
railroad. A certification candidate may
only perform such tasks under the direct
and immediate supervision of a mentor,
signal instructor, or qualified instructor.
A qualified instructor must confirm that
on-the-job proficiency has been
demonstrated.
(ii) If the railroad elects to classify its
certified signal employees into more
than one occupational category or
subcategory, the person must
demonstrate on-the-job proficiency by
successfully completing the tasks
applicable to that occupational category
or subcategory in which the person is
seeking to be certified. A qualified
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
instructor must confirm that on-the-job
proficiency has been demonstrated; and
(3) Demonstrate qualification on the
signal system equipment and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad’s territory on which the person
is expected to work. A qualified
instructor must confirm that
qualification has been demonstrated.
(f) In making the determination
required under paragraph (a) of this
section, a railroad shall have written
documentation showing that:
(1) The person completed an initial
signal employee training program that
complies with paragraph (c) of this
section (if the person has not been
previously certified as a signal
employee); and
(2) The person demonstrated their
knowledge and on-the-job proficiency
by achieving a passing grade under the
testing and evaluation procedures of the
training program; and
(3) The person achieved a passing
score on the qualification exam on the
signal system equipment and signalrelated technology on which the person
will work as a certified signal employee.
(g) The certification program, required
under this part and submitted in
accordance with the procedures and
requirements described in § 246.106,
shall include:
(1) How comprehensive training will
be provided on the installation,
operation, testing, maintenance, and
repair of the signal systems and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad’s territory; and
(2) How the railroad will ensure that
each certified signal employee is
qualified on the signal system
equipment and signal-related
technology (whether existing or new)
deployed on the railroad’s territory
before the certified signal employee is
required to install, operate, test,
maintain, or repair that signal system
equipment or signal-related technology;
and
(3) The maximum time period that a
certified signal employee can be absent
from performing work on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
that requires certification pursuant to
this part before requalification will be
required. In accordance with
§ 246.120(c), this time period cannot
exceed 12 months.
(h) If ownership of a railroad is being
transferred from one company to
another, the signal employees of the
acquiring company may receive
familiarization training from the selling
company prior to the acquiring railroad
commencing operation.
(i) A railroad shall provide for the
continuing education of its certified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
signal employees to ensure that each
certified signal employee maintains the
necessary knowledge concerning:
(1) Railroad safety and operating
rules;
(2) Compliance with all applicable
Federal railroad safety laws, regulations,
and orders; and
(3) Compliance with all applicable
standards, procedures, and instructions
for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of new and existing signal
systems and new and existing signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad.
(j) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.120
Requirements for qualification.
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s certification program, a
railroad shall not permit or require a
person to serve as a signal employee, as
defined in § 246.7, unless that railroad
determines that:
(1) The person is a certified signal
employee; and
(2) The person either:
(i) Is qualified, as defined in § 246.7,
on the signal system equipment and
signal-related technology (whether
existing or new) and therefore may
reasonably be expected to be proficient
on all safety related tasks the person is
assigned to perform; or
(ii) Is working under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or
qualified instructor.
(b) If a person is called to perform
work on signal system equipment or
signal-related technology that they are
not qualified on, the person must
immediately notify the railroad that
they are not qualified on the signal
system equipment or signal-related
technology.
(c) A person shall no longer be
considered qualified on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology
if they have not performed work that
requires certification pursuant to this
part on signal system equipment or
signal-related technology in the
previous 12 months.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44885
(d) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.121
Knowledge testing.
(a) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s signal employee certification
program, the railroad shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal
employee certificate and in accordance
with the requirements of this section,
that the person has demonstrated
sufficient knowledge of the railroad’s
signal standards, test procedures, and
instructions for the installation,
operation, testing, maintenance,
troubleshooting, and repair of the
railroad’s signal system equipment and
signal-related technology.
(b) To make the knowledge
determination required by paragraph (a)
of this section, a railroad shall have
procedures for testing a person being
evaluated for certification as a signal
employee that:
(1) Are designed to examine a
person’s knowledge of:
(i) All applicable Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders
governing signal systems and signalrelated technology;
(ii) All applicable railroad safety and
operating rules; and
(iii) All applicable railroad standards,
procedures, and instructions for the
installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of the railroad’s signal systems
and signal-related technology,
including:
(A) The railroad’s rules and standards
for disabling and removing signal
systems from service; and
(B) The railroad’s rules and standards
for placing signal systems back in
service;
(2) Are objective in nature;
(3) Include a practical demonstration
component;
(4) Are in written or electronic form;
(5) Are sufficient to accurately
measure the person’s knowledge of the
subjects listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section; and
(6) Allow for testing conducted with
reference to books and other written
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44886
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
materials, as addressed in the railroad’s
certification program.
(c) The railroad shall provide the
certification candidate with an
opportunity to consult with a mentor,
signal instructor or qualified instructor
to explain one or more test questions.
(d) If a person fails the test, no
railroad shall permit or require that
person to work as a certified signal
employee prior to that person’s
achieving a passing score during a
reexamination of the test.
(e) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.123 Monitoring operational
performance.
(a) Each railroad’s certification
program shall describe how it will
monitor the operational performance of
its certified signal employees by
including procedures for:
(1) Giving each certified signal
employee at least one unannounced
compliance test each calendar year in
one of the following areas: the railroad’s
signal system standards and test
procedures, or Federal regulations
concerning signal systems, except as
provided for in paragraph (d) of this
section;
(2) Giving unannounced compliance
tests to certified signal employees who
return to signal work that requires
certification pursuant to this part, as
described in paragraph (d) of this
section;
(3) What actions the railroad will take
if it finds deficiencies in a certified
signal employee’s performance during
an unannounced compliance test; and
(4) Monitoring the performance of
signal-related tasks.
(b) An unannounced compliance test
shall:
(1) Be performed by a certified signal
employee; and
(2) Be given to each certified signal
employee at least once each calendar
year, except as provided for in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) If the railroad’s certification
program classifies signal employees
pursuant to § 246.107, the unannounced
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
compliance test shall be within scope of
the certified signal employee’s
classification.
(d) A certified signal employee who is
not performing signal work that requires
certification pursuant to this part does
not need to be given an unannounced
compliance test. However, when the
certified signal employee returns to
signal work that requires certification
pursuant to this part, the railroad shall:
(1) Give the certified signal employee
an unannounced compliance test within
30 days of their return to signal work
that requires certification; and
(2) Retain a written record that
includes the following information:
(i) The date the certified signal
employee stopped performing work that
required certification pursuant to this
part;
(ii) The date the certified signal
employee returned to signal work that
required certification pursuant to this
part; and
(iii) The date and the result of the
unannounced compliance test was
performed following the signal
employee’s return to signal work
requiring certification.
(e) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.124
Mentoring.
(a) Each railroad’s certification
program shall include procedures for
the mentoring of persons who have not
been certified by the railroad. Each
railroad shall identify potential
scenarios in which mentoring of noncertified persons will be provided.
(b) After FRA has approved a
railroad’s certification program pursuant
to this part, the railroad shall not permit
or require any person to perform work
on a signal system or signal-related
technology on its territory that requires
certification unless the railroad first
determines that:
(1) The person is a certified signal
employee who has been certified by the
railroad and qualified on all applicable
signal system equipment and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad; or
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) The person is working under the
direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor or qualified instructor.
(c) If the railroad elects to classify its
certified signal employees into more
than one occupational category or
subcategory pursuant to § 246.107:
(1) The railroad shall address in its
certification program how mentoring
will be provided for certified signal
employees who move into a different
occupational category or subcategory of
certified signal service; and
(2) Mentors shall be certified within
the occupational category or
subcategory of the task being performed
by the person or persons working under
their direct and immediate supervision.
(d) If allowed by the railroad’s
certification program, any work on a
signal system performed by a person
whose signal employee certification has
been revoked shall be performed under
the direct and immediate supervision of
a mentor or qualified instructor.
(e) Each railroad’s certification
program shall address how mentoring
will be provided to ensure that mentors
are located in close proximity to each
person or persons they are mentoring to
allow the mentor to take immediate
action to prevent a violation of
§ 246.303(e) from occurring. Each
railroad’s certification program shall
also address how mentors will be held
accountable for the work performed by
persons working under the mentor’s
direct and immediate supervision. Any
records of tests performed by persons
working under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor shall reflect the
mentor’s name.
(f) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including but not limited to a
railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or
independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement
of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person
shall be considered to have violated the
requirements of this section.
§ 246.125 Certification determinations
made by other railroads.
(a) A railroad or parent company that
is considering certification of a person
as a signal employee (‘‘certifying
railroad or parent company’’) may rely
on certain determinations made by
another railroad or parent company
concerning that person’s certification.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(b) A certifying railroad or parent
company that relies on the certification
determinations made by another
railroad shall be responsible for making
the following determinations:
(1) The person’s signal employee
certification is still valid under
§§ 246.201 and 246.307;
(2) The person has been qualified on
the signal system equipment and signalrelated technology deployed on the
railroad territory on which the person is
expected to work in accordance with
§ 246.119; and
(3) The person has demonstrated the
necessary knowledge concerning the
certifying railroad or parent company’s
signal standards, test procedures, and
instructions for the installation,
operation, testing, maintenance,
troubleshooting, and repair of the
certifying railroad or parent company’s
signal system equipment and signalrelated technology in accordance with
§ 246.121.
Subpart C—Administration of the
Certification Program
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.201
Time limitations for certification.
(a) After FRA approves a railroad’s
signal employee certification program,
that railroad shall not certify or recertify
a person as a signal employee if the
railroad is making:
(1) A determination concerning
eligibility under §§ 246.111, 246.113,
246.115, and 246.303 and the eligibility
data being relied on was furnished more
than one year before the date of the
railroad’s certification decision;
(2) A determination concerning vision
or hearing acuity and the medical
examination being relied on was
conducted more than 450 days before
the date of the railroad’s certification
decision; or
(3) A determination concerning
demonstrated knowledge and the
knowledge examination being relied on
was conducted more than one year
before the date of the railroad’s
certification decision, or more than two
years before the date of the railroad’s
certification decision if the railroad
administers knowledge testing pursuant
to § 246.121 at intervals that do not
exceed two years.
(b) The time limitations of paragraph
(a) of this section do not apply to a
railroad that is making a certification
decision in reliance on determinations
made by another railroad in accordance
with § 246.125.
(c) Except if a person is designated as
a certified signal employee under
§ 246.105(c) or (d), no railroad shall
certify a person as a signal employee for
an interval of more than three years.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
(d) Each railroad shall issue each
certified signal employee a certificate
that complies with § 246.207 no later
than 30 days from the date of its
decision to certify or recertify that
person.
§ 246.203 Retaining information
supporting determinations.
(a) After FRA approves a railroad’s
signal employee certification program,
any time the railroad issues, denies, or
revokes a certificate after making the
determinations required under
§ 246.109, it shall maintain a record for
each certified signal employee and
certification candidate. Each record
shall contain the information, described
in paragraph (b) of this section, that the
railroad relied on in making the
determinations required under
§ 246.109.
(b) A railroad shall retain the
following information:
(1) Relevant data from the railroad’s
records concerning the person’s prior
safety conduct and eligibility;
(2) Relevant data furnished by another
railroad;
(3) Relevant data furnished by a
governmental agency concerning the
person’s motor vehicle driving record;
(4) Relevant data furnished by the
person seeking certification concerning
their eligibility;
(5) The relevant test results data
concerning visual and hearing acuity;
(6) If applicable, the relevant data
concerning the professional opinion of
the railroad’s medical examiner on the
adequacy of the person’s visual or
hearing acuity;
(7) Relevant data from the railroad’s
records concerning the person’s success
or failure on knowledge test(s) under
§ 246.121;
(8) A sample copy of the written
knowledge test or tests administered;
and
(9) The relevant data from the
railroad’s records concerning the
person’s success or failure on
unannounced tests the railroad
performed to monitor the person’s
performance in accordance with
§ 246.123.
(c) If a railroad is relying on
successful completion of a training
program conducted by another entity,
the relying railroad shall maintain a
record for each certification candidate
that contains the relevant data furnished
by the training entity concerning the
person’s demonstration of knowledge
relied on by the railroad in making its
determinations.
(d) If a railroad is relying on a
certification decision initially made by
another railroad, the relying railroad
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44887
shall maintain a record for each
certification candidate that contains the
relevant data furnished by the other
railroad which it relied on in making its
determinations.
(e) All records required under this
section shall be retained by the railroad
for a period of six years from the date
of the certification, recertification,
denial, or revocation decision and shall,
upon request, be made available to FRA
representatives in a timely manner.
(f) It shall be unlawful for any railroad
to knowingly or any individual to
willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or
participate in the making of a false entry
on the record(s) required by this section;
or
(2) Otherwise falsify such records
through material misstatement,
omission, or mutilation.
(g) Nothing in this section precludes
a railroad from maintaining the
information required to be retained
under this section in an electronic
format provided that:
(1) The railroad maintains an
information technology security
program adequate to ensure the integrity
of the electronic data storage system,
including the prevention of
unauthorized access to the program
logic or individual records;
(2) The program and data storage
system must be protected by a security
system that utilizes an employee
identification number and password, or
a comparable method, to establish
appropriate levels of program access
meeting all of the following standards:
(i) No two individuals have the same
electronic identity; and
(ii) A record cannot be deleted or
altered by any individual after the
record is certified by the employee who
created the record;
(3) Any amendment to a record is
either:
(i) Electronically stored apart from the
record that it amends; or
(ii) Electronically attached to the
record as information without changing
the original record;
(4) Each amendment to a record
uniquely identifies the person making
the amendment; and
(5) The system employed by the
railroad for data storage permits
reasonable access and retrieval of the
information which can be easily
produced in an electronic or printed
format that can be:
(i) Provided to FRA representatives in
a timely manner; and
(ii) Authenticated by a designated
representative of the railroad as a true
and accurate copy of the railroad’s
records if requested to do so by an FRA
representative.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44888
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.205 List of certified signal
employees and recordkeeping.
(a) After a railroad’s certification
program has received its initial approval
from FRA, pursuant to § 246.103(f)(1),
the railroad must maintain a list of each
person who is currently certified as a
signal employee by the railroad. The list
must include the date of the railroad’s
certification decision and the date the
person’s signal employee certification
expires. If a railroad classifies its
certified signal employees into
occupational categories or subcategories
by class, task, location, or other suitable
terminology, the list must indicate the
occupational categories and
subcategories in which each certified
signal employee is certified to perform
service.
(b) The list shall:
(1) Be updated at least annually;
(2) Be made available, upon request,
to FRA representatives in a timely
manner; and
(3) Be available either:
(i) In electronic format pursuant to
paragraph (c) of this section; or
(ii) At the divisional or regional
headquarters of the railroad.
(c) If a railroad elects to maintain its
list in an electronic format, it must:
(1) Maintain an information
technology security program adequate to
ensure the integrity of the electronic
data storage system, including the
prevention of unauthorized access to the
program logic or the list;
(2) Have its program and data storage
system protected by a security system
that utilizes an employee identification
number and password, or a comparable
method, to establish appropriate levels
of program access meeting all of the
following standards:
(i) No two individuals have the same
electronic identity; and
(ii) An entry on the list cannot be
deleted or altered by any individual
after the entry is certified by the
employee who created the entry;
(3) Have any amendment to the list
either:
(i) Electronically stored apart from the
entry on the list that it amends; or
(ii) Electronically attached to the
entry on the list as information without
changing the original entry;
(4) Ensure that each amendment to
the list uniquely identifies the person
making the amendment;
(5) Ensure that the system employed
for data storage permits reasonable
access and retrieval of the information
which can be easily produced in an
electronic or printed format that can be:
(i) Provided to FRA representatives
within a timely manner; and
(ii) Authenticated by a designated
representative of the railroad as a true
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
and accurate copy of the railroad’s
records if requested to do so by an FRA
representative.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any
railroad to knowingly or any individual
to willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or
participate in the making of a false entry
on the list required by this section; or
(2) Otherwise falsify such list through
material misstatement, omission, or
mutilation.
§ 246.207
Certificate requirements.
(a) Each person who becomes a
certified signal employee in accordance
with this part shall be issued a paper or
electronic certificate that:
(1)(i) Identifies the railroad issuing
the certificate; or
(ii) Identifies the parent company
issuing the certificate, if a parent
company submits a certification
program for one or more of its
subsidiary railroads. The certificate
issued by the parent company shall also
list each subsidiary railroad on which
the person is certified to work as a
signal employee;
(2) Indicates it is a signal employee
certificate and, if applicable, lists all
signal employee occupational categories
or subcategories developed pursuant to
§ 246.107 in which the person is
certified;
(3) Provides the following information
about the certified signal employee:
(i) Name;
(ii) Employee identification number;
and
(iii) Either a physical description or
photograph of the person;
(4) Identifies any conditions or
limitations, including conditions to
ameliorate vision or hearing acuity
deficiencies, that restrict, limit, or alter
the person’s abilities to work as a
certified signal employee;
(5) Shows the effective date of the
certification;
(6) Shows the expiration date of the
certification unless the certificate was
issued pursuant to § 246.105(c) or (d);
(7) Has been signed by an individual
designated in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section; and
(8) Is electronic or of sufficiently
small size to permit being carried in an
ordinary pocket wallet.
(b) Each railroad or parent company
shall designate in writing any person it
authorizes to sign the certificates
described in this section. The
designation shall identify such persons
by name or job title.
(c) Nothing in this section shall
prohibit any railroad or parent company
from including additional information
on the certificate or supplementing the
certificate through other documents.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(d) It shall be unlawful for any
railroad or parent company to
knowingly or any individual to
willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or
participate in the making of a false entry
on a certificate; or
(2) Otherwise falsify a certificate
through material misstatement,
omission, or mutilation.
(e) Except as provided for in
paragraph (g) of this section, each
certified signal employee shall:
(1) Have their certificate in their
possession while on duty as a signal
employee; and
(2) Display their certificate upon
request from:
(i) An FRA representative;
(ii) A state inspector authorized under
part 212 of this chapter;
(iii) An officer of the issuing railroad;
or
(iv) An officer of the person’s
employer if the certified signal
employee is not employed by the
issuing railroad.
(f) If a person’s signal employee
certificate is lost, stolen, mutilated, or
becomes unreadable, the railroad shall
promptly replace the certificate at no
cost to the person.
(g) A certified signal employee is
exempt from the requirements of
paragraph (e) of this section if:
(1) The railroad made its certification
or recertification decision within the
last 30 days and the person has not yet
received their certificate; or
(2) The person’s signal employee
certificate was lost, stolen, mutilated, or
became unreadable, and the railroad has
not yet issued a replacement certificate
to the person who reported their lost
certificate.
(h) Any person who is notified or
called to work as a certified signal
employee and such work would cause
the person to exceed certificate
limitations, set forth in accordance with
subpart B of this part, shall immediately
notify the railroad that they are not
authorized to perform that work and it
shall be unlawful for the railroad to
require such work.
(i) Nothing in this section shall be
deemed to alter a certified signal
employee’s duty to comply with other
provisions of this chapter concerning
railroad safety.
§ 246.213
Multiple certifications.
(a) A person who holds a signal
employee certificate may:
(1) Hold a signal employee certificate
for multiple types of signal service; and
(2) Be certified in other crafts, such as
a locomotive engineer or conductor.
(b) A railroad that issues multiple
certificates to a person, shall, to the
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
extent possible, coordinate the
expiration date of those certificates.
(c) Paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of
this section apply to persons who are
currently certified as a signal employee
for multiple railroads or are seeking to
become certified signal employees for
multiple railroads.
(1) A person who holds a current
signal employee certificate from more
than one railroad shall immediately
notify the other certifying railroad(s) if
they are denied signal employee
certification or recertification under
§ 246.301 by a railroad or have their
signal employee certification suspended
or revoked under § 246.307 by a
railroad.
(2) If a person has their signal
employee certification suspended or
revoked by a railroad under § 246.307,
they shall not work as a certified signal
employee for any railroad during the
period that their certification is
suspended or revoked, except as
provided for in § 246.124(d).
(3) If a person has their signal
employee certification suspended or
revoked by a railroad under § 246.307,
they shall notify any railroad from
whom they are seeking signal employee
certification that their signal employee
certification is currently suspended or
revoked by another railroad.
(d) Paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of
this section apply to persons who are
currently certified as a signal employee
and also currently certified in another
railroad craft, such as a locomotive
engineer or conductor:
(1) If a person’s signal employee
certification is revoked under § 246.307
for a violation of § 246.303(e)(11), they
shall not work in another certified
railroad craft, such as a locomotive
engineer or conductor, during the
period of revocation.
(2) If a person’s signal employee
certification is revoked under § 246.307
for a violation of § 246.303(e)(1) through
(10), they may work in another certified
railroad craft, such as a locomotive
engineer or conductor, during the
period of revocation.
(3) If any of a person’s non-signal
employee certifications are revoked for
failure to comply with § 219.101 of this
chapter, they shall not work as a
certified signal employee for any
railroad during the period of revocation.
(4) If any of a person’s non-signal
employee certifications are revoked for
any reason other than a failure to
comply with § 219.101 of this chapter,
they may work as a certified signal
employee during the period of
revocation.
(e) A person who has had their signal
employee certification revoked for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
failure to comply with § 219.101 of this
chapter shall not obtain any other
certification pursuant to this chapter
from any railroad during the period of
revocation.
(f) A person who has had any of their
non-signal employee certifications
revoked for failure to comply with
§ 219.101 of this chapter shall not obtain
signal employee certification pursuant
to this part from any railroad during the
period of revocation.
(g) A railroad that denies a person
signal employee certification or
recertification under § 246.301 shall not,
solely on the basis of that denial, deny
or revoke that person’s non-signal
employee certifications or
recertifications.
(h) A railroad that denies a person any
non-signal employee certification or
recertification pursuant to this chapter
shall not, solely on the basis of that
denial, deny or revoke that person’s
signal employee certification or
recertification.
(i) In lieu of issuing multiple
certificates, a railroad may issue one
certificate to a person who is certified in
multiple crafts as long as the single
certificate complies with all of the
certificate requirements for those crafts.
(j) A person who is certified in
multiple crafts and who is involved in
a revocable event, as described in this
chapter, may only have one certificate
revoked for that event. The
determination by the railroad as to
which certificate to revoke must be
based on the work the person was
performing at the time the revocable
event occurred.
§ 246.215 Railroad oversight
responsibilities.
(a) No later than March 31 of each
year (beginning in calendar year 2027),
each Class I railroad (including the
National Railroad Passenger
Corporation), each railroad providing
commuter service, and each Class II
railroad shall conduct a formal annual
review and analysis concerning the
administration of its program for
responding to detected instances of poor
safety conduct by certified signal
employees during the prior calendar
year.
(b) Each review and analysis shall
involve:
(1) The number and nature of the
instances of detected poor safety
conduct including the nature of the
remedial action taken in response
thereto;
(2) The number and nature of FRA
reported accidents/incidents attributed
to poor safety performance by signal
employees; and
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44889
(3) The number and type of
operational monitoring test failures
recorded by certified signal employees
conducting compliance tests pursuant to
§ 246.123.
(c) Based on that review and analysis,
each railroad shall determine what
action(s) it will take to improve the
safety of railroad operations to reduce or
eliminate future accidents/incidents of
that nature.
(d) If requested in writing by FRA, by
the president of a labor organization that
represents the railroad’s signal
employees, or by a railroad’s certified
signal employee who is not represented
by a labor organization, the railroad
shall provide a report of the findings
and conclusions reached during such
annual review and analysis effort.
(e) For reporting purposes,
information about the nature of detected
poor safety conduct shall be capable of
segregation for study and evaluation
purposes into the following categories:
(1) Incidents involving
noncompliance with railroad rules and
procedures governing the removal from
service of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade
crossing warning devices and systems;
and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and
systems;
(iii) Other devices or signal systems
subject to this part.
(2) Incidents involving
noncompliance with railroad rules and
procedures governing the restoration of
service of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade
crossing warning devices and systems;
and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and
systems;
(iii) Other devices or signal systems
subject to this part.
(3) Incidents involving interference
with the normal functioning of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade
crossing warning devices and systems;
and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and
systems.
(4) Incidents involving
noncompliance with railroad rules and
test procedures governing the inspection
and testing of grade crossing warning
devices and systems after installation,
modification, disarrangement,
maintenance, testing, and repair.
(5) Incidents involving
noncompliance with railroad test
procedures on devices or signal systems
subject to this part.
(6) Incidents resulting in a signal false
proceed, grade crossing activation
failure, or accident or personal injury
related to the same.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44890
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(7) Incidents involving
noncompliance with the on-track safety
requirements and blue signal
requirements in parts 214 and 218 of
this chapter.
(8) Incidents involving
noncompliance with part 219 of this
chapter.
(f) For reporting purposes, each
category of detected poor safety conduct
identified in paragraph (e) of this
section shall be capable of being
annotated to reflect the following:
(1) The total number of incidents in
that category;
(2) The number of incidents within
that total which reflect incidents
requiring an FRA accident/incident
report under part 225 of this chapter;
and
(3) The number of incidents within
that total which were detected as a
result of a scheduled operational
monitoring effort.
(g) For reporting purposes, each
instance of detected poor safety conduct
identified in paragraph (b) of this
section shall be capable of being
annotated to reflect the following:
(1) The nature of the remedial action
taken, and the number of events
subdivided, so as to reflect which of the
following actions was selected:
(i) Imposition of informal discipline;
(ii) Imposition of formal discipline;
(iii) Provision of informal training; or
(iv) Provision of formal training; and
(2) If the nature of the remedial action
taken was formal discipline, the number
of events further subdivided so as to
reflect which of the following
punishments was imposed by the
railroad:
(i) The person was withheld from
service;
(ii) The person was dismissed from
employment; or
(iii) The person was issued demerits.
If more than one form of punishment
was imposed, only the punishment
deemed the most severe shall be shown.
(iv) The person’s classification or type
of signal employee service was removed
or reduced.
(h) For reporting purposes, each
instance of detected poor safety conduct
identified in paragraph (b) of this
section which resulted in the imposition
of formal or informal discipline shall be
annotated to reflect the following:
(1) The number of instances in which
the railroad’s internal appeals process
reduced the punishment initially
imposed at the conclusion of its hearing;
and
(2) The number of instances in which
the punishment imposed by the railroad
was reduced by any of the following
entities: The National Railroad
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Adjustment Board, a Public Law Board,
a Special Board of Adjustment, or other
body for the resolution of disputes duly
constituted under the provisions of the
Railway Labor Act.
(i) For reporting purposes, an instance
of poor safety conduct involving a
person who is a certified signal
employee and is certified in another
craft such as locomotive engineer or
conductor, need only be reported once
(e.g., either under this section or
§ 240.309 or § 242.215 of this chapter).
The determination as to where to report
the instance of poor safety conduct
should be based on the work the person
was performing at the time the conduct
occurred.
Subpart D—Denial and Revocation of
Certification
§ 246.301 Process for denying
certification.
(a) A railroad shall notify a candidate
for certification or recertification of
information known to the railroad that
forms the basis for denying the person
certification and provide the candidate
a reasonable opportunity to explain or
rebut that adverse information in
writing prior to denying certification. A
railroad shall provide the candidate
with any documents or records,
including written statements, related to
failure to meet a requirement of this part
that support its pending denial decision.
(b) If a railroad denies a person
certification or recertification, it shall
issue a decision that complies with all
of the following requirements:
(1) It must be in writing.
(2) It must explain the basis for the
railroad’s denial decision.
(3) It must address any explanation or
rebuttal information that the candidate
provides pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section.
(4) It must include the date of the
railroad’s decision.
(5) It must be served on the person no
later than 10 days after the railroad’s
decision.
(c) A railroad shall not deny the
person’s certification for failing to
comply with a railroad test procedure,
signal standard, or practice which
constitutes a violation under
§ 246.303(e)(1) through (10) if sufficient
evidence exists to establish that an
intervening cause prevented or
materially impaired the person’s ability
to comply with that railroad test
procedure, signal standard, or practice.
§ 246.303 Criteria for revoking
certification.
(a) It shall be unlawful to fail to
comply with any of the railroad rules or
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
practices described in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(b) A certified signal employee who
fails to comply with a railroad test
procedure, signal standard or practice
described in paragraph (e) of this
section shall have their certification
revoked.
(c) A certified signal employee who is
assigned to monitor, mentor, or instruct
a signal employee and fails to take
appropriate action to prevent a violation
of paragraph (e) of this section shall
have their certification revoked.
(d) A certified signal employee who is
called by a railroad to perform a duty
other than that of a signal employee
shall not have their signal employee
certification revoked based on actions
taken or not taken while performing that
duty except for violations described in
paragraph (e)(11) of this section.
(e) When determining whether to
revoke a person’s signal employee
certification, a railroad shall only
consider violations of Federal regulatory
provisions or railroad rules, procedures,
signal standards, and practices that
involve:
(1) Interfering with the normal
functioning of a highway-rail grade
crossing warning system under
§ 234.209 of this chapter, or signal
system under § 236.4 of this chapter,
without providing an alternative means
of protection. (Railroads shall only
consider those violations that result in
an activation failure or false proceed
signal.)
(2) Failure to comply with a railroad
rule or procedure when removing from
service:
(i) Highway-rail or pathway grade
crossing warning devices and systems;
(ii) Wayside signal devices or signal
systems; or
(iii) Other devices or signal systems
subject to this part.
(3) Failure to comply with railroad
rule or procedure when placing in
service or restoring to service:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade
crossing warning devices and systems;
(ii) Wayside signal devices or signal
systems; or
(iii) Other devices or signal systems
subject to this part.
(4) Failure to perform an inspection or
test to ensure a highway-rail or pathway
grade crossing warning device or system
functions as intended, when required by
railroad rule or procedure, after:
(i) Installation, maintenance, testing
or repair of the warning device or
system;
(ii) Modification or disarrangement of
the warning device or system; or
(iii) Malfunction or failure of the
warning device or system;
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(5) Failure to restore power to train
detection device or highway-rail or
pathway grade crossing warning device
or system after manual interruption of
the power source. (Railroads shall
consider only those violations that
result in activation failures.)
(6) Failure to comply with railroad
validation or cutover procedures.
(7) Failure to comply with §§ 214.313,
214.319, 214.321, 214.323, 214.325,
214.327, or 214.329. Railroads shall
consider only those violations directly
involving a person who failed to obtain
proper on-track safety before fouling a
track.
(8) Failure to comply with § 218.25 of
this chapter (Workers on a main track);
(9) Failure to comply with § 218.27 of
this chapter (Workers on other than
main track);
(10) Failure to comply with § 218.29
of this chapter (Alternate methods of
protection);
(11) Failure to comply with § 219.101
of this chapter. However, such incidents
shall be considered as a violation only
for the purposes of § 246.305(a)(2) and
(b).
(f) In making the determination as to
whether to revoke a person’s signal
employee certification, a railroad shall
only consider conduct described in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (10) of this
section that occurred within the three
years prior to the determination.
(g) If in any single incident the
person’s conduct contravened more
than one Federal regulatory provision or
railroad rule, procedure, signal
standard, or practice, that event shall be
treated as a single violation for the
purposes of this section.
(h) A violation of one or more railroad
rules, procedures, signal standards, or
practices described in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (10) of this section that occurs
during a properly conducted
compliance test subject to the
provisions of this chapter shall be
counted in determining the periods of
ineligibility described in § 246.305.
(i) A compliance test that is not
conducted in compliance with this part,
a railroad’s operating rules, or a
railroad’s program under § 217.9 of this
chapter, will not be considered a
legitimate test of skill or knowledge, and
will not be considered for revocation
purposes.
(j) Each railroad shall adopt and
comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any
person (including, but not limited to,
each railroad, railroad officer,
supervisor, and employee) violates any
requirement of a program which
complies with the requirements of this
section, that person shall be considered
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
to have violated the requirements of this
section.
§ 246.305
Periods of ineligibility.
(a) The starting date for a period of
ineligibility described in this section
shall be:
(1) For a person not currently
certified, the date of the railroad’s
written determination that the most
recent incident has occurred; or
(2) For a person currently certified,
the date of the railroad’s notification to
the person that recertification has been
denied or certification has been
suspended.
(b) A period of ineligibility shall be
determined according to the following
standards:
(1) In the case of a single incident
involving a violation of one or more of
the Federal regulatory provisions or
railroad rules, procedures, signal
standards, or practices described in
§ 246.303(e)(1) through (10), the person
shall have their certificate revoked for a
period of 30 calendar days.
(2) In the case of two separate
incidents involving a violation of one or
more of the Federal regulatory
provisions or railroad rules, procedures,
signal standards, or practices described
in § 246.303(e)(1) through (10), that
occurred within 24 months of each
other, the person shall have their
certificate revoked for a period of six
months.
(3) In the case of three separate
incidents involving violations of one or
more of the Federal regulatory
provisions or railroad rules, procedures,
signal standards, or practices, described
in § 246.303(e)(1) through (11), that
occurred within 36 months of each
other, the person shall have their
certificate revoked for a period of one
year.
(4) In the case of four separate
incidents involving violations of one or
more of the Federal regulatory
provisions or railroad rules, procedures,
signal standards, or practices, described
in § 246.303(e)(1) through (11), that
occurred within 36 months of each
other, the person shall have their
certificate revoked for a period of three
years.
(5) Where, based on the occurrence of
violations described in § 246.303(e)(11),
different periods of ineligibility may
result under the provisions of this
section and § 246.115, the longest
period of revocation shall control.
(c) Any or all periods of revocation
provided in paragraph (b) of this section
may consist of training.
(d) A person whose certification is
denied or revoked shall be eligible for
grant or reinstatement of the certificate
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44891
prior to the expiration of the initial
period of ineligibility only if:
(1) The denial or revocation of
certification in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (b) of this
section is for a period of one year or
less;
(2) Certification is denied or revoked
for reasons other than noncompliance
with § 219.101 of this chapter;
(3) The person is evaluated by a
railroad officer and determined to have
received adequate remedial training;
(4) The person successfully completes
any mandatory program of training or
retraining, if that is determined to be
necessary by the railroad prior to return
to service; and
(5) At least one half of the pertinent
period of ineligibility specified in
paragraph (b) of this section has
elapsed.
§ 246.307 Process for revoking
certification.
(a) If a railroad determines that a
person, who is currently certified as a
signal employee by the railroad, has
violated a Federal regulatory provision,
railroad test procedure, signal standard
or practice described in § 246.303(e), the
railroad shall revoke the person’s signal
employee certification in accordance
with the procedures and requirements
of this section.
(b) Except as provided for in
§ 246.115(f), if a railroad acquires
reliable information that a person, who
is currently certified as a signal
employee by the railroad, has violated a
Federal regulatory provision, railroad
rule, procedure, signal standard, or
practice described in § 246.303(e) or
§ 246.115(d), the railroad shall
undertake the following process to
determine whether revocation of the
person’s signal employee certification is
warranted:
(1) The person’s signal employee
certification shall be suspended
immediately.
(2) The person’s employer(s) (if
different from the suspending railroad)
shall be immediately notified of the
certification suspension and the reason
for the certification suspension.
(3) Prior to or upon suspending the
person’s signal employee certification,
the railroad shall provide the person
with notice of: the reason for the
suspension; the pending revocation; and
an opportunity for a hearing before a
presiding officer other than the
investigating officer. This notice may
initially be given either orally or in
writing. If given orally, the notice must
be subsequently confirmed in writing in
a manner that conforms with the
notification provisions of the applicable
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
44892
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
collective bargaining agreement. If there
is no applicable collective bargaining
agreement notification provision, the
written notice must be made within four
days of the date the certification was
suspended.
(4) The railroad must convene the
hearing within the time frame required
under the applicable collective
bargaining agreement. If there is no
applicable collective bargaining
agreement or the applicable collective
bargaining agreement does not include
such a requirement, the hearing shall be
convened within ten days of the date
the certification is suspended unless the
person requests or consents to a delay
to the start of the hearing.
(5) Except as provided for in
paragraph (c) of this section, the railroad
shall provide the certified signal
employee with a copy of the written
information and a list of witnesses the
railroad will present at the hearing at
least 72 hours before the start of the
hearing. If this information was
provided by an employee of the
railroad, the railroad shall make that
employee available for examination
during the hearing notwithstanding the
terms of an applicable collective
bargaining agreement.
(6) Following the hearing, the railroad
must determine, based on the record of
the hearing, whether revocation of the
certification is warranted and state
explicitly the basis for the conclusion
reached. The railroad shall have the
burden of proving that revocation of the
person’s signal employee certification is
warranted under § 246.303.
(7) If the railroad determines that
revocation of the person’s signal
employee certification is warranted, the
railroad shall impose the proper period
of revocation provided for in § 246.305
or § 246.115.
(8) The railroad shall retain the record
of the hearing for three years after the
date the decision is rendered.
(c) A hearing required by this section
which is conducted in a manner that
conforms procedurally to the applicable
collective bargaining agreement shall
satisfy the procedural requirements of
this section.
(d) Except as provided for in
paragraph (c) of this section, a hearing
required under this section shall be
conducted in accordance with the
following procedures:
(1) The hearing shall be conducted by
a presiding officer who can be any
proficient person authorized by the
railroad other than the investigating
officer.
(2) The presiding officer shall
convene and preside over the hearing
and exercise the powers necessary to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
regulate the conduct of the hearing for
the purpose of achieving a prompt and
fair determination of all material issues
in dispute.
(3) The presiding officer may:
(i) Adopt any needed procedures for
the submission of evidence in written
form;
(ii) Examine witnesses at the hearing;
and
(iii) Take any other action authorized
by or consistent with the provisions of
this part and permitted by law that may
assist in achieving a prompt and fair
determination of all material issues in
dispute.
(4) All relevant and probative
evidence shall be received into the
record unless the presiding officer
determines the evidence to be unduly
repetitive or have such minimal
relevance that its admission would
impair the prompt, orderly, and fair
resolution of the proceeding.
(5) Parties may appear at the hearing
and be heard on their own behalf or
through designated representatives.
Parties may offer relevant evidence
including testimony and may conduct
such examination of witnesses as may
be required for a full disclosure of the
relevant facts.
(6) Testimony by witnesses at the
hearing shall be recorded verbatim.
Witnesses can testify in person, over the
phone, or virtually.
(7) The record in the proceeding shall
be closed at the conclusion of the
hearing unless the presiding officer
allows additional time for the
submission of evidence.
(8) A hearing required under this
section may be consolidated with any
disciplinary action or other hearing
arising from the same facts, but in all
instances a railroad official, other than
the investigating officer, shall make
separate findings as to the revocation
required under this section.
(9) A person may waive their right to
a hearing. That waiver shall:
(i) Be made in writing;
(ii) Reflect the fact that the person has
knowledge and understanding of these
rights and voluntarily surrenders them;
and
(iii) Be signed by the person making
the waiver.
(e) Except as provided for in
paragraph (c) of this section, a decision,
required by this section, on whether to
revoke a person’s signal employee
certification shall comply with the
following requirements:
(1) No later than ten days after the
close of the record, a railroad official,
other than the investigating officer, shall
prepare and sign a written decision as
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
to whether the railroad is revoking the
person’s signal employee certification.
(2) The decision shall:
(i) Contain the findings of fact on all
material issues as well as an explanation
for those findings with citations to all
applicable railroad rules, signal
standards and procedures and any
applicable Federal regulations;
(ii) State whether the railroad official
found that the person’s signal employee
certification should be revoked;
(iii) State the period of revocation
under § 246.305 (if the railroad official
concludes that the person’s signal
employee certification should be
revoked); and
(iv) Be served on the person and their
representative, if any, with the railroad
retaining proof of service for three years
after the date the decision is rendered.
(f) The period that a person’s signal
employee certification is suspended in
accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this
section shall be credited towards any
period of revocation that the railroad
assesses in accordance with § 246.305.
(g) A railroad shall revoke a person’s
signal employee certification if, during
the period that certification is valid, the
railroad acquires information that
another railroad has revoked the
person’s signal employee certification in
accordance with the provisions of this
section. Such revocation shall run
concurrently with the period of
revocation imposed by the railroad that
initially revoked the person’s signal
employee certification. The requirement
to provide a hearing under this section
is satisfied when any single railroad
holds a hearing. No additional hearing
is required prior to a revocation by more
than one railroad arising from the same
facts.
(h) A railroad shall not revoke a
person’s signal employee certification if
sufficient evidence exists to establish
that an intervening cause prevented or
materially impaired the person’s ability
to comply with the railroad test
procedure, signal standard, or practice
which constitutes a violation under
§ 246.303.
(i) A railroad may decide not to
revoke a person’s signal employee
certification if sufficient evidence exists
to establish that the violation of the
railroad test procedure, signal standard,
or practice described in § 246.303(e) was
of a minimal nature and had no direct
or potential effect on rail safety.
(j) If sufficient evidence meeting the
criteria in paragraph (h) or (i) of this
section becomes available, including
prior to a railroad’s action to suspend
the certificate as provided for in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section or prior
to the convening of the hearing
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
provided for in this section, the railroad
shall place the relevant information in
the records maintained in compliance
with:
(1) Section 246.215 for Class I
railroads (including the National
Railroad Passenger Corporation),
railroads providing commuter service,
and Class II railroads; and
(2) Section 246.203 for Class III
railroads.
(k) If a railroad makes a good faith
determination, after performing a
reasonable inquiry, that the course of
conduct provided for in paragraph (h) or
(i) of this section is warranted, the
railroad will not be in violation of
paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it
decides not to suspend the person’s
signal employee certification.
Subpart E—Dispute Resolution
Procedures
§ 246.401
Review board established.
(a) Any person who has been denied
certification or recertification, or has
had their certification revoked and
believes that a railroad incorrectly
determined that they failed to meet the
certification requirements of this part
when making the decision to deny or
revoke certification, may petition the
Administrator to review the railroad’s
decision.
(b) The Administrator has delegated
initial responsibility for adjudicating
such disputes to the Certification
Review Board (Board). The Board shall
be composed of FRA employees.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.403
Petition requirements.
(a) To obtain review of a railroad’s
decision to deny certification, deny
recertification, or revoke certification, a
person shall file a petition for review
that complies with this section.
(b) Each petition shall:
(1) Be in writing;
(2) Be filed no more than 120 days
after the date the railroad’s denial or
revocation decision was served on the
petitioner, except as provided for in
paragraph (d) of this section;
(3) Be filed on https://
www.regulations.gov;
(4) Include the following contact
information for the petitioner and
petitioner’s representative (if petitioner
is represented):
(i) Full name;
(ii) Daytime telephone number; and
(iii) Email address;
(5) Include the name of the railroad
and the name of the petitioner’s
employer (if different from the railroad
that revoked petitioner’s certification);
(6) Contain the facts that the
petitioner believes constitute the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
improper action by the railroad and the
arguments in support of the petition;
and
(7) Include all written documents in
the petitioner’s possession or reasonably
available to the petitioner that
document the railroad’s decision.
(c) If requested by the Board, the
petitioner must provide a copy of the
information under 49 CFR 40.329 that
laboratories, medical review officers,
and other service agents are required to
release to employees. The petitioner
must provide a written explanation in
response to a Board request if written
documents, that should be reasonably
available to the petitioner, are not
supplied.
(d) The Board may extend the petition
filing period in its discretion provided
the petitioner provides good cause for
the extension and:
(1) The request for an extension is
filed before the expiration of the period
provided for in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section; or
(2) The failure to timely file was the
result of excusable neglect.
(e) A party aggrieved by a Board
decision to deny a petition as untimely
or not in compliance with the
requirements of this section may file an
appeal with the Administrator in
accordance with § 246.411.
§ 246.405 Processing certification review
petitions.
(a) Each petition shall be
acknowledged in writing by FRA. The
acknowledgment shall be sent to the
petitioner (if an email address is
provided), petitioner’s representative (if
any), the railroad, and petitioner’s
employer (if different from the railroad
that revoked petitioner’s certification).
The acknowledgment shall contain the
docket number assigned to the petition
and will notify the parties where the
petition can be accessed.
(b) Within 60 days from the date of
the acknowledgment provided in
paragraph (a) of this section, the railroad
may submit to FRA any information that
the railroad considers pertinent to the
petition and shall supplement the
record with any relevant documents in
its possession, such as hearing
transcripts and exhibits, that were not
submitted by the petitioner. Late filings
will only be considered to the extent
practicable. A railroad that submits such
information shall:
(1) Identify the petitioner by name
and the docket number for the petition;
(2) Provide the railroad’s email
address;
(3) Serve a copy of the information
being submitted to the petitioner and
petitioner’s representative (if any); and
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44893
(4) Be filed on https://
www.regulations.gov.
(c) The petition will be referred to the
Board for a decision after a railroad’s
response is received or 60 days from the
date of the acknowledgment provided in
paragraph (a) of this section, whichever
is earlier. Based on the record, the Board
shall have the authority to grant, deny,
dismiss, or remand the petition. If the
Board finds that there is insufficient
basis for granting or denying the
petition, the Board may issue an order
affording the parties an opportunity to
provide additional information or
argument consistent with its findings.
(d) When considering procedural
issues, the Board will grant the petition
if the petitioner shows:
(1) That a procedural error occurred;
and
(2) The procedural error caused
substantial harm to the petitioner.
(e) When considering factual issues,
the Board will grant the petition if the
petitioner shows that the railroad did
not provide substantial evidence to
support its decision.
(f) When considering legal issues, the
Board will determine whether the
railroad’s legal interpretations are
correct based on a de novo review.
(g) The Board will only consider
whether the denial or revocation of
certification or recertification was
improper under this part and will grant
or deny the petition accordingly. The
Board will not otherwise consider the
propriety of a railroad’s decision. For
example,the Board will not consider
whether the railroad properly applied
its own more stringent requirements.
(h) The Board’s written decision shall
be served on the petitioner and/or
petitioner’s representative (if any), the
railroad, and petitioner’s employer (if
different from the railroad that revoked
petitioner’s certification).
§ 246.407
Request for a hearing.
(a) If adversely affected by the Board’s
decision, either the petitioner before the
Board or the railroad involved shall
have a right to an administrative
proceeding as prescribed by § 246.409.
(b) To exercise that right, the
adversely affected party shall file a
written request for a hearing within 20
days of service of the Board’s decision
on that party. The request must be filed
in the docket on https://
www.regulations.gov that was used
when the case was before the Board.
(c) A written request for a hearing
must contain the following:
(1) The name, telephone number, and
email address of the requesting party
and the party’s designated
representative (if any);
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44894
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(2) The name, telephone number, and
email address of the respondent;
(3) The docket number for the case
while it was before the Board;
(4) The specific factual issues,
industry rules, regulations, or laws that
the requesting party alleges need to be
examined in connection with the
certification decision in question; and
(5) The signature of the requesting
party or the requesting party’s
representative (if any).
(d) Upon receipt of a hearing request
complying with paragraph (c) of this
section, FRA shall arrange for the
appointment of a presiding officer who
shall schedule the hearing for the
earliest practicable date.
(e) If a party fails to request a hearing
within the period provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, the Board’s decision
will constitute final agency action.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.409
Hearings.
(a) An administrative hearing for a
signal employee certification petition
shall be conducted by a presiding
officer, who can be any person
authorized by the Administrator.
(b) The presiding officer shall
convene and preside over the hearing.
The hearing shall be a de novo hearing
to find the relevant facts and determine
the correct application of this part to
those facts. The presiding officer may
determine that there is no genuine issue
covering some or all material facts and
limit evidentiary proceedings to any
issues of material fact as to which there
is a genuine dispute.
(c) The presiding officer may exercise
the powers of the Administrator to
regulate the conduct of the hearing for
the purpose of achieving a prompt and
fair determination of all material issues
in controversy.
(d) The presiding officer may
authorize discovery of the types and
quantities which in the presiding
officer’s discretion will contribute to a
fair hearing without unduly burdening
the parties. The presiding officer may
impose appropriate non-monetary
sanctions, including limitations as to
the presentation of evidence and issues,
for any party’s willful failure or refusal
to comply with approved discovery
requests.
(e) Every petition, motion, response,
or other authorized or required
document shall be signed by the party
filing the same, or by a duly authorized
officer or representative of record, or by
any other person. If signed by such
other person, the reason therefor must
be stated and the power of attorney or
other authority authorizing such other
person to subscribe the document must
be filed with the document. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
signature of the person subscribing any
document constitutes a certification that
they have read the document; that to the
best of their knowledge, information,
and belief, every statement contained in
the document is true and no such
statements are misleading; and that it is
not interposed for delay or to be
vexatious.
(f) After the request for a hearing is
filed, all documents filed or served
upon one party must be served upon all
parties. Each party may designate a
person upon whom service is to be
made when not specified by law,
regulation, or directive of the presiding
officer. If a party does not designate a
person upon whom service is to be
made, then service may be made upon
any person having subscribed to a
submission of the party being served,
unless otherwise specified by law,
regulation, or directive of the presiding
officer. Proof of service shall accompany
all documents when they are tendered
for filing.
(g) If any document initiating, filed in,
or served in, a proceeding is not in
substantial compliance with the
applicable law, regulation, or directive
of the presiding officer, the presiding
officer may strike or dismiss all or part
of such document, or require its
amendment.
(h) Any party to a proceeding may
appear and be heard in person or by an
authorized representative.
(i) Any person testifying at a hearing
or deposition may be accompanied,
represented, and advised by an attorney
or other representative, and may be
examined by that person.
(j) Any party may request to
consolidate or separate the hearing of
two or more petitions by motion to the
presiding officer when they arise from
the same or similar facts or when the
matters are for any reason deemed more
efficiently heard together.
(k) Except as provided in § 246.407(e)
and paragraph (s)(4) of this section,
whenever a party has the right or is
required to take action within a period
prescribed by this part, or by law,
regulation, or directive of the presiding
officer, the presiding officer may extend
such period, with or without notice, for
good cause, provided another party is
not substantially prejudiced by such
extension. A request to extend a period
which has already expired may be
denied as untimely.
(l) An application to the presiding
officer for an order or ruling not
otherwise specifically provided for in
this part shall be by motion. The motion
shall be filed with the presiding officer
and, if written, served upon all parties.
All motions, unless made during the
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
hearing, shall be written. Motions made
during hearings may be made orally on
the record, except that the presiding
officer may direct that any oral motion
be reduced to writing. Any motion shall
state with particularity the grounds
therefor and the relief or order sought
and shall be accompanied by any
affidavits or other evidence desired to
be relied upon which is not already part
of the record. Any matter submitted in
response to a written motion must be
filed and served within 14 days of the
motion, or within such other period as
directed by the presiding officer.
(m) Testimony by witnesses at the
hearing shall be given under oath and
the hearing shall be recorded verbatim.
The presiding officer shall give the
parties to the proceeding adequate
opportunity during the course of the
hearing for the presentation of
arguments in support of or in opposition
to motions, and objections and
exceptions to rulings of the presiding
officer. The presiding officer may permit
oral argument on any issues for which
the presiding officer deems it
appropriate and beneficial. Any
evidence or argument received or
proffered orally shall be transcribed and
made a part of the record. Any physical
evidence or written argument received
or proffered shall be made a part of the
record, except that the presiding officer
may authorize the substitution of
copies, photographs, or descriptions,
when deemed to be appropriate.
(n) The presiding officer shall employ
the Federal Rules of Evidence for United
States Courts and Magistrates as general
guidelines for the introduction of
evidence. Notwithstanding paragraph
(m) of this section, all relevant and
probative evidence shall be received
unless the presiding officer determines
the evidence to be unduly repetitive or
so extensive and lacking in relevancy
that its admission would impair the
prompt, orderly, and fair resolution of
the proceeding.
(o) The presiding officer may:
(1) Administer oaths and affirmations;
(2) Issue subpoenas as provided for in
§ 209.7 of this chapter;
(3) Adopt any needed procedures for
the submission of evidence in written
form;
(4) Examine witnesses at the hearing;
(5) Convene, recess, adjourn, or
otherwise regulate the course of the
hearing; and
(6) Take any other action authorized
by or consistent with the provisions of
this part and permitted by law that may
expedite the hearing or aid in the
disposition of the proceeding.
(p) The petitioner before the Board,
the railroad involved in taking the
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
certification action, and FRA shall be
parties at the hearing. All parties may
participate in the hearing and may
appear and be heard on their own behalf
or through designated representatives.
All parties may offer relevant evidence,
including testimony, and may conduct
such cross-examination of witnesses as
may be required to make a record of the
relevant facts.
(q) The party requesting the
administrative hearing shall be the
‘‘hearing petitioner.’’ The party that the
Board issued its decision in favor of will
be a respondent. At the start of each
proceeding, FRA will be a respondent as
well. The hearing petitioner shall have
the burden of proving its case by a
preponderance of the evidence.
(r) The record in the proceeding shall
be closed at the conclusion of the
evidentiary hearing unless the presiding
officer allows additional time for the
submission of additional evidence. In
such instances the record shall be left
open for such time as the presiding
officer grants for that purpose.
(s) At the close of the record, the
presiding officer shall prepare a written
decision in the proceeding. The
decision:
(1) Shall contain the findings of fact
and conclusions of law, as well as the
basis for each, concerning all material
issues of fact or law presented on the
record;
(2) Shall be served on all parties to the
proceeding;
(3) Shall not become final for 35 days
after issuance;
(4) Constitutes final agency action
unless an aggrieved party files an appeal
within 35 days after issuance; and
(5) Is not precedential.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
§ 246.411
Appeals.
(a) Any party aggrieved by the
presiding officer’s decision may file an
appeal in the presiding officer’s docket.
The appeal must be filed within 35 days
of issuance of the decision. A copy of
the appeal shall be served on each party.
The appeal shall set forth objections to
the presiding officer’s decision,
supported by reference to applicable
laws and regulations and with specific
reference to the record. If no appeal is
timely filed, the presiding officer’s
decision constitutes final agency action.
(b) A party may file a reply to the
appeal within 25 days of service of the
appeal. The reply shall be supported by
reference to applicable laws and
regulations and with specific reference
to the record, if the party relies on
evidence contained in the record.
(c) The Administrator may extend the
period for filing an appeal or a reply for
good cause shown, provided that the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
written request for extension is served
before expiration of the applicable
period provided in this section.
(d) The Administrator has sole
discretion to permit oral argument on
the appeal. On the Administrator’s own
initiative or written motion by any
party, the Administrator may grant the
parties an opportunity for oral
argument.
(e) The Administrator may remand,
vacate, affirm, reverse, alter, or modify
the decision of the presiding officer and
the Administrator’s decision constitutes
final agency action except where the
terms of the Administrator’s decision
(for example, remanding a case to the
presiding officer) show that the parties’
administrative remedies have not been
exhausted.
(f) An appeal from a Board decision
pursuant to § 246.403(e) must be filed in
the Board’s docket within 35 days of
issuance of the decision. A copy of the
appeal shall be served on each party.
The Administrator may affirm or vacate
the Board’s decision, and may remand
the petition to the Board for further
proceedings. An Administrator’s
decision to affirm the Board’s decision
constitutes final agency action.
Appendix A to Part 246—Procedures
for Obtaining and Evaluating Motor
Vehicle Driving Record Data
(1) The purpose of this appendix is to
outline the procedures available to
individuals and railroads for complying with
the requirements of § 246.111. This provision
requires that railroads consider the motor
vehicle driving record of each person prior to
issuing them certification or recertification as
a signal employee.
(2) To fulfill that obligation, a railroad is
required to review a certification candidate’s
recent motor vehicle driving record for
information described in § 246.111(m).
Generally, that will be a single record on file
with the state agency that issued the
candidate’s current motor vehicle driver’s
license. However, a motor vehicle driving
record can include multiple documents if the
candidate has been issued a motor vehicle
driver’s license by more than one state
agency or a foreign country.
(3) The right of railroad workers, their
employers, or prospective employers to have
access to a state motor vehicle licensing
agency’s data concerning an individual’s
driving record is controlled by state law.
Although many states have mechanisms
through which employers and prospective
employers, such as railroads, can obtain such
data, there are some states where privacy
concerns make such access very difficult or
impossible. Since individuals are generally
entitled to obtain access to their driving
record data that will be relied on by a state
motor vehicle licensing agency when that
agency is taking action concerning their
driving privileges, FRA places the
responsibility on individuals who want to
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
44895
serve as certified signal employees to request
that their current state motor vehicle
licensing agency (or agencies) furnish such
data directly to the railroad that is
considering certification (or recertification) of
the individual as a signal employee.
Depending on the procedures established by
the state motor vehicle licensing agency, the
individual may be asked to send the state
agency a brief letter requesting such action or
to execute a state agency form that
accomplishes the same effect. Requests for an
individual’s motor vehicle driving record
normally involve payment of a nominal fee
established by the state agency as well. In
rare instances, when a certification (or
recertification) candidate has been issued
multiple licenses, an individual may be
required to submit multiple requests.
(4) Once the railroad has obtained the
individual’s motor vehicle driving record(s),
the railroad is required to afford the
certification (or recertification) candidate an
opportunity to review and comment on the
record(s) in writing pursuant to § 246.301 if
the motor vehicle driving records contain
information that could form the basis for
denying the person certification. This
opportunity to review and comment must
occur before the railroad renders a
certification decision based on information in
the record(s). The railroad is required to
evaluate the information in the certification
(or recertification) candidate’s motor vehicle
driving record(s) pursuant to the provisions
of this part.
Appendix B to Part 246—Medical
Standards Guidelines
(1) The purpose of this appendix is to
provide greater guidance on the procedures
that should be employed in administering the
vision and hearing requirements of
§§ 246.117 and 246.118.
(2) For any examination performed to
determine whether a person meets the visual
acuity requirements in § 246.117, it is
recommended that such examination be
performed by a licensed optometrist or a
technician who reports to a licensed
optometrist. It is also recommended that any
test conducted pursuant to § 246.117 be
performed according to any directions
supplied by the test’s manufacturer and any
ANSI standards that are applicable.
(3) For any examination performed to
determine whether a person meets the
hearing acuity requirements in § 246.118, it
is recommended that such examination be
performed by a licensed or certified
audiologist or a technician who reports to a
licensed or certified audiologist. It is also
recommended that any test conducted
pursuant to § 246.118 be performed
according to any directions supplied by the
test’s manufacturer and any ANSI standards
that are applicable.
(4) In determining whether a person has
the visual acuity that meets or exceeds the
requirements of this part, the following
testing protocols are deemed acceptable
testing methods for determining whether a
person has the ability to recognize and
distinguish among the colors used as signals
in the railroad industry. The acceptable test
methods are shown in the left hand column
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
44896
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
and the criteria that should be employed to
determine whether a person has failed the
particular testing protocol are shown in the
right hand column.
TABLE 1 TO APPENDIX B TO PART 246
Accepted tests
Failure criteria
Pseudoisochromatic Plate Tests
American Optical Company 1965 ............................................................
AOC—Hardy-Rand-Ritter plates—second edition ...................................
Dvorine—Second edition ..........................................................................
Ishihara (14 plate) ....................................................................................
Ishihara (16 plate) ....................................................................................
Ishihara (24 plate) ....................................................................................
Ishihara (38 plate) ....................................................................................
Richmond Plates 1983 .............................................................................
5 or more errors on plates 1–15.
Any error on plates 1–6 (plates 1–4 are for demonstration—test plate 1
is actually plate 5 in book).
3 or more errors on plates 1–15.
2 or more errors on plates 1–11.
2 or more errors on plates 1–8.
3 or more errors on plates 1–15.
4 or more errors on plates 1–21.
5 or more errors on plates 1–15.
Multifunction Vision Tester
Keystone Orthoscope ...............................................................................
OPTEC 2000 ............................................................................................
Titmus Vision Tester .................................................................................
Titmus II Vision Tester .............................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES3
(5) In administering any of these protocols,
the person conducting the examination
should be aware that railroad signals do not
always occur in the same sequence and that
‘‘yellow signals’’ do not always appear to be
the same. It is not acceptable to use ‘‘yarn’’
or other materials to conduct a simple test to
determine whether the certification
candidate has the requisite vision. No person
shall be allowed to wear chromatic lenses
during an initial test of the person’s color
vision; the initial test is one conducted in
accordance with one of the accepted tests in
the chart and § 246.117(c)(3).
(6) An examinee who fails to meet the
criteria in the chart may be further evaluated
as determined by the railroad’s medical
examiner. Ophthalmologic referral, field
testing, or other practical color testing may be
utilized depending on the experience of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 May 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
Any
Any
Any
Any
error.
error.
error.
error.
examinee. The railroad’s medical examiner
will review all pertinent information and,
under some circumstances, may restrict an
examinee who does not meet the criteria for
serving as a certified signal employee. The
intent of §§ 246.117(d) and 246.118(d) is not
to provide an examinee with the right to
make an infinite number of requests for
further evaluation, but to provide an
examinee with at least one opportunity to
prove that a hearing or vision test failure
does not mean the examinee cannot safely
perform as a certified signal employee.
Appropriate further medical evaluation could
include providing another approved
scientific screening test or a field test. All
railroads should retain the discretion to limit
the number of retests that an examinee can
request, but any cap placed on the number
of retests should not limit retesting when
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
changed circumstances would make such
retesting appropriate. Changed circumstances
would most likely occur if the examinee’s
medical condition has improved in some way
or if technology has advanced to the extent
that it arguably could compensate for a
hearing or vision deficiency.
(7) Certified signal employees who wear
contact lenses should have good tolerance to
the lenses and should be instructed to have
a pair of corrective glasses available when on
duty.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Amitabha Bose,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024–09958 Filed 5–20–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
E:\FR\FM\21MYR3.SGM
21MYR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 21, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44830-44896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-09958]
[[Page 44829]]
Vol. 89
Tuesday,
No. 99
May 21, 2024
Part III
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Railroad Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 CFR Part 246
Certification of Signal Employees; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 2024 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 44830]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 246
[Docket No. FRA-2022-0020, Notice No. 4]
RIN 2130-AC92
Certification of Signal Employees
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA is prescribing regulations for certification of signal
employees, pursuant to the authority granted in section 402 of the Rail
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA).
DATES: Effective Date: The rule is effective July 22, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal,
Train Control, and Crossings Division, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, telephone: (816) 516-
7168, email: [email protected]; or Kathryn Gresham, Attorney Adviser,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration,
telephone: (202) 577-7142, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This Document
AANP--American Association of Nurse Practitioners
AAR--Association of American Railroads
ADA--Americans with Disabilities Act
APTA--American Public Transportation Association
ASLRRA--American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association
BRS--Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
CE--Categorical Exclusion
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CRB--Certification Review Board
DAC--Drug and alcohol counselor
DOT--United States Department of Transportation
EA--Environmental Assessment
EIS--Environmental Impact Statement
FRA--Federal Railroad Administration
IBEW--International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
IRFA--Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
ITLC--International Transportation Learning Center
MTA--New York State Metropolitan Transportation Authority
NEPA--National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NRC--Network Rail Consulting Inc.
NRCMA--National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association
NRM--Northwest Railway Museum
OCSR--Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad
OMB--United States Office of Management and Budget
PRA--The Paperwork Reduction Act
PTC--Positive Train Control
PV--Present Value
RIA--Regulatory Impact Analysis
RIN--Regulatory Identification Number
RSAC--Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
RSIA--Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008
SAP--Substance Abuse Professional
SMART-TD--Transportation Division of the International Association
of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers
STB--The Surface Transportation Board
TTD--Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
U.S.C.--United States Code
UTC--Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
Table of Contents for Supplementary Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Legal Authority
III. Background
A. Roles and Responsibilities of Signal Employees
B. FRA History of Certification
C. Statutory Background for Signal Employee Certification
D. Report to Congress
E. RSAC Working Group
F. Public Outreach
G. Role of Third Parties
H. Interaction With Other FRA Regulations
I. Confidential Close Call Reporting System
J. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
IV. Discussion of General Comments and FRA's Conclusions
A. Cost-Benefit Analysis/Safety Justification
B. RSIA Authority
C. Role of Third Parties
D. Interaction With Other FRA Regulations
E. Confidential Close Call Reporting System
F. PTC
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Federalism Implications
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
F. Environmental Impact
G. Environmental Justice
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
I. Energy Impact
J. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
I. Executive Summary
Purpose of the Regulatory Action
FRA is requiring railroads to develop FRA-approved programs for
certifying signal employees who work on signal systems and signal-
related technology on their networks. Pursuant to this rule, railroads
are required to have formal processes for training signal employees, as
well as verifying that each signal employee has the requisite
knowledge, skills, safety record, and ability to safely perform
assigned tasks mandated by railroad rules and safety standards and
Federal law and regulations prior to certification. In addition,
railroads will be required to have formal processes for revoking
certification (either temporarily or permanently) for signal employees
who violate specified minimum requirements.
FRA is promulgating this regulation in response to section 402 of
the RSIA, Public Law 110-432, 122 Stat. 4848, 4884 (Oct. 16, 2008),
which required the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to submit a
report to Congress addressing whether certification of ``certain crafts
or classes'' of railroad employees or contractors, including signal
employees, was necessary to ``reduce the number and rate of accidents
and incidents or to improve railroad safety.'' Section 402 further
provides that the Secretary may prescribe regulations requiring the
certification of certain crafts or classes if the Secretary determined,
pursuant to the report to Congress, that such regulations are necessary
to reduce the number and rate of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.
The Secretary submitted a report to Congress on November 4,
2015,\1\ stating that, based on FRA's preliminary research, signal
employees were one of the most viable candidate railroad crafts for
certification, particularly with the introduction of Positive Train
Control (PTC) technology. Given the safety critical role of signal
employees in facilitating safe railroad operations, FRA determined that
the number and rate of accidents and incidents would be expected to
decrease and railroad safety would be expected to improve if signal
employees are required to satisfy certain standards and be certified by
each railroad whose signal systems they install, troubleshoot, repair,
test, or maintain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A copy of this November 4, 2015 Report to Congress has been
posted in the rulemaking docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2022-0020-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Major Provisions
This rule requires railroads to develop written programs for
certifying individuals who work as signal employees on their
territories, and to submit those written certification programs to FRA
for approval prior to implementation. FRA will issue a letter to the
railroad when it approves a certification program that explains the
basis for approval, and a program will not be considered approved until
FRA issues the approval letter. Subpart A of this rule contains general
provisions, including a formal statement of the rule's purpose and
scope.
[[Page 44831]]
Subpart B of this rule covers the review and approval process of
certification programs, the implementation schedule for this rule, the
certification program requirements, and the eligibility determinations
a railroad must make to certify a person as a signal employee. Class I
railroads (including the National Railroad Passenger Corporation), and
railroads providing commuter service, are required to submit their
written certification programs to FRA no later than eight (8) months
after this rule's effective date. Class II and Class III railroads are
required to submit their written certification plans sixteen (16)
months after this rule's rule effective date. New railroads that begin
operation after the effective date are required to submit their written
certification programs to FRA and obtain FRA approval before installing
their signal systems and commencing operations. In addition, railroads
seeking to materially modify their FRA-approved certification programs
must obtain FRA approval prior to modifying their programs.
Railroads are required to evaluate certification candidates in
multiple areas, including prior safety conduct as a motor vehicle
operator, prior safety conduct as an employee of a different railroad,
substance abuse disorders and alcohol/drug rules compliance, and visual
and hearing acuity.
The rule also contains minimum requirements for the training
provided to candidates for signal employee certification. These
requirements are intended to ensure certified signal employees have
received sufficient training before they are hired to work on signal
systems and signal-related technology. These requirements are also
intended to ensure that certified signal employees periodically receive
recurring training on Federal laws, regulations, and orders and
railroad safety and operating rules, as well as comprehensive training
on new signal systems and signal-related technology before they are
introduced on the railroads where they work.
Subpart C of this rule addresses how railroads are to administer
their signal employee certification programs. With the exception of
individuals designated as certified signal employees prior to FRA
approval of the railroad's signal employee certification program, this
rule prohibits railroads from certifying signal employees for intervals
longer than three (3) years. This three-year limitation, which is
consistent with the 36-month maximum period for certifying locomotive
engineers in 49 CFR 240.217(c) and the 36-month maximum period for
certifying conductors in 49 CFR 242.201(c), allows for periodic re-
evaluation of certified signal employees to verify their continued
compliance with FRA's minimum safety requirements.
Subpart D of this rule addresses the process and criteria for
denying and revoking certification. Before a railroad denies an
individual certification or recertification, it must provide the
certification candidate with the information that forms the basis for
the denial decision and give the candidate an opportunity to rebut such
evidence. The rule also requires that a railroad make any decision to
deny an individual certification or recertification in writing and meet
certain requirements.
A railroad can only revoke a signal employee's certification if one
of eleven events occurs. Generally, for the first revocable event that
is not related to a signal employee's use of drugs or alcohol, the
person's certification would be revoked for 30 days. If a person
accumulates more of these violations in a given time period, the
revocation period (period of ineligibility) becomes longer.
If a railroad acquires reliable information that a certified signal
employee has violated an operating rule or practice requiring
decertification under this rule, the railroad must suspend the signal
employee's certification immediately, while it determines whether
revocation is warranted. In such circumstances, signal employees are
entitled to a hearing. Similar to a railroad's decision to deny
certification, a railroad's decision to revoke a signal employee's
certification must satisfy certain requirements. Finally, if an
intervening cause prevented or materially impaired a signal employee's
ability to comply with a railroad operating rule or practice, the
railroad must not revoke the signal employee's certification.
Subpart E of this rule describes the dispute resolution process for
individuals wishing to challenge a railroad's decision to deny
certification, deny recertification, or revoke certification. This
dispute resolution process mirrors the process used for locomotive
engineers and conductors under 49 CFR parts 240 and 242, respectively.
Finally, this final rule contains two appendices. Appendix A
discusses the procedures that a person seeking certification or
recertification should follow to furnish a railroad with information
concerning their motor vehicle driving record. Appendix B provides
guidance on the procedures railroads should employ in administering the
vision and hearing requirements under Sec. Sec. 246.117 and 246.118.
Benefits and Costs
FRA analyzed the economic impact of this final rule. FRA estimated
the benefits of fewer signal employee-caused accidents, and the costs
anticipated to be incurred by railroads and the Government.
This rule will help ensure that signal employees are properly
trained, are qualified to perform their duties, and meet Federal safety
standards. This rule will reduce the likelihood of an accident
occurring due to signal employee error. FRA has analyzed accidents over
the past 10 years to categorize those where signal employee training
and certification would have impacted the accident. FRA then estimated
benefits based on that analysis.
The following table shows the estimated 10-year quantifiable
benefits of the final rule. The total 10-year estimated benefits would
be $2.9 million (PV, 7%) and annualized benefits would be $0.4 million
(PV, 7%).
Total 10-Year Discounted Benefits
[2020 Dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present value Present value Annualized Annualized
Category 7% ($) 3% ($) 7% ($) 3% ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grade Crossing Accidents.......................... 1,766,028 2,064,676 251,443 242,043
Train Accidents/Incidents......................... 960,671 1,123,127 136,778 131,665
Business Benefits (Railroad Industry)............. 53,817 62,917 7,662 7,376
Business Benefits (Government).................... 87,985 102,863 12,527 12,059
-------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44832]]
Total......................................... 2,868,501 3,353,584 408,410 393,142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule will also provide unquantifiable benefits. FRA has
quantified the monetary impact from accidents which is reported on FRA
accident forms. However, some accident costs are not required to be
reported on FRA accident forms (e.g., environmental impact). That
impact may account for additional benefits not quantified in this
analysis. If these costs were realized, accidents affected by this
rulemaking could have much greater economic impact than estimated
quantitative benefit estimates.
There is also a chance of a high impact event due to signal
employee error. This could involve fatalities, injuries, and
environmental damage, as well as impact railroads, communities, and the
public. FRA has not estimated the likelihood of such an event, but this
final rule is expected to reduce the risk of an accident of that
magnitude.
FRA estimates the 10-year costs of the final rule to be $9.4
million, discounted at 7 percent. The estimated annualized costs are
$1.3 million discounted at 7 percent. The following table shows the
total costs of this final rule, over the 10-year analysis period.
Total 10-Year Discounted Costs
[2020 Dollars] \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present value Present value Annualized Annualized
Category 7% ($) 3% ($) 7% ($) 3% ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development of Certification Program.............. 1,504,135 1,541,874 214,155 180,755
Certification Eligibility Requirements............ 202,952 227,006 28,896 26,612
Recertification Eligibility Requirements.......... 243,632 310,417 34,688 36,390
Training.......................................... 2,079,835 2,379,911 296,122 278,998
Knowledge Testing................................. 746,865 898,884 106,337 105,377
Vision and Hearing................................ 1,097,523 1,320,891 156,263 154,849
Monitoring Operational Performance................ 1,178,812 1,408,753 167,836 165,149
Railroad Oversight Responsibilities............... 267,530 326,714 38,090 38,301
Certification Card................................ 103,175 124,175 14,690 14,557
Petitions and Hearings............................ 181,733 217,183 25,875 25,460
Government Administrative Cost.................... 1,780,113 2,065,541 253,448 242,144
-------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 9,386,306 10,821,350 1,336,399 1,268,592
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Legal Authority
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Numbers in this table and subsequent tables may not sum due
to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law
110-432, sec. 402, 122 Stat. 4884 (Oct. 16, 2008) (hereinafter
``RSIA''), the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) was required to
submit a report to Congress addressing whether certification of certain
crafts or classes of employees, including signal repair and maintenance
employees, was necessary to reduce the number and rate of accidents and
incidents or to improve railroad safety.\3\ If the Secretary determined
it was necessary to require the certification of certain crafts or
classes of employees to reduce the number and rate of accidents and
incidents or to improve railroad safety, section 402 of the RSIA stated
the Secretary may prescribe such regulations. The Secretary delegated
this authority to the Federal Railroad Administrator. 49 CFR 1.89. In
response to the RSIA, the Secretary submitted a report to Congress on
November 4, 2015, stating that, based on FRA's preliminary research,
dispatchers and signal employees were potentially the most viable
candidate railroad crafts for certification. Based on the analysis in
Section III below, the Federal Railroad Administrator has determined
that it is necessary to require the certification of signal employees
to improve railroad safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See also 49 U.S.C. 20103 (providing FRA's general authority
to ``prescribe regulations and issue orders for every area of
railroad safety'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Background
A. Roles and Responsibilities of Signal Employees
Railroad signal employees play an integral role in ensuring the
safety of railroad operations, as well as the safety of highway
motorists. As noted in comments submitted by the Transportation Trades
Department of the AFL-CIO (TTD), signal systems are critical to the
operation of every railroad. Signal employees are responsible for the
installation, testing, troubleshooting, repair, and maintenance of
signal systems, as defined in Sec. 246.7, which railroads utilize to
direct train movements. Signal employees must also use specialized test
and maintenance equipment to complete safety critical tasks on
mechanical, electrical, and electronic signal equipment.
The work performed by signal employees can generally be divided
into two categories: construction and maintenance. On larger railroads,
some signal employees work in groups (often referred to as ``gangs'')
under the direct supervision of an experienced signal employee to
construct, install, and upgrade signal systems and signal system
subsystems and components. Some signal employees also work in ``gangs''
under the direct supervision of an experienced signal employee to make
repairs to the signal system, while other signal employees (often
referred to as ``signal maintainers'') are primarily
[[Page 44833]]
tasked with inspecting, testing, troubleshooting, and maintaining
signal systems and performing emergency repairs as needed.
The definition of ``signal employee'' for purposes of this
rulemaking may differ from the conventional definition of this term. As
stated in Sec. 246.1(c), the signal employee certification
requirements contained in this part apply to any person who meets the
definition of signal employee contained in Sec. 246.7, even if the
person has a job classification title other than that of signal
employee.
The term ``signal employee'' is defined in Sec. 246.7 as an
individual who is engaged in installing, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of railroad signal systems or related
technology. FRA acknowledges that this definition is expansive, as an
employee of a railroad (or railroad contractor or subcontractor) may be
considered a signal employee for purposes of this rule if they engage
in the installation, troubleshooting, testing, repair, or maintenance
of railroad signal systems or related technology, even if such tasks
are not the primary focus of the employee's job. Railroads and other
interested parties seeking additional guidance on how the term,
``signal employee,'' has been defined for purposes of this part may
find it helpful to review FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01, entitled
``Application of the Hours of Service Laws to Positive Train Control
Systems'' (TB S-19-01). This technical bulletin provides a general
framework for evaluating whether individuals engaged in certain types
of tasks are subject to the Federal hours of service law for signal
employees (49 U.S.C. 21104).
For example, as noted in FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01,
employees who are engaged in testing signal system components (even so-
called ``self-tests'' of cab signal equipment installed on locomotives)
that require the employee to interact with the signal system component,
monitor the progress of the test, or interpret the results of the test
are considered to be ``signal employees'' who are subject to the
Federal hours of service law (49 U.S.C. 21104). Accordingly, even
employees of the railroad's mechanical department are considered
``signal employees'' for purposes of this part if they test signal
system components that require employee interaction, monitor the
progress of the test, or interpret the results of the test.
B. FRA History of Certification
On January 4, 1987, an Amtrak train and Conrail train collided in
Chase, Maryland, resulting in 16 deaths and 174 injuries. At the time,
it was the deadliest train accident in Amtrak's history. The subsequent
investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board concluded
that the probable cause of the accident was the impairment of the
Conrail engineer who was under the influence of marijuana at the time
of the collision.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Railroad Accident Report: Rear-end Collision of Amtrak
Passenger Train 94, the Colonial and Consolidated Rail Corporation
Freight Train ENS-121, on the Northeast Corridor, Chase, Maryland,
January 4, 1987 (144 Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd. 1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following this accident, Congress passed the Rail Safety
Improvement Act of 1988, Public Law 100-342, 4, 102 Stat. 624, 625
(1988), which instructed the Secretary to ``issue such rules,
regulations, orders, and standards as may be necessary to establish a
program requiring the licensing or certification of any operator of a
locomotive, including any locomotive engineer.'' On June 19, 1991, FRA
published a final rule establishing a certification system for
locomotive engineers and requiring railroads to ensure that they only
certify individuals who met minimum qualification standards.\5\ FRA
prescribed a certification system where the railroads issue the
certificates as opposed to a government-run licensing system. This
final rule, published in 49 CFR part 240 (part 240), created
certification requirements for engineers that addressed various areas
including vision and hearing acuity; training, knowledge, and
performance skills; and prior safety conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 56 FR. 28227 (June 19, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seventeen years later, in 2008, Congress passed the RSIA, which
mandated the creation of a certification system for conductors. On
November 9, 2011, FRA published a final rule requiring railroads to
have certification programs for conductors and to ensure that all
certified conductors satisfy minimum Federal safety standards.\6\ The
conductor certification rule, published in 49 CFR part 242 (part 242),
was largely modeled after part 240 with some deviations based on the
different job classifications. Part 242 also included some
organizational improvements which made the regulation more streamlined
than part 240.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 76 FR 69801 (Nov. 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Statutory Background for Signal Employee Certification
In addition to requiring certification for conductors, the RSIA
required the Secretary to submit a report to Congress addressing
whether certain other railroad crafts or classes of employees would
benefit from certification. Specifically, section 402 of the RSIA
required the Secretary to issue a report to Congress ``about whether
the certification of certain crafts or classes of railroad carrier or
railroad carrier contractor or subcontractor employees is necessary to
reduce the number and rate of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety.'' As part of that report, section 402 specifically
required the Secretary to consider ``signal repair and maintenance
employees'' as one of the railroad crafts for certification.
After identifying a railroad craft or class for which certification
is necessary, pursuant to the report to Congress discussed above,
section 402 authorized the Secretary to ``prescribe regulations
requiring the certification of certain crafts or classes of employees
that the Secretary determines . . . are necessary to reduce the number
and rate of accidents and incidents or to improve railroad safety.''
D. Report to Congress
On November 4, 2015, the Secretary submitted the report to Congress
required by section 402(b) of the RSIA. The report stated that, based
on FRA's preliminary research, dispatchers and signal repair employees
were the most viable candidates for certification, particularly with
the introduction of Positive Train Control (PTC) technology. In
reaching this determination with respect to signal employees, the
Secretary cited a variety of factors.
The report noted that signal employees perform safety-sensitive
work as shown by signal employees being covered under the hours of
service laws. The report also noted that the greatest proportion of
contractors covered under the hours of service laws are signal
employees and noted that they tend to switch employers more frequently
than other crafts of employees.
FRA did not include data to support the position in its 2015 report
to Congress that signal employees of railroad contractors tend to
switch jobs more frequently than other crafts of employees. However,
given the lack of regulations requiring prior employment background
checks, it is relatively easy for signal employees to leave their
current employer after committing a rules violation and find work on
another railroad.
Another important factor noted in the 2015 report was the nature of
the work signal employees perform on wayside signal and train control
systems, which are safety-critical for freight and passenger rail
operations. The report noted that, in the coming decade, the
[[Page 44834]]
rail industry will likely lose many experienced signal employees to
retirement, while growth in freight, commuter, and intercity passenger
rail will require that more signal employees are hired and trained.
The report also summarized the challenges posed by PTC system
implementation, while noting the ``increasingly sophisticated work''
involved in the implementation of complex PTC system technology by
signal employees.\7\ In particular, the report noted that ``signal
employees will be required to differentiate between a vital and non-
vital PTC system \8\ and to address the technicalities of using
standalone or overlay PTC systems.'' \9\ This combination of factors
led to the report's conclusion that signal employees are a potentially
viable candidate craft for certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 2015 DOT Report to Congress on Certification of Railroad
Crafts at 3.
\8\ PTC systems vary widely in complexity and sophistication
based on the level of automation and functionality they implement,
the system architecture used, the wayside system upon which they are
based (i.e., non-signaled, block signal, cab signal, etc.), and the
degree of train control they are capable of assuming. Vital systems
are reliable and built upon failsafe principles, while non-vital
systems are reliable but not guaranteed to provide failsafe
operation.
\9\ See 2015 DOT Report to Congress on Certification of Railroad
Crafts at 3. An overlay system relies upon and supplements an
existing wayside signal system or redundant method of operation. A
standalone system replaces the existing method of operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. RSAC Working Group
In March 1996, FRA established the Railroad Safety Advisory
Committee (RSAC), which provides a forum for collaborative rulemaking
and program development. RSAC includes representatives from all of the
agency's major stakeholder groups, including railroads, labor
organizations, suppliers and manufacturers, and other interested
parties. When appropriate, FRA assigns a task to RSAC, and after
consideration and debate, RSAC may accept or reject the task. If
accepted, RSAC establishes a Working Group that possesses the
appropriate expertise and representation of interests to develop
recommendations to FRA for action on the task.
On April 21, 2017, a task statement regarding certification of
signal employees was presented to the RSAC by email but no vote was
taken. On April 24, 2019, the RSAC accepted a task (No. 19-03)
entitled, ``Certification of Railroad Signal Employees.'' \10\ The
purpose of the task was ``[t]o consider whether rail safety would be
enhanced by developing guidance, voluntary standards, and/or draft
regulatory language for the certification of railroad signal
installation, repair, and maintenance workers.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ At the same meeting, the RSAC also accepted a task (No. 19-
02) titled ``Certification of Train Dispatchers.'' A separate RSAC
Working Group was formed to address this task, and FRA plans to
issue a related rule that would establish certification requirements
for dispatchers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Working Group, which included representatives from the
Association of American Railroads (AAR), American Public Transportation
Association (APTA), American Short Line and Regional Railroad
Association (ASLRRA), Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS),
Transportation Division of the International Association of Sheet
Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (SMART-TD), International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), Commuter Rail Coalition, and
National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association (NRCMA),
held its first and only meeting on September 5, 2019 in Washington, DC.
At this meeting, the Working Group reviewed the task statement from the
RSAC, discussed some of the safety-critical tasks performed by signal
employees, and debated whether certification of signal employees would
be beneficial to railroad safety. At the end of the meeting, action
items were assigned, and the next meeting was tentatively scheduled for
January 2020.
However, on December 16, 2019, the presidents of the American Train
Dispatchers Association, BRS, and IBEW (collectively the ``Unions'')
requested that both the dispatcher and signal certification RSAC tasks
be withdrawn from consideration. The Unions stated that they were
involved in numerous activities and were not able to give the task
proper attention. AAR and ASLRRA advised the unions that they were not
opposed to this request. In response, FRA withdrew the tasks from the
RSAC, and the Working Groups became inactive.
F. Public Outreach
In 2021, FRA revisited the issue of establishing certification
requirements for signal employees. The agency assembled subject matter
experts from FRA, IBEW and BRS to exchange facts or information
regarding the tasks performed by signal employees. Those parties met
virtually several times between May 5, 2021 and June 30, 2021.
As part of FRA's outreach, a list of tasks performed by signal
employees was developed. These tasks generally involved: vital
equipment design validation, installation, calibration, testing,
maintenance, and repair (interlockings, grade crossings, wayside signal
systems, PTC, etc.). FRA reviewed each task to determine whether
correctly performing the task was critical to railroad safety; the
potential consequences if errors were made while performing the task;
and whether there were any recent examples of issues or concerns with
respect to the task. After performing this analysis, FRA concluded that
the vast majority of tasks performed by signal employees (80-90% of the
listed tasks) were critical to railroad safety with potentially
catastrophic consequences, such as accidents, injuries, and/or deaths,
if the tasks were not performed properly.
During FRA's outreach, the benefits of certification based on the
experience of stakeholders with engineer and conductor certification
under 49 CFR parts 240 and 242 were also discussed. Some of the main
benefits of certification that were identified include:
--Creating a minimum standard for training to ensure that the training
encompasses all skills and proficiencies necessary to properly perform
all safety-related signal employee functions;
--Establishing a record of safety compliance that will follow a signal
employee if the employee wishes to become certified by another
railroad, and that can be used to review a signal employee's
performance and potential training needs;
--Requiring certain safety checks, which can help identify active
substance abuse disorders; and
--Establishing a system for individuals to dispute a railroad's
decision to deny or revoke certification with the aim of creating a
fair and consistent process for all parties.
Based on these meetings, FRA concluded that requiring certification
for signal employees would be an important tool to ensure signal
employees performing safety-sensitive tasks are adequately trained and
qualified and have a documented record of performance that is
accessible to prospective employers.
Following this initial outreach, FRA held a follow-up conversation
with BRS and IBEW, on March 3, 2022, and individuals from BRS and IBEW
informed FRA of elements that they believed would be beneficial in a
signal employee certification program. During this conversation, which
was held in videoconference format, FRA asked the attendees to provide
individualized feedback on how similar or different a signal employee
certification rule should be to FRA's locomotive engineer
[[Page 44835]]
and conductor certification rules found in 49 CFR parts 240 and 242.
In response to that request, FRA heard that the agency needs to
ensure that comprehensive training is provided to signal employees, as
the current training is inadequate. FRA also heard that railroads are
not providing enough training on new equipment and new technology for
signal employees. It was also noted that, in some cases, signal
employees are being required to use new equipment and new technology
without having received any prior training on the equipment or
technology.
On March 7, 2022, FRA met with the railroad industry, including
Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NS), ASLRRA, and AAR. During this
conversation, which was conducted in a videoconference format, FRA also
asked for individualized feedback on how FRA's locomotive engineer and
conductor certification regulations in 49 CFR parts 240 and 242 could
be improved upon with respect to signal employee certification.
Specifically, FRA asked for feedback on any regulatory provisions in 49
CFR parts 240 and 242 that, in their experience, may have been
difficult to implement, as well as whether FRA should explore any
changes to these regulatory provisions.
AAR expressed opposition to FRA's proposal to issue regulations
requiring certification of signal employees, arguing that there was not
a safety benefit to certification. In addition, NS questioned the need
for certification regulations in the absence of any identified gaps in
coverage by existing railroad training programs.
ASLRRA expressed concern that FRA's proposal to issue regulations
requiring certification of dispatchers and signal employees would
result in a big paperwork burden with little benefit. In addition,
ASLRRA asserted that most short line railroads do not have signal
systems. With respect to grade crossings, ASLRRA asserted that most
short line railroads rely on contractors to maintain their grade
crossing warning systems.
After this conversation, FRA provided a short list of written
questions to AAR and ASLRRA. While AAR did not provide additional
feedback in response to FRA's list of questions, ASLRRA responded to
FRA's list of written questions by email on April 13, 2022, a copy of
which has been placed in the docket.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ A record of public contact summarizing this meeting has
been posted in the rulemaking docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2022-0020-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 8, 2022, FRA staff had a follow-up conversation with BRS
and IBEW to receive information on the types of errors and grade
crossing and signal violations that should result in a railroad
revoking a signal employee's certification. During this conversation,
which was conducted in a videoconference format, FRA heard that it
might be appropriate to revoke a signal employee's certification in
response to willful violations.
G. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On May 31, 2023, FRA published an NPRM proposing the establishment
of signal employee certification and provided commenters 60 days to
file comments.\12\ On July 5, 2023, FRA extended the comment period by
an additional 30 days.\13\ On August 22, 2023, FRA extended the comment
period again, this time by an additional 15 days until September 14,
2023.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 88 FR 35632 (May 31, 2023).
\13\ 88 FR 42907 (July 5, 2023).
\14\ 88 FR 57044 (Aug. 22, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Discussion of General Comments and FRA's Conclusions
FRA received 24 comments on the NPRM and the related Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) from State agencies, labor organizations, trade
associations, tourist, historic, and excursion railroads, railway
museums, consulting firms, a transportation learning center, and a
public-interest law firm and policy center. The order of the topics or
comments discussed in this document does not reflect the significance
of the comment raised or the standing of the commenter. Additionally,
this summary of comments provides a general understanding of the
overall scope and themes raised by the commenters and gives some
specific descriptions to provide context. Not every comment is
described in this summary. Comments addressing specific sections of
this rule are discussed in the section-by-section analysis below.
Comments regarding the proposed RIA are addressed in the RIA to the
final rule.
A. Cost-Benefit Analysis/Safety Justification
FRA received several comments related to the costs and benefits of
the proposed rule. Comments were received from AAR, ASLRRA, and the
Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), each of whom commented that the
costs of the proposed rule outweigh the benefits.
AAR and ASLRRA commented on several of FRA's cost estimates for
provisions in the proposed rule. AAR and ASLRRA commented that FRA's
estimates for the time to develop the certification programs were low.
ASLRRA commented that it would take 550 hours to develop a model
program and 19 hours per small railroad to implement. For unannounced
compliance tests (monitoring operational performance), AAR and ASLRRA
estimated that the time per supervisor would be much more than the two
hours per year that FRA estimated. Regarding dispute resolution
hearings, AAR and ASLRRA commented that the cost assessments for
hearings are underestimated and that the actual cost would amount to 20
percent of the total estimated costs of the proposed rule. AAR and
ASLRRA also contend that FRA underestimated wage-related costs by using
the 2020 railroad wage rates which ``do not take into account the 24%
wage increase that railroad employees received as part of the 2022
collective bargaining process or the 10.7% increase in Federal
government employee pay rates.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ FRA-2022-0020-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA also received comments pertaining to the estimated benefits in
the RIA associated with the proposed rule. AAR and ASLRRA contend that
FRA relied on some incidents that were not caused by signal employee
activities and some incidents for which AAR and ASLRRA assert that it
would be impossible to draw the conclusion that the incident would have
been prevented by a signal employee certification program.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that there is no safety justification
for this rulemaking and asserted, in their comments, that ``the last
decade was the safest on record for railroads.'' \16\ In support of
this assertion, AAR and ASLRRA provided statistics reflecting a
reduction in rail accidents since 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on ASLRRA's comment regarding the time to develop a
certification program, FRA has revised the estimated time for ASLRRA to
develop a model program to 550 hours and increased the estimated time
for small railroads to implement a program from 8 hours to 15 hours.
FRA has now accounted for only one template program produced by ASLRRA.
Holding companies will likely use the template program developed by
ASLRRA, instead of producing their own template, as discussed in the
RIA associated with the NPRM.
FRA also reassessed the costs for petitions and hearings based on
comments from AAR and ASLRRA. The
[[Page 44836]]
categories of employees have been revised and estimates have been
increased. FRA determined these estimates by looking at the number of
petitions and hearings associated with the conductor and engineer
certification programs. This baseline was then adjusted for the
population size of signal employees. Additionally, Government costs for
petitions and hearings have been increased and now include more
categories of employees involved in the process.
With respect to AAR and ASLRRA's comment that the time estimate for
unannounced compliance tests is too low, FRA has revised its estimate
for monitoring operational performance. FRA estimates that each signal
employee will require 17 minutes per year for unannounced compliance
tests. This revised estimate reflects 15 minutes of additional tasks
that would not have been performed otherwise and 2 minutes for
documentation.
As for AAR and ASLRRA's comments on the 2020 wage rates used in the
NPRM, FRA notes that the wage rates used during NPRM drafting were the
most recently available data, as provided by the Surface Transportation
Board's (STB) wage data series and General Schedule (GS) pay scales.
With respect to AAR and ASLRRA's comments on FRA's estimate of
benefits in the RIA on the proposed rule, FRA has decreased the number
of activation failures from 45 (as stated in the NPRM RIA) to 41.5. In
addition, FRA adjusted the number of train accidents from 77 to 75 to
align with the FRA supplemental data report to the NPRM RIA.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ FRA, ``Certification of Signal Employees Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking: Supplemental Data to the Regulatory Impact Analysis,''
July 2023, https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2022-0020-0010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turning to the contention from AAR and ASLRRA that there is no
safety justification for this rule, FRA disagrees with the premise that
because railroad safety has improved over the last 20 years, the agency
does not need to take actions that could further improve safety.
Moreover, the associations neglected to mention in their comments that
one of the changes in the railroad industry over the past few decades
has been the introduction of certification requirements. The locomotive
engineer certification requirements in part 240 went into effect in
1991,\18\ and the conductor certification requirements in part 242
became effective just over a decade ago in 2012.\19\ Thus, it stands to
reason that certification has been one of the factors that has improved
railroad safety in recent decades and instituting such requirements for
signal employees could lead to similar improvements in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 56 FR 28227, 28228 (June 19, 1991).
\19\ 76 FR 69802 (Nov. 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A more detailed response to these comments is, however, provided in
the RIA.
B. RSIA Authority
In their comments on the proposed rule, AAR and ASLRRA challenge
FRA's assertion that section 402 of the RSIA authorized the Secretary
to prescribe regulations requiring the certification of signal
employees. AAR and ASLRRA assert that Congress only authorized the
Department to issue regulations requiring certification if the
Secretary determined in a report to Congress that regulations are
``necessary to reduce the number and rate of accidents and incidents or
to improve railroad safety.'' \20\ AAR and ASLRRA contend the Secretary
failed to make such a determination in the 2015 report to Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-432,
section 402, 122 Stat. 4848, 4884 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While section 402 of the RSIA required the Secretary to issue a
report to Congress ``about whether the certification of certain crafts
or classes of railroad carrier or railroad carrier contractor or
subcontractor employees is necessary to reduce the number and rate of
accidents and incidents or to improve railroad safety,'' it did not
require the Secretary to make an official determination in this report
that the issuance of signal employee certification regulations was
necessary to reduce the number and rate of accidents and incidents or
to improve railroad safety, as a necessary precondition to the
initiation of this rulemaking.
Section 402 of the RSIA authorizes the Secretary (and by
delegation, FRA) to prescribe regulations requiring the certification
of certain crafts or classes of railroad carrier employees (or railroad
carrier contractor or subcontractor employees) ``pursuant to'' the
report to Congress that was required by section 402(b) of the RSIA. The
phrase, ``pursuant to,'' is defined to mean ``in a way that agrees with
or follows (something).'' \21\ Thus, in section 402 of the RSIA,
Congress authorized FRA to prescribe regulations that are consistent
with the 2015 report to Congress. Moreover, FRA notes that it has broad
authority to ``prescribe regulations and issue orders for every area of
railroad safety,'' including this regulation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ www.britannica.com.
\22\ 49 U.S.C. 20103. The Secretary delegated this authority to
the Federal Railroad Administrator. 49 CFR 1.89.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Role of Third Parties
Consistent with FRA's engineer and conductor certification
regulations, this final rule requires railroads to develop and submit
certification programs to FRA for approval and then implement their
FRA-approved certification programs. However, FRA received multiple
comments urging FRA to clarify how signal employee certification
programs will be implemented for the employees of signal contractors.
The International Transportation Learning Center (ITLC) urged FRA
to implement a process that allows railroads to use model programs in a
manner similar to the existing process established pursuant to FRA's
training regulations in part 243 of this chapter. In contrast, AAR and
ASLRRA submitted comments asserting that FRA should authorize
contractors and subcontractors to certify their own employees. AAR and
ASLRRA asserted that locomotive engineers and conductors are not a
useful comparison when considering this issue because Class I railroad
engineers and conductors are almost uniformly company employees. AAR
and ASLRRA asserted that Class I railroads make far greater use of
contractors in the context of signal systems, as railroads typically
engage contractors to perform temporary or intermittent signal work,
such as manufacturing signal bungalows in a shop environment and for
field work like installing signal mast foundations. Then, once the
project is complete, AAR and ASLRRA asserted that the contractor and
the contractor's employees will move on to a new project, possibly on a
different railroad. Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA concluded that requiring
railroads to certify signal employees employed by signal contractors
will be inefficient and result in significant administrative burdens
for railroads.
With respect to short line railroads, AAR, ASLRRA, and the National
Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association (NRCMA) submitted
comments asserting that many short line railroads use contractors
extensively for signal work because they do not have the in-house
expertise to otherwise manage signal maintenance. AAR and ASLRRA noted
that signal contractors often provide signal maintenance for dozens of
short lines at the same time. Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA asserted that
it would be infeasible and an inefficient waste of resources for dozens
of railroads to potentially certify the same individual in any given
period. In addition, NRCMA asserted that, while
[[Page 44837]]
many of FRA's regulations hold a railroad responsible for the actions
of an individual performing tasks in accordance with the regulation, no
other FRA regulation requires railroads to determine whether a non-
employee has the stated qualifications to perform such tasks.
As noted in the proposed rule, especially with respect to Class I,
Class II, and commuter railroads, the railroad is generally most
knowledgeable about the signal systems and signal-related technology
that have been deployed on their territories. Therefore, Class I, Class
II, and commuter railroads are best suited to develop certification
programs to ensure signal employees tasked with installing, testing,
repair, or maintenance of their signal systems and signal-related
technology have been properly trained and qualified on such systems and
technology. However, railroads are encouraged to work with any signal
contractors they hire to obtain records for the contractor's employees
that will assist the railroad in making the signal employee
certification determinations required by this part.
There are a number of provisions in this final rule which are
intended to reduce the burdens associated with developing signal
employee certification programs. As noted in the section-by-section
analysis of Sec. 246.207, parent companies can assist subsidiary
railroads with compliance with this final rule by developing and
submitting signal employee certification programs for one or more of
their subsidiary railroads to FRA for review and approval. For example,
a parent company can submit one signal employee certification program
to FRA for multiple subsidiary railroads. In this scenario, the parent
company must identify and address all variances associated with each
subsidiary railroad that will be covered by the certification program
developed by the parent company and submitted by the parent company to
FRA for approval. After FRA approves the signal employee certification
program, Sec. 246.207 allows either the parent company or the
subsidiary railroad to issue signal employee certificates to the signal
employees of each subsidiary railroad that is covered by the parent
company's certification program.
In addition, to ease the burden of developing signal employee
certification programs, especially with respect to Class III railroads,
this final rule allows railroads to choose between conducting their own
training for signal employees, hiring a third party to provide training
to the railroad's signal employees, or using a training program
developed by a third party (including a parent company). NRCMA asserted
in their comments that signal contractors have expertise in the
equipment they install and maintain and that they are well-situated to
develop a training program to address particular safety issues that may
arise in the course of their work. FRA acknowledges that some signal
contractors may, in fact, be well-situated to develop training programs
for their signal employees. Therefore, some railroads may choose to
hire signal contractors who have their own in-house signal employee
training programs. Railroads that adopt this approach should, however,
keep in mind that most, if not all, existing signal employee training
programs which have been approved by FRA pursuant to 49 CFR part 243
will need to be revised to comply with the training and knowledge
testing requirements in this part that specifically apply to signal
employees. In addition, the operational performance monitoring
requirements in this part must be performed by the certifying railroad.
However, if a railroad chooses to hire a third party to provide
training or use a training program developed by a third party, the
third-party training program must fit the railroad's specific operating
environment and address any unique signal system equipment or signal-
related technology (or any unique deployment of signal system equipment
or signal-related technology) on the railroad's territory.
Ultimately, with respect to railroads who hire signal contractors
to perform work on their signal systems and signal-related technology,
employees of signal contracting companies must be certified by the
railroad before the railroad allows them to work on its signal systems
and signal-related technology, unless they are assigned to work under
the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor. As stated in Sec. 246.124(b), railroads are responsible
for ensuring that certified signal employees install, test, maintain,
and repair their signal systems and signal-related technology.
D. Interaction With Other FRA Regulations
As stated in the 2015 DOT Report to Congress on the Certification
of Railroad Employees, the purpose of certification is to document and
verify that the holder of the certificate has achieved certain training
and proficiency and to create a record of safety compliance infractions
that prospective employers can review when hiring experienced
employees. While developing this rule, FRA has been mindful of other
regulations that may touch upon topics covered in this rule, including
FRA's training, qualification, and oversight regulations in 49 CFR part
243 (part 243); railroad safety risk reduction programs (SSP/RRP) in 49
CFR parts 270 and 271 (parts 270 and 271); and fatigue risk management
programs (FRMP) in parts 270 and 271. However, FRA finds that this rule
would complement, rather than duplicate, those regulations.
AAR and ASLRRA disagree. In their comments on the proposed rule,
AAR and ASLRRA contend that the gaps in FRA's regulations which this
rule is trying to fill are either non-existent or immaterial. AAR and
ASLRRA assert that there is no safety basis for layering new
certification requirements on top of FRA's training, qualification, and
oversight requirements in part 243 and the railroad safety risk
reduction program requirements in parts 270 and 271. In addition, AAR
and ASLRRA specifically assert that there is significant overlap
between this rule and part 243.
In support of their argument, AAR and ASLRRA point to Sec.
246.119, which requires railroads to provide training on railroad
safety and operating rules, as well as training on the signal systems
and signal-related technology deployed on their networks to their
signal employees. AAR and ASLRRA assert that this provision overlaps
and potentially conflicts with Sec. 243.101(c)(5), which states that
the employer must determine how training ``shall be structured,
developed, and delivered.'' AAR and ASLRRA also assert that Sec.
246.119 overlaps and potentially conflicts with the stated purpose of
part 243 of this chapter ``to ensure that any person employed by a
railroad or a contractor of a railroad as a safety-related railroad
employee is trained and qualified to comply with any relevant Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, as well as any relevant
railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.''
As an initial matter, AAR and ASLRRA's narrative that this rule is
duplicative of parts 243, 270, and 271 appears to be contradicted by
congressional direction. As they note in their joint comment, FRA
issued the training regulations in part 243, the SSP regulations in
part 270, and the RRP regulations in part 271 because of a statutory
mandate in the RSIA. However, in the same law, Congress explicitly
permitted requiring the certification of certain crafts if the
Secretary determined it was necessary
[[Page 44838]]
to improve railroad safety. Had Congress determined that certification
requirements were duplicative of what was already mandated by the RSIA,
it would not have required the Secretary to study whether other crafts
or classes of employees could benefit from certification or given the
Secretary the statutory authority to issue additional certification
regulations.
Turning to any overlap between this rule and part 243, FRA stands
by its position proffered in the NPRM that this rule complements, and
does not duplicate, part 243. This rule builds off the initial
performance skill evaluations required in part 243 by mandating that
certified signal employees also receive an unannounced compliance test
each calendar year to ensure that signal employees continue to safely
perform their duties after their initial certification. Part 243 has no
such continuing compliance testing requirement. While 49 CFR 243.205
requires employers to perform periodic oversight tests and inspections
to determine whether their employees are complying with Federal
railroad safety laws and regulations, the rule does not require that
all employees receive such tests and inspections. In fact, under part
243, an employee could work for decades without being tested or
inspected. Therefore, Sec. 246.123 fills a significant gap in FRA's
training regulations.
Also, as noted in the NPRM, part 243 does not require railroads to
have formal processes in place for promptly removing signal employees
from service if they violate one or more basic regulatory standards
that could have a significant negative impact on the safety of rail
operations. AAR and ALSRRA failed to address this fact in their
comment. Part 246 complements part 243 by mandating that railroads
remove signal employees from service if they commit one of the safety
violations enumerated in Sec. 246.303(e). This rule also requires
railroads to perform certain safety checks before certifying a person
as a signal employee. These safety checks pertain to a person's prior
safety conduct, both working on railroads and as a motor vehicle
operator; their history of substance abuse disorders; and their visual
and hearing acuity. These are basic safety requirements that are not
addressed in part 243. Thus, FRA does not find significant overlap
between this rule and part 243.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend ``the proposed rule would cast aside
the carefully considered risk analysis conducted through the [system
safety/risk reduction programs] in favor of an approach that would have
railroads potentially focus on lower priority risks associated with
signal employees, not because it is an effective safety management
tool, but solely because this rulemaking would require it.'' \23\ AAR
and ASLRRA assert that all Class I railroads have submitted RRPs and
received approval from FRA. If all railroads with passenger rail
operations that operate intercity or commuter service have also
submitted SSPs and received FRA approval, AAR and ASLRRA estimate that
SSP/RRPs could cover more than 83% of the line-haul mileage and 95% of
workers in the rail industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Comment submitted by the AAR and ASLRRA, Docket no. FRA-
2022-0020-0035, p. 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, even if a railroad has a railroad safety risk reduction
program through which it identifies the risks associated with
installing, testing, maintaining, and repairing signal systems, the
railroad can decide not to implement mitigations to eliminate or reduce
those specific risks. Whether a railroad is required to have a program
that mitigates risks associated with signal systems will depend on how
the railroad prioritizes risks for mitigation and how effectively that
mitigation would promote continuous safety improvement, as compared to
mitigation of other identified hazards and risks. Even if signal
systems are identified as a risk, a railroad may not be required by its
risk reduction program to implement mitigations to eliminate or reduce
that risk.
Moreover, FRA disagrees with AAR and ASLRRA's assertion that this
rulemaking ``cast[s] aside the carefully considered risk analysis
conducted through the [system safety/risk reduction programs] . . . .''
\24\ Nothing in this rule obviates a railroad's responsibilities under
parts 270 and 271. Railroads are expected to continue to perform the
risk analysis and the necessary mitigations to comply with parts 270
and 271, while also implementing a signal employee certification
program. This final rule does not duplicate existing FRA regulations or
hinder railroads from complying with them. To the contrary, part 246
complements FRA's existing regulations and will help promote railroad
safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Confidential Close Call Reporting System
APTA and MTA each commented on the potential interaction between
part 246 and the Confidential Close Call Reporting System (C\3\RS), an
FRA-sponsored program that allows railroad employees reporting close
calls to receive certain protections, which currently includes
protection from decertification for locomotive engineers and
conductors. Each C\3\RS program is established through an Implementing
Memorandum of Understanding (IMOU) signed by FRA and the participating
railroad and labor organization(s). Under the current process, the
participating railroad submits to FRA a petition to waive specific part
240 and/or part 242 requirements necessary to implement the IMOU's
decertification protections. A waiver granted by FRA then incorporates
the IMOU's protections by reference. APTA and MTA request that FRA add
language to this regulation which would state that those railroads with
existing C\3\RS programs with part 240 and 242 waivers do not have to
similarly apply for a waiver of part 246, as their C\3\RS protections
should automatically be applied to part 246 revocable events. APTA and
MTA also request that FRA identify in the rule whether any revocable
events for signal employees will not be afforded C\3\RS protections.
While FRA appreciates the commenters' desire for a more streamlined
C\3\RS process, their request is beyond the scope of the NPRM in this
proceeding and risks introducing inconsistency and confusion into the
C\3\RS implementation process. Specifically, addressing C\3\RS in this
rule would treat signal employees differently than locomotive engineers
and conductors, who receive C\3\RS decertification protection only
pursuant to part 240/242 waivers. The proposed approach would also
treat signal employees at new C\3\RS programs differently, as railroads
joining C\3\RS after the publication of the rule would still have to
file a part 246 waiver petition. This inconsistency could create
confusion and lead to signal employees at C\3\RS-participating
railroads being uncertain about whether they were protected by the
terms of a waiver or by C\3\RS-related provisions in part 246
(particularly signal employees hired after the date of this final rule
who would not necessarily know when their railroad implemented C\3\RS
for signal employees). Such confusion would be compounded if this rule
specified which decertifiable events were not afforded C\3\RS
protections, as any such regulatory provision could differ
substantively from the provisions of an applicable IMOU and waiver.
Confusion is further risked because only some existing C\3\RS IMOUs
cover signal employees, not all. Using part 246 to provide C\3\RS
decertification
[[Page 44839]]
protection to signal employees at railroads with ``existing'' C\3\RS
programs could therefore be particularly confusing for signal employees
at railroads with existing C\3\RS programs that do not currently
include signal employees. Such signal employees may mistakenly believe
that they are covered by C\3\RS simply through the action of part 246,
not realizing that they lack protection due to the absence of an IMOU
that applies to them.
Overall, FRA believes that to promote signal employee confidence in
C\3\RS reporting, signal employees must be certain about the
decertification protection they will receive. Such confidence is best
promoted by a clear understanding that all signal employees may only
report pursuant to an IMOU and waiver that specifically apply to their
railroad, rather than having some signal employees protected by
separate provisions in part 246, depending on whether they were covered
by a C\3\RS program at the time the final rule is published.
FRA also notes that RSAC has established a C\3\RS Working Group
tasked, in part, with examining how C\3\RS could be expanded industry-
wide without a separate waiver required for each participating
railroad.\25\ Instead of addressing C\3\RS in this rule, FRA finds it
preferable to allow the RSAC C\3\RS Working Group to perform its work
and to apply any RSAC-recommended improvements consistently to
locomotive engineers, conductors, signal employees, and any other
certified craft through a future rulemaking or some other means. In the
meantime, any railroad that already has a C\3\RS program that applies
to signal employees will need to file a request to modify its waiver if
the railroad would like the program's decertification protections to
apply to its signal employees. Likewise, a railroad that is not
currently participating in C\3\RS (or a railroad that has a C\3\RS
program, but one that does not apply to its signal employees) will need
to file a petition for relief if the railroad decides to implement a
C\3\RS program covering signal employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Task No. 2022-03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. PTC
Positive train control (PTC) systems provide an additional layer of
safety to existing signal systems, many of which have been place for
many decades. PTC systems are also interoperable with each other, as
well as with existing signal systems. In their comments on the proposed
rule, AAR and ASLRRA assert that PTC implementation has not increased
the complexity of the work performed by signal employees. Instead, AAR
and ASLRRA assert that the work of signal employees has become less
complex because installing, repairing, and maintaining signal systems
has become more simplified and more efficient as microprocessors
monitor the health of the system and provide automated alerts.
Accordingly, AAR and ASLRRA assert that the implementation of PTC
systems does not provide a justification for this rule.
FRA disagrees with this assertion. Signal employees need to
understand the relationship between signal and PTC systems and the
communication medium and how these systems operate, function, and react
to a myriad of circumstances. Signal systems and PTC systems are also
continually upgraded, so the development and implementation of these
increasingly complex systems need to be properly understood by signal
employees who install, troubleshoot, test, maintain, and repair them.
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
This section responds to public comments and identifies changes
made from the regulatory provisions as proposed in the NPRM.
Accordingly, provisions that received no comment and are otherwise
being finalized as proposed are not discussed below.
Subpart A--General
Subpart A of this rule contains general provisions, including a
formal statement of the rule's purpose and scope. This subpart also
provides that the rule does not constrain the ability of a railroad to
prescribe additional or more stringent requirements for its signal
employees that are not inconsistent with this final rule.
Section 246.3 Application and Responsibility for Compliance
The extent of FRA's jurisdiction, and the agency's exercise of that
jurisdiction, is well-established. See 49 CFR part 209, app. A. This
application and responsibility for compliance section is consistent
with FRA's Statement of Agency Policy Concerning Enforcement of the
Federal Railroad Safety Laws in appendix A to 49 CFR part 209 (Policy
Statement).
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.3 and 242.3, provides that
this final rule applies to all railroads with four exceptions.
Paragraph (a)(1) of this section notes that this rule does not apply to
railroads that do not have a signal system, as defined in Sec. 246.7.
The second and third exceptions apply to rail operations on tracks
that are not part of the general railroad system of transportation.
Paragraph (a)(2) contains an exception for rail operations that occur
within the confines of industrial installations commonly referred to as
``plant railroads'' and typified by operations such as those in steel
mills that do not go beyond the plant's boundaries and that do not
involve the switching of rail cars for entities other than themselves.
Paragraph (a)(3) contains an exception for ``tourist, scenic,
historic, or excursion operations that are not part of the general
railroad system of transportation,'' as defined in Sec. 246.7. This
reflects a change from the proposed rule, in which paragraph (a)(3)
would have excluded tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion operations
that are not part of the general railroad system of transportation, if
they are deemed to be ``insular.''
As explained in FRA's Statement of Agency Policy Concerning
Enforcement of the Federal Railroad Safety Laws in appendix A to 49 CFR
part 209 (Policy Statement), FRA considers a railroad to be ``insular''
if its operations are limited to a separate enclave in such a way that
there is no reasonable expectation that the safety of any member of the
public (except a business guest, a licensee of a tourist operation or
an affiliated entity, or a trespasser) would be affected by the
operation. A railroad is not considered insular if one or more of the
following exists on its line: (a) A public highway-rail grade crossing
that is in use; (b) an at-grade crossing that is in use; (c) a bridge
over a public road or waters used for commercial navigation; or (d) a
common corridor with a railroad (i.e., its operations are within 30
feet of those of any railroad. Therefore, for example, a tourist
railroad that operates outside the general railroad system of
transportation yet operates over one or more public highway-rail grade
crossings, would have been required by the proposed rule to comply with
these regulatory requirements for signal employees.
FRA received multiple comments on paragraph (a)(3) in the proposed
rule from tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion operations,
including the Monticello Railway Museum, the Colorado Railroad Museum,
the Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad, the Durango and Silverton Narrow
Gauge Railroad, the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad, and the Northwest
Railway Museum, as well as an association (HeritageRail Alliance, Inc.)
and a consultant (George Hardy Consulting). All commenters expressed
support for excluding all tourist, scenic, historic and excursion
operations that operate outside the general railroad
[[Page 44840]]
system from the scope of this rule--regardless of whether the tourist,
scenic, historic, and excursion operation is deemed to be insular or
not.
Therefore, FRA took a closer look at tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion operations that operate outside the general railroad system
of transportation. According to FRA's records, out of 818 railroads
nationwide, there are 34 tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion
operations operating outside the general railroad system of
transportation. FRA's records also indicate that these tourist, scenic,
historic, and excursion operations maintain active warning devices at
approximately 105 grade crossings (a small percentage of the 70,289
highway-rail grade crossings nationwide that are equipped with active
warning devices).
Asserting that excursion and heritage railways have traditionally
relied on volunteer and part-time workers located in their host
community to perform signal work, the Northwest Railway Museum
commented that the added burden of medical exams, drug testing,
certification training, and the review of signal employee driving
records may result in smaller entities having to transition to contract
signal maintainers. The Northwest Railway Museum and the Oregon Coast
Scenic Railroad commented that the transition to contract signal
maintainers may result in the unintended consequence of reducing the
timeliness of repairs, as contract signal maintainers could be located
two or more hours away. The Oregon Coast Scenic Railroad asserted that
a highway-rail grade crossing could remain out of service for a lengthy
period of time while a tourist railroad arranges to bring in an
expensive outside contractor for a repair that previously would have
had the crossing back in service within an hour.
Therefore, after taking a closer look at tourist, scenic, historic,
and excursion operations that operate outside the general railroad
system of transportation, and considering the comments that were
submitted to FRA by tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion operations
that may be affected by this rulemaking, FRA has excluded these
operations from the scope of this final rule. This is consistent with
FRA's Policy Statement, which excludes tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion operations from all but a limited number of Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders (including FRA regulations
governing alcohol and drug testing in 49 CFR part 219 and employee
training plans in 49 CFR part 243).
The fourth exception, in paragraph (a)(4), applies to rapid transit
operations in an urban area that are not connected to the general
railroad system of transportation. It should, however, be noted that
FRA does exercise jurisdiction over some rapid transit type operations,
given their links to the general railroad system of transportation,
such as rapid transit operations conducted on track used for freight,
intercity passenger, or commuter passenger railroad operations during a
block of time when a general system railroad is not operating (temporal
separation). FRA specifically intends to have this rule apply to those
rapid transit operations.
Paragraph (b) is intended to clarify that any person, as defined in
Sec. 246.7 (including a railroad employee or employee of a railroad
contractor or subcontractor) who performs a function required by this
part will be held responsible for compliance.
Section 246.5 Effect and Construction
This section is derived from 49 CFR 240.5 and 242.5. While FRA has
not revised the language in this section that was proposed in the NPRM,
FRA would like to provide clarification in response to comments from
the AAR and ASLRRA asserting that FRA fails to understand this final
rule will require the altering of existing collective bargaining
agreements. Paragraph (a) does not state that collective bargaining
agreements will not be altered as a result of this new rule. To the
contrary, FRA understands that, due to new requirements in this rule,
collective bargaining agreements may need to be modified to reflect the
training and qualification requirements of the rule. FRA acknowledges
this fact, but this rule allows for mentoring so individuals can obtain
new signal employee positions and be mentored until they become
qualified on the railroad's signal system and signal-related
technology. Paragraph (a) of this section simply acknowledges that the
term ``signal employee'' is defined in this final rule to cover persons
who engage in certain tasks that affect railroad signal systems and
signal-related technology as defined in Sec. 246.7. However, railroads
and labor organizations may use job classification titles other than
``signal employee'' for persons who engage in installing,
troubleshooting, testing, repairing, or maintaining railroad signal
systems and signal-related technology as defined in Sec. 246.7, and
this final rule does not affect the use of such job classification
titles in collective bargaining agreements.
Section 246.7 Definitions
This section defines a number of terms that have specific meaning
in this part. However, consistent with FRA's approach in drafting this
section-by-section analysis, definitions that received no comment and
are being finalized as proposed are not discussed in this section.
The American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) submitted
comments on the definition of ``medical examiner'' in the proposed
rule. Noting that approximately 70% of all nurse practitioner graduates
deliver primary care, AANP requested that FRA revise the definition of
``medical examiner'' to include nurse practitioners and thereby
authorize them to make determinations on signal employees'
certification, recertification, vision acuity and hearing acuity. AANP
asserted that the definition of ``medical examiner'' in the proposed
rule was based on FRA's locomotive engineer certification regulations
in 49 CFR part 240, which are now 32 years old, and not reflective of
the current practice environment where nurse practitioners provide a
substantial portion of care.
While FRA has not revised the definition of ``medical examiner'' to
specifically include nurse practitioners, FRA clarifies that if a nurse
practitioner is a licensed or certified technician, FRA's regulations
in 49 CFR parts 240 and 242 (and this final rule) allow the nurse
practitioner to perform the vision and hearing examinations required in
those parts (and in this rule). However, given the complex nature of
this issue and FRA's lack of regulatory requirements for medical
examiners, the question of whether nurse practitioners should be
allowed to serve as medical examiners (and if so, whether they should
be required to comply with specific regulatory or industry standards)
is best addressed in a future rulemaking during which comments can be
solicited specifically on this issue. Accordingly, only a doctor of
medicine or doctor of osteopathy is authorized by this final rule to
conduct a medical evaluation to determine whether a person can safely
work as a certified signal employee if the person fails the vision or
hearing acuity examination. FRA has, however, revised the last sentence
of this definition by changing ``employee'' to ``individual'' to
reflect the fact that railroad medical examiners will be asked to
conduct medical evaluations of railroad employees, as well as other
individuals seeking signal employee certification or recertification.
In this part, mentor is defined as a certified signal employee who
has at
[[Page 44841]]
least one year of experience as a certified signal employee. For
purposes of this part, a mentor provides direct and immediate
supervision over the work of one or more signal employees. In other
words, FRA views a mentor as a certified signal employee with current,
relevant experience who can be counted on to impart knowledge and
demonstrate safety-related tasks through on-the-job training. Unlike
qualified instructors, mentors are generally not directly involved in
testing or making certification decisions.
BRS and the SMART-TD commented on the definition of ``mentor'' in
the proposed rule and recommended that, after the first year of
implementing this final rule, mentors should be required to have at
least three years of experience working with sophisticated signal
systems. TTD and IBEW submitted similar comments. TTD expressed concern
that one year of experience does not provide enough time for an
employee to demonstrate real proficiency in the signal craft, while
IBEW commented that mentors should have no less than three years of
experience working as a certified signal employee and should be chosen
in concurrence with the applicable designated employee representative.
In contrast, AAR and ASLRRA commented that FRA should only require
signal employee certification, instead of requiring mentors to be
certified signal employees and also have at least one year of
experience as a certified signal employee. Otherwise, AAR and ASLRRA
point out that the experience requirements for mentors are more
stringent than the experience requirements for qualified instructors.
FRA agrees that it would, in most cases, be beneficial for mentors
to have more than one year of signal employee experience and encourages
the selection of mentors with additional years of experience in such
cases. FRA believes it is important to have individuals who are
comfortable with the signal systems and signal-related technology
deployed on the railroad provide direct and immediate supervision of
the tasks performed by uncertified persons on such systems and devices.
However, FRA does not have sufficient data to quantify the
potential impact on rail safety of having signal employees with at
least three years of signal employee experience serve as mentors, as
opposed to having signal employees with between one to three years of
signal employee experience, serve in this role. Accordingly, FRA has
retained the requirement that mentors have at least one year of
certified signal employee experience in this final rule. FRA has not,
however, revised the definition of mentor to require concurrence by
labor organizations in the selection of individuals to serve as
mentors. Concurrence by labor organizations is beneficial for qualified
instructors because qualified instructors participate in the
certification process by confirming that on-the-job proficiency and
qualification on the railroad's signal system and signal-related
technology has been demonstrated. FRA does not, however, anticipate
that mentors will be tasked by railroads with evaluating certification
candidates. Therefore, concurrence by labor organizations in the
selection of mentors seems unnecessary.
BRS and TTD also commented that use of the terms ``oversight'' and
``supervision'' in the same sentence in the definition of ``mentor'' in
the proposed rule may cause confusion. To avoid confusion, BRS and TTD
recommended that FRA clarify that oversight can be provided by a mentor
or supervisor. BRS and TTD explained that, by making this change, the
roles of both mentor and supervisor will be explicitly acknowledged and
there will be clearer understanding of the certified signal employee's
responsibilities when working on unfamiliar equipment.
However, after considering BRS and TTD's comments on this issue,
FRA revised the definition of ``mentor'' to clarify that mentors are
required to provide direct and immediate supervision of the person(s)
they are mentoring. As reflected in Sec. 246.124, mentors are held
responsible for the work performed by the person(s) working under their
direct and immediate supervision. While the verb ``oversee'' is defined
in the Britannica Dictionary as ``to watch and direct (an activity, a
group of workers, etc.) in order to be sure that a job is done
correctly,'' \26\ mentors are held responsible in this final rule for
closely supervising the work performed by the person(s) they are
mentoring. Therefore, the definition of ``mentor'' has been revised in
the final rule to provide this clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Britannica.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A definition of ``qualified'' has been added to this final rule,
which is similar to definition of this term in parts 240 and 242 of
this chapter. Use of ``qualified'' as defined in this section is
intended to reflect that the railroad's instruction and training
program not only imparted knowledge of how to perform a task, but also
sufficiently prepared the person to perform the task proficiently. For
example, a signal employee qualified on a specific type of signal
system equipment should have received classroom training on how to
perform required tasks on the signal system equipment, as well as on-
the-job training on how to perform those required tasks proficiently.
Without both instruction and hands-on practice performing required
tasks on the signal system equipment, the signal employee cannot be
considered qualified on the equipment.
In this final rule, the definition of ``qualified instructor'' has
been revised to make it more consistent with the definition of
``qualified instructor'' in 49 CFR 242.7. APTA submitted comments on
the definition of ``qualified instructor'' in the proposed rule,
asserting that the selection of qualified instructors is inherently the
responsibility of railroad management and that discharge of this duty
should not be subject to the consent of another party. APTA also
expressed concern that some current instructors may not be able to be
``qualified instructors'' because they are not engaged in installing,
troubleshooting, testing, repairing, or maintaining railroad signal
systems or signal-related technology and would not be considered
``signal employees,'' as defined in this rule. Network Rail Consulting
Inc. (NRC) commented that the person providing supervision should have
at least two years of experience and no safety-related incidents in the
previous two years, while IBEW commented that qualified instructors
should have no less than three years of experience working as a
certified signal employee.
The definition of ``qualified instructor'' has not, however, been
revised in this final rule to remove the required concurrence of the
designated employee representative when selecting a qualified
instructor or the requirement for the qualified instructor to be a
certified signal employee. The required concurrence of the designated
employee representative has been retained to facilitate input by
designated employee representatives, specifically in situations
involving qualified instructor candidates with minimal experience
(i.e., less than 12 months experience working as a signal employee) or
questionable experience who may be under consideration by railroad
management for employment as qualified instructors.
While FRA agrees that it would be beneficial for qualified
instructors to have more than one year of signal employee experience,
the definition of ``qualified instructor'' has not been revised to
require that qualified instructors have at least two years of
experience with no safety-related
[[Page 44842]]
incidents in the previous two years. FRA does not have sufficient data
to quantify the potential impact on rail safety of having signal
employees with at least two years of signal employee experience serve
as qualified instructors, as opposed to having signal employees with
between one to two years of signal employee experience, serve in this
role. Therefore, FRA has retained the requirement that qualified
instructors have at least one year of signal employee experience in
this final rule.
With respect to the concern expressed by APTA regarding current
instructors who may not be able to work as ``qualified instructors''
because they are not ``signal employees'' as this term is defined in
this rule, FRA notes that a new term ``signal instructor'' has been
added to this section in the final rule. To accommodate current
instructors who may not be able to comply with the definition of
``qualified instructor,'' signal instructors are not required to be
certified signal employees or even employees of a railroad. However, if
authorized by the railroad's certification program, signal instructors
may provide signal employee training.
Although the RSIA required FRA to issue a report to Congress on
whether the certification of certain crafts or classes of railroad
carrier or railroad carrier contractor or subcontractor employees,
including ``signal repair and maintenance employees,'' is necessary to
reduce the number and rate of accidents and incidents or to improve
railroad safety, the RSIA did not define the term, ``signal repair and
maintenance employees.'' In the absence of such a definition in the
RSIA, FRA is using the streamlined term, ``signal employee'' in this
part. This streamlined term, ``signal employee,'' is defined in this
final rule as a person who is engaged in installing, troubleshooting,
testing, repairing, or maintaining railroad signal systems or related
technology. This definition is generally consistent with the definition
of ``signal employee'' in the hours of service laws but includes the
terms ``troubleshooting'' and ``testing'' which are not found in the
statutory definition.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 49 U.S.C. 21101(4). The hours of service law defines
``signal employee'' as ``an individual who is engaged in installing,
repairing, or maintaining signal systems.'' 49 U.S.C. 21101(4).
While FRA believes ``troubleshooting'' and ``testing'' would fall
under the terms ``installing, repairing, or maintaining'' in the
hours of service law definition, FRA wanted to make explicit in this
rule that ``troubleshooting'' and ``testing'' are included in the
definition of ``signal employee.'' The addition of
``troubleshooting'' and ``testing'' in the definition in this final
rule is not intended to capture a broader group of employees than
provided in the hours of service law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In their comments on the proposed rule, AAR and ASLRRA asserted the
final rule should be clear that it does not apply to employees who are
not subject to the Federal hours of service law. As noted earlier, the
term ``signal employee'' as used in this part is intended to cover all
individuals who are currently subject to the Federal hours of service
law for signal employees (49 U.S.C. 21104). However, should questions
arise as to whether a specific group of employees are considered signal
employees for purposes of this rule, FRA will examine the tasks
performed by the employees to determine whether they are engaged in the
installation, troubleshooting, testing, repair, or maintenance of
railroad signal systems or related technology (even if such tasks are
not the primary focus of the employees' job). If FRA determines that
the employees engage in the installation, troubleshooting, testing,
repair, or maintenance of railroad signal systems or related
technology, FRA will then examine whether the employees are covered by
the Federal hours of service law for signal employees to determine
whether they are signal employees for purposes of this part.
AAR and ASLRRA also commented on the definition of ``signal
employee'', asserting that the definition in the proposed rule was
unmoored from the definition of ``signal employee'' in the Federal
hours of service law (49 U.S.C. 21101(4)), while noting FRA's
acknowledgement in the proposed rule that troubleshooting and testing
are activities that were not listed in the definition. AAR and ASLRRA
asserted that these tasks should be removed from the definition of
``signal employee'' to avoid confusion. However, troubleshooting and
testing signal systems has always been considered signal covered
service for purposes of the Federal hours of service law. Accordingly,
FRA has not revised the definition of ``signal employee'' to remove
these tasks.
In the proposed rule, while describing the roles and
responsibilities of signal employees, FRA stated that signal
maintainers are tasked with inspecting and testing signal systems and
performing minor and emergency repairs as needed. AAR and ASLRRA
objected to this statement, asserting that FRA did not explain what was
meant by ``minor repairs.'' AAR and ASLRRA also asserted that this
description limits the scope of a signal employee's work, which could
have implications for existing collective bargaining agreements. In
addition, AAR and ASLRRA asserted that there are several minor tasks
performed by people who are not signal employees and FRA should avoid
an overlap in terms when differentiating between these employees. After
considering these concerns, FRA revised its description of the work
performed by signal employees in the ``Roles and Responsibilities of
Signal Employees'' section above to more accurately reflect the work
typically performed by signal maintainers.
In their comments on the proposed rule, AAR and ASLRRA also
objected to FRA's assertion that a signal employee certification
program which includes background checks and disqualification from
safety-sensitive service for specified alcohol and drug violations and
for refusing alcohol and drug testing could help prevent employees with
active substance abuse disorders from ``job hopping.'' AAR and ASLRRA
contend FRA presented no evidence that signal employees switch jobs
more frequently than other crafts, including those that are subject to
certification requirements.
FRA's statements on this issue in the proposed rule were based on
FRA's finding in the 2015 report to Congress that the greatest
proportion of contractors covered under the hours of service laws are
signal employees and that they tend to switch employers more frequently
than other crafts of employees. The 2015 report to Congress did not,
however, include data showing the frequency with which the employees of
signal contractors switch employers, as compared to other crafts of
employees. Therefore, FRA has removed statements from this final rule
comparing the frequency with which signal employees switch jobs to the
frequency with which other crafts of railroad employees switch jobs.
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that the hiring process for signal
employees is already thorough. AAR and ASLRRA noted that prospective
signal employees undergo pre-employment drug and alcohol testing. Then,
once they are hired, AAR and ASLRRA noted that signal employees are
subject to random and reasonable basis testing, as well as post-
accident/incident testing. FRA agrees that railroads are well
positioned to identify signal employees with substance abuse disorders,
given existing drug and alcohol testing programs conducted by railroads
in accordance with 49 CFR part 219. However, signal employee
certification will make it difficult for employees who commit certain
safety violations (including violations related to
[[Page 44843]]
prohibited drug and alcohol use) to continue performing safety-
sensitive work on railroad signal systems. By issuing this final rule
requiring signal employee certification, FRA is taking a proactive
approach to minimize (and hopefully eliminate) such occurrences in the
future.
In their comments on the definition of ``signal employee,'' APTA
requested clarification on how FRA defines ``related technology.'' APTA
noted that railroads may have electric traction department employees
performing railhead bonding and contractors performing non-vital work
such as running direct burial cable. However, APTA asserted that
neither the electric traction department employees nor the contractors
engaged in running direct burial cable should be considered signal
employees for purposes of this part. In addition, APTA asserted that
mechanical department employees working on a locomotive's onboard cab
signal/PTC equipment might be considered signal employees for purposes
of this part.
FRA agrees that individuals who engage in electric traction work,
such as railhead bonding, and the running of direct burial cable
(without permanently landing or splicing the cable) should not be
considered signal employees for purposes of this part. As noted in
FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01, ``Application of the Hours of Service
Laws to Positive Train Control Systems,'' digging trenches for laying
signal cable and running cable without permanently landing or splicing
the cable are not considered to be signal covered service.
However, employees who test signal system components (even so-
called ``self-tests'' of cab signal equipment installed on locomotives)
that require the employee to interact with the signal system component,
monitor the progress of the test, or interpret the results of the test
are considered to be ``signal employees'' who are subject to the
Federal hours of service law (49 U.S.C. 21104). Therefore, employees of
the railroad's mechanical department are considered ``signal
employees'' for purposes of this part if they test signal system
components that require the employee to interact with the component,
monitor the progress of the test, or interpret the results of the test.
Network Rail Consulting Inc. (NRC) noted in their comments that
employees engaged in signal design have not been included in the
definition of ``signal employee'' in Sec. 246.7. However, NRC contends
that competence management is needed for these employees as well. In
contrast, AAR and ASLRRA commented that the work performed by signal
design engineers (who program and test the vital and non-vital software
programs that perform the functions for a signal system) is very
specific and not related to the repair or maintenance of railroad
signal systems.
NRC is correct in noting that employees engaged in signal design
have not been included in the definition of ``signal employee,'' as
they are not considered signal employees for purposes of this part.
While competence management would likely be beneficial, as indicated in
FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01, individuals engaged in the production
and design of signal system hardware and software outside railroad
property are not generally covered by the Federal hours of service law.
NRC also asserted that the maintenance of signal technology in the
operations control center should be covered by this final rule. FRA
agrees that the maintenance of signal technology in the operations
control center plays an important role in signal system safety.
Accordingly, individuals who maintain signal technology in the
operations control center (such as electronic control system
technicians and centralized traffic control (CTC) maintainers) are
considered ``signal employees'' for purposes of this part. As stated in
FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01, FRA considers work affecting the
proper functioning of software to be signal covered service, for
purposes of the Federal hours of service law, whether in the field or
in an office location. Therefore, in general, individuals engaged in
loading, verifying, or testing software or configurations into PTC
system hardware are considered to be ``signal employees'' for purposes
of this part.
With respect to back-office employees, AAR and ASLRRA noted that
these employees are not considered to be signal employees for purposes
of the Federal hours of service law (49 U.S.C. 21101(4)). While AAR and
ASLRRA acknowledge that some back-office employees have limited ability
to remotely access onboard and wayside systems for research purposes,
AAR and ASLRRA assert that they do not have the ability to modify any
safety-critical component of PTC systems. Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA
assert that back-office employees should not be considered signal
employees for purposes of this part.
FRA agrees that back-office employees, such as PTC help desk
personnel, who do not have the ability to modify any safety-critical
component of the PTC system are not considered ``signal employees'' for
purposes of this part. However, back-office employees, such as the
centralized traffic control (CTC) maintainers, who engage in the
installation, troubleshooting, testing, repair, or maintenance of
systems that connect the dispatching system to the wayside or onboard
train control systems are considered signal employees for purposes of
this rule. These employees have historically been subject to the
Federal hours of service law for signal employees.
As noted earlier, FRA is adding a definition of ``signal
instructor'' to the final rule to facilitate the continued use of
third-party training organizations by railroads. Unlike qualified
instructors, signal instructors are not required to be certified signal
employees. However, as stated in the definition, signal instructors
must demonstrate adequate knowledge of the subject matter they are
teaching and have the necessary experience to provide formal training
of the subject matter. Therefore, even though the signal instructor may
not be employed by the railroad, FRA expects railroads to verify that
the signal instructors who are providing training on signal systems and
signal-related technology have adequate knowledge and the necessary
experience to do so.
A slight revision has been made to the definition of ``signal
system'' to clarify that this term refers to signal system software and
equipment. NRC commented on the proposed definition of ``signal
system'' in the proposed rule and asked FRA to clarify whether this
definition includes operations control center signal equipment, while
also recommending that FRA revise the definition of ``signal system''
in Sec. 246.7 to include a reference to ``train control and detection
systems.'' As noted earlier, FRA considers individuals who maintain
signal technology in the operations control center (such as electronic
control system technicians and CTC maintainers) to be signal employees
for purposes of this rulemaking. Therefore, even though the definition
of ``signal system'' has not been revised to include a specific
reference to ``train control and detection systems,'' FRA is clarifying
that operations control center signal equipment falls under the
definition of ``signal system'' for purposes of this part.
AAR and ASLRAA also commented on the definition of ``signal
system,'' asserting that FRA's definition of ``signal system'' is
inconsistent with the definition of this term in the Federal hours of
service law (49 U.S.C. 20501). The Federal hours of service law defines
``signal system'' as a block signal system, an interlocking, automatic
train
[[Page 44844]]
stop, train control, or cab-signal device, or a similar appliance,
method, device, or system intended to promote safety in railroad
operations.'' \28\ However, AAR and ASLRRA fail to mention that this
definition of ``signal system'' was issued on July 5, 1994 and covers
most of the signal system components that were regulated by FRA's
signal regulations in 49 CFR part 236 at that time. In the 30 years
that have elapsed since this definition of ``signal system'' was issued
in 49 U.S.C. 20501, FRA promulgated regulations that specifically
address PTC systems, as well as pathway grade crossings. Therefore, if
FRA limited the definition of ``signal system'' to a definition of this
term that was promulgated 30 years ago, FRA would have overlooked
recent developments in signal system technology and might have
inadvertently failed to require certification and related training for
signal employees who are tasked with working on recently developed
signal system components and signal-related technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 49 U.S.C. 20501.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAR and ASLRRA also assert FRA needs to clarify that the term,
``signal system,'' does not include signal equipment that is not in
service. AAR and ASLRRA assert that FRA has no authority to regulate
equipment before or after it has been taken out of service. However,
this final rule does not directly regulate signal system equipment.
This final rule is intended to ensure that signal employees who install
(and remove from service) signal system components and signal-related
technology receive sufficient training to perform these tasks in a safe
manner. Given the importance of properly installing signal system
components that have not yet been placed in service, FRA does not agree
with AAR and ASLRRA that persons tasked with installing signal system
components which have not yet been placed in service should be exempt
from the signal employee certification requirements in this part.
Finally, AAR and ASLRRA commented that the definition of ``signal
system'' should not include wayside detection devices used to detect
defective conditions on locomotives and rolling stock (such as high-
wide load, hot or defective bearing, defective wheel detectors) or
other unsafe conditions (such as high-water, high-wind, sliding or
slumping soil, rock, or snow detectors) in non-signaled territory,
especially if the devices are not integrated into a signal system. AAR
and ASLRRA also noted that RSAC Working Group on wayside detectors
recently held its kickoff meeting on August 31, 2023. AAR and ASLRRA
note that, according to the RSAC Working Group's task statement, the
purpose of the Working Group is to consider and review issues related
to wayside detectors, including analyzing existing regulations and
guidance, accident, incident, and performance data, safety complaints,
and existing best practices. Therefore, AAR and ASLRRA assert that any
matters impacting how FRA treats wayside detection equipment should be
reserved for this RSAC Working Group (which consists of a multi-
disciplinary team of subject matter experts.)
As noted earlier, FRA's definition of the term ``signal employee''
is based on FRA's longstanding interpretation of what constitutes
signal covered service, as explained in FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-
01. As stated in FRA's Technical Bulletin S-19-01, FRA considers
``installing, repairing, or maintaining locomotive and wayside
equipment that encodes or decodes transmissions (e.g., a wayside
messaging server) to be signal covered service.'' \29\ This final rule
does not directly regulate signal system equipment or signal-related
technology (such as wayside detection devices). Instead, the signal
employee certification regulations in this part are intended to ensure
that signal employees who install, troubleshoot, test, repair, or
maintain signal system components and signal-related technology (such
as wayside detection devices) receive sufficient training to perform
these tasks in a safe manner. Therefore, FRA disagrees with AAR and
ASLRRA that the signal certification requirements in this final rule
should not apply to signal employees who work on wayside detection
equipment because an RSAC Working Group has been created to consider
and review issues related to wayside detectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ FRA Technical Bulletin S-19-01, page 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given changes that have been made to the scope of this rulemaking
since the proposed rule stage (see the section-by-section analysis for
Sec. 246.3 above), this final rule contains a definition for the
phrase ``tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations that are
not part of the general railroad system of transportation.''. This
phrase means a tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operation
(``tourist operation'') conducted only on track used exclusively for
that purpose. However, even if a tourist operation has a switch
connecting it to the general railroad system of transportation (general
railroad system), FRA does not consider the tourist operation part of
the general railroad system if the tourist operation's trains do not
enter the general railroad system and general system railroads do not
use the tourist operation's tracks for any purpose other than
delivering or picking up shipments from the tourist operation.
Section 246.11 Penalties and Consequences for Noncompliance
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.11 and 242.11, explains that
FRA may impose civil penalties on any person, including a railroad or a
contractor (or a subcontractor) providing goods or services to a
railroad, who violates any requirement of this rule. IBEW expressed
support for the language in this section which states that individuals
should only be subject to civil penalties for willful violations.
In their comments on this section, NRC suggested that violations of
FRA regulations involving gross negligence, a pattern of repeated
violations, or death or injury should be grounds for permanent
revocation of signal employee certification. However, as indicated by
paragraph (c) of this section, FRA reserves the right to take
enforcement action against any person who causes or contributes to non-
compliance with FRA's rail safety regulations by assessing a civil
penalty or issuing an order prohibiting an individual from temporarily
or permanently performing safety-sensitive functions in the rail
industry. Therefore, FRA finds it unnecessary to revise this provision.
Subpart B--Program and Eligibility Requirements
Section 246.101 Certification Program Required
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.101 and 242.101, requires
railroads to have written certification programs comprised of multiple
elements, each of which comports with specific regulatory provisions in
the rule related to that element. This section has been revised in the
final rule to include a reference to Sec. 246.120, which was added in
this final rule and requires railroads to qualify persons who work on
their signal systems and signal-related technology.
Paragraph (c) requires version control for certification programs.
Therefore, railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) are required
to maintain an up-to-date, detailed list or index tracking every change
made to their FRA-approved certification programs. FRA encourages
railroads and parent companies to maintain ``redlined''
[[Page 44845]]
versions, clearly reflecting revisions and indicating the year of the
version against which the revisions appear, of their certification
programs to reflect changes that have been made over the years.
Section 246.103 FRA Review of Certification Programs
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.103 and 242.103, describes
FRA's process for reviewing and approving signal employee certification
programs.
BRS and TTD submitted comments contending that the deadlines in
paragraph (a) of this section should be revised. BRS asserted that
Class II and Class III railroads should be required to adhere to the
same deadline for submitting their certification programs to FRA as the
Class I railroads. Since Class I railroads and commuter service
railroads are required to submit their certification programs to FRA
within eight months of the effective date of this rule, BRS asserted
that aligning the certification program submission deadlines would
promote regulatory consistency, while sending a clear message that all
railroads, regardless of their size, are equally responsible for
meeting the certification requirements within a defined timeframe.
TTD commented that FRA should require Class II railroads to submit
their certification programs to FRA within eight months of the
effective date of this rule. IBEW submitted a similar comment asserting
that several Class II railroads have the capability and resources to
develop certification programs within eight months and those Class II
railroads should do so to avoid unnecessary delays in implementing this
rule.
Despite these comments, FRA has decided to retain the program
submission schedule in the proposed rule. In the eight months between
the deadlines referenced in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this
section, FRA will be devoting its resources to reviewing approximately
40 certification programs from Class I and commuter railroads \30\ and
is unlikely to have the capacity to begin its review of programs
submitted by Class II railroads until after the 16-month deadline.
Also, FRA is concerned that the eight-month deadline proposed by the
unions may put too much of a strain on some Class II and III railroads.
Thus, while FRA shares the unions' desire for speedy implementation of
this rule, FRA does not believe that giving Class II and III railroads
16 months to develop and submit their certification programs to FRA
will delay implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Certification of Signal
Employees Final Rule, Docket No. FRA-2022-0020, p. 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c) of this section requires railroads (and parent
companies, if applicable) to submit their certification programs and
their requests for FRA approval (which are described in greater detail
in Sec. 246.106(a)) by emailing them to [email protected].
Paragraph (c) has been revised in the final rule to allow parent
companies to submit certification programs on behalf of one or more of
their subsidiary railroads. Paragraph (c) has also been revised to
require railroads and parent companies to submit their certification
programs and requests for FRA approval to a specified email address. In
the NPRM, this paragraph stated that signal employee certification
programs should be uploaded to a secure document submission site.
However, after further consideration, FRA determined that it would be
easier for both railroads and the agency if certification programs and
requests for FRA approval are submitted to a dedicated FRA email
address.
When a railroad or parent company submits its certification program
to FRA, paragraph (d) of this section also requires the railroad or
parent company to submit a copy of the program and the request for FRA
approval to the president of each labor organization that represents
the railroad's signal employees and to all of the railroad's signal
employees who would be subject to this part. In their comments, AAR and
ASLRRA assert that railroads should not have to have their
certification programs approved by the labor union president and all of
the railroad's signal employees. AAR and ASLRRA claim such a
requirement would be a substantial change from FRA's locomotive
engineer and conductor certification rules and would be arbitrary and
capricious. AAR and ASLRRA also expressed concern that a labor union
president could potentially hold up approval forcing the railroad to
miss deadlines. In addition, AAR and ASLRRA contend that requiring
approval of the labor union president creates an inherent conflict of
interest because FRA is allowing the labor union president to approve
and exercise control over when and how the railroad uses contractors to
perform work on certain signal equipment.
AAR and ASLRRA's concern with respect to paragraph (d) of this
section is unwarranted. This rule does not require railroads to obtain
approval of their certification programs from labor union presidents or
their signal employees. Paragraph (d) only provides these individuals
with the opportunity to review and comment on these programs. FRA
believes the source of AAR and ASLRRA's confusion was the reference to
a ``request for approval'' in paragraph (d)(1) of this section in the
proposed rule. However, this document, which is described in greater
detail in Sec. 246.106, is a request for approval from FRA, not from a
union president or signal employee. To avoid further confusion, FRA has
revised references to ``request for approval'' in this section to
``request for FRA approval.''
Several labor organizations, including BRS, IBEW, and TTD expressed
concern about the 45-day comment period for railroad certification
programs in paragraph (e). They are particularly concerned about the
initial influx of programs they will have to review after this rule
takes effect, especially if multiple railroads submit their signal
employee certification programs on or about the same date, and contend
that 45 days will not be enough time to thoroughly review and assess
each railroad's certification program. TTD specifically noted its
experience with FRA's PTC dockets, asserting that it has been rushed to
provide comments on amendments to the critical safety systems described
in PTC Safety Plan Requests for Application in fewer than three weeks,
due to delays in posting notices in the Federal Register that announce
the submission of these documents to FRA. Therefore, these labor
organizations request that the comment period be extended to 90 days.
Based on these comments from labor organizations, FRA has extended
the comment period from 45 days to 60 days. This change will provide
commenters with additional time to draft and submit meaningful comments
to assist FRA in its review of these programs. However, in an effort to
avoid further delays to the implementation of this rule, FRA is
declining to extend the comment period to 90 days. FRA understands that
labor organizations are particularly concerned about the initial influx
of programs they will need to review when this rule first goes into
effect, but once the effective date of this rule is established, labor
organizations will have several months to plan how to efficiently
allocate their resources when they anticipate receiving a large number
of programs to review. Also, FRA will consider late-filed comments to
the extent practicable and will extend comment periods on a case-by-
case basis if circumstances warrant (especially during these initial
periods where there is a high volume of programs to review).
AAR and ASLRRA are also opposed to FRA's review and approval
process in paragraph (f) of this section.
[[Page 44846]]
Specifically, AAR and ASLRRA contend that the proposed process allows
FRA ``to arbitrarily hold railroads in limbo for an indefinite time
period even if their programs are fully compliant'' \31\ and does
nothing to ensure that FRA's review process is handled expeditiously.
Instead, AAR and ASLRRA recommend that FRA implement the same review
and approval process found in parts 240 and 242, whereby a
certification program or material modification is considered approved
30 days after it was submitted unless FRA notifies the railroad in
writing that its program has been disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ FRA-2022-0020-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA is, however, declining to adopt this suggestion as it is
untenable following a 2020 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit). In Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen v. Federal Railroad Administration,
the D.C. Circuit invalidated FRA's passive approval of a modification
to Kansas City Southern Railway's locomotive engineer certification
program. In its decision, the court noted that the Administrative
Procedure Act ``requires agencies to reasonably explain to reviewing
courts the bases for the actions they take and the conclusions they
reach.'' \32\ The court found FRA's passive approval system allowed for
a ``complete absence of any accompanying explanation for the agency's
approval'' of the certification program.\33\ Since the administrative
record did not contain any explanation or reasoning for the
determinations made by FRA in approving the program, the court vacated
and remanded the case for FRA to provide a more complete explanation of
the agency's action or to take new agency action altogether.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen v. Fed. R.R.
Admin., 972 F.3d 82, 115 (D.C. Cir. 2020).
\33\ Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen, 972 F.3d at
116-17.
\34\ Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen, 972 F.3d at
117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the D.C. Circuit's criticism of the passive approval system
in part 240, it would be ill-advised for FRA to include a similar
system in this rule. Therefore, paragraph (f) of this section creates a
new system in which a certification program is not considered approved
by FRA until the agency issues an approval letter to the railroad or
parent company. Contrary to AAR and ASLRRA's comment, FRA will not
arbitrarily hold railroads in limbo for an indefinite period of time.
FRA will make every effort to meet its goal of issuing a decision on a
program within 120 days of submission. (This goal was 90 days in the
NPRM.) However, as noted above, FRA is extending the comment period on
signal employee certification programs to 60 days in this final rule.
Accordingly, 120 days for FRA to complete its review of these programs
is a more realistic goal. As FRA acknowledged in the NPRM, meeting this
goal will not always be feasible and will be especially difficult
during the initial implementation of this rule when FRA will receive
several programs to review at the same time. During this time,
railroads will be able to continue to operate as they did before this
rule went into effect so it is unclear how railroads will be harmed by
such delays.
Paragraph (g) of this section addresses the process for railroads
and parent companies that wish to make a material modification to their
previously approved programs. AAR and ASLRRA assert that the definition
of ``material modification'' in paragraph (g)(1) of this section is
vague and should be revised to avoid stifling innovations in safety
systems. In particular, AAR and ASLRRA recommend that FRA ``allow
railroads to use different delivery methods and to incorporate new
technology without treating those changes as material modifications.''
AAR and ASLRRA also contend that FRA should limit material
modifications to significant content-based changes that are likely to
impact safety, as opposed to treating edits to test questions,
structure, and timelines as material modifications.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ FRA-2022-0020-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the term ``material modification'' is intended to cover
any change in an approved certification program that significantly
affects the certification process. This may include alterations to the
training curriculum; modifications to testing or assessment methods;
changes to the duration of the program or program components (such as
training); changes to the number of test questions or the scoring
system; or any other change that would substantially impact the way
signal employees are trained, evaluated, and certified. It is vital
that FRA and stakeholders have the opportunity to review these proposed
changes to a certification program to ensure they align with the
overall goals of maintaining safety and compliance.
There are significant safety concerns at play when incorporating
new technologies. If new technologies do not receive an appropriate
level of oversight, safety risks can be introduced into the system
which could also undermine public confidence in railroad safety.
Therefore, FRA and stakeholders must be engaged in the review of
modifications to certification programs as provided in paragraph (g) of
this section. Railroads and parent companies should not introduce new
signal technologies without considering them to be material
modifications to their signal employee certification programs.
Paragraph (h) of this section describes the process to resubmit a
program or material modification that was previously disapproved by
FRA. TTD expressed support for paragraph (h)(3) of this section which
states that railroads with operational signal systems as of the
effective date of this final rule must resubmit their certification
program within 30 days, if notified by FRA that their program has been
disapproved. TTD cited to instances of railroads not bringing their
certification programs into compliance with parts 240 and 242 of this
chapter, specifically referencing recent accidents involving Norfolk
Southern Railway Company as support for their position. TTD also
recommended that FRA amend this section to authorize the issuance of
fines against railroads that ``repeatedly are not compliant with the
certification requirements.'' \36\ FRA appreciates TTD's comment;
however, such an amendment is unnecessary, as Sec. 246.11 authorizes
FRA to issue civil penalties for violations of this part. FRA will
publish a civil penalty schedule for this part on its website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ FRA-2022-0020-0032, p.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 246.105 Implementation Schedule for Certification Programs
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.201 and 242.105, contains the
timetable for implementation of this final rule. APTA commented that
railroads should be allowed to designate individuals who are in an
initial training program when this rule goes into effect so that they
can become certified signal employees upon completion of the training
program. APTA contends that implementing certification requirements in
the middle of a training program would be disruptive to the
participants and instructors.
In response to APTA's comment, paragraph (d) of this section allows
railroads to continue to designate as certified signal employees those
individuals who have been authorized by the railroad to perform the
duties of a signal employee until FRA approves the railroad's
certification program.
[[Page 44847]]
Therefore, railroads will be able to continue to designate individuals
as certified signal employees for several months after the effective
date of this rule, which should include any person who is in a signal
employee training program on the effective date of this rule. However,
railroads will no longer be able to designate persons as certified
signal employees under paragraph (d) once FRA approves the railroad's
program. FRA understands that some individuals will likely be in the
middle of a training program when this occurs, but railroads will have
several months to prepare for this occurrence and to figure out the
best way to minimize any disruption.
FRA is revising paragraph (d) from the proposed rule to clarify
that railroads are only allowed to ``designate'' persons as certified
signal employees in accordance with paragraph (d) between March 17,
2025 and the date FRA approves the railroad's certification program.
Once FRA approves a railroad's certification program, the designation
system described in paragraph (d) will no longer be allowed and
individuals will be required to obtain certification pursuant to the
railroad's certification program.
AAR and ASLRRA submitted comments recommending that FRA create an
exception for circumstances in which non-certified railroad employees
perform minor or routine corrections to signal systems. In support of
this recommendation, AAR and ASLRRA pointed to circumstances in which
maintenance of way personnel are tasked with disabling signals. AAR and
ASLRRA assert that activities of this nature should not require signal
employee certification.
FRA would like to clarify that tasks associated with disabling
signal systems, which are performed outside the signal bungalow, are
not considered to be signal covered service for purposes of the Federal
hours of service law. Therefore, maintenance of way employees engaged
in tasks performed outside the signal bungalow to disable the signal
system are not considered to be performing signal system work that
requires signal employee certification. However, tasks associated with
disabling signal systems that are performed inside the signal bungalow
are considered to be signal covered service under the Federal hours of
service law and, therefore, signal system work that requires signal
employee certification pursuant to this part.
To address the issue of designated signal employees who will be
eligible to retire within three years of the date FRA approves their
railroad's certification program, paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) allow
signal employees who are eligible to receive a retirement pension to
submit a request to their railroad that they not be certified, in
accordance with subpart B of this part, until three years from the date
FRA approves the railroad's program.
AAR and ASLRRA recommended, however, that FRA eliminate paragraphs
(f)(1) through (3), as they contend these provisions are contrary to
FRA's safety rationale for this rule and would allow a signal employee
to forego certification for up to six years. AAR and ASLRRA also assert
that these provisions will be burdensome on railroads, as they will
have to keep track of a special category of employees and establish
special protocols for them.
However, after considering those comments, FRA is retaining
paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) in this final rule. These paragraphs
simply allow signal employees who meet the requirements of paragraph
(f)(1) to request that their employing railroad not make them go
through the full certification process until their designated
certification expires (three years after FRA approves the railroad's
certification program). From FRA's perspective, it does not appear to
be an efficient use of railroad resources to require designated signal
employees who are going to retire before the end of their designation
period to complete the full certification process. However, except as
provided in paragraph (f)(2), railroads are not required to grant these
requests. Paragraph (f)(2) of this section states that, if a railroad
grants any such request, the railroad must grant all other requests
from eligible persons ``to every extent possible.'' In addition, this
paragraph does not create a loophole where a signal employee could
continue to work on railroad signal systems and signal-related
technology for up to six years without a mentor and forego
certification. Paragraph (f) plainly states that no person shall be
allowed to perform service as a certified signal employee more than
three years after their railroad's certification program is approved by
FRA without being tested and evaluated in accordance with procedures
that comply with subpart B of this part.
Section 246.106 Requirements for Certification Programs
This section contains the organizational requirements and a
narrative description of what must be included in a railroad's (or
parent company's) certification program. This section has been revised
in the final rule to address the submission of certification programs
by parent companies. The International Transportation Learning Center
(ITLC) submitted comments recommending that FRA authorize the use of
model signal employee certification programs, which could be
transferable between railroads. FRA anticipates that a non-profit
industry association will likely develop a model signal employee
certification program template, which can be adopted for use by Class
III railroads. However, after considering ITLC's comment, FRA has
decided to authorize the submission of signal employee certification
programs by parent companies on behalf of one or more of their
subsidiary railroads. Therefore, the requirements in this part that
apply to railroads subject to this part also apply to parent companies
who submit signal employee certification programs to FRA for approval
on behalf of one or more of their subsidiary railroads.
Paragraph (a) of this section addresses what must be included in a
certification program submission to FRA. The railroad or parent company
must include two documents in its submission: (1) a request for FRA
approval; and (2) the certification program. If a railroad is
submitting its initial certification program, the request for FRA
approval can be a brief document that simply states the railroad is
submitting its initial signal employee certification program to FRA for
approval. However, if a parent company is submitting a certification
program on behalf of one or more of its subsidiary railroads, the
parent company must provide a list of the railroads that will utilize
the certification program. Also, as stated in paragraph (a)(1)(iii), by
submitting a certification program on behalf of one or more subsidiary
railroads, the parent company assumes responsibility for compliance
with this part for all railroads identified on its list that will
utilize the parent company's certification program.
If a railroad or parent company would like to make a material
modification to a signal employee certification program that has
previously been approved by FRA, the request for FRA approval must
include a copy of the modified certification program that identifies
all of the proposed changes from the last FRA-approved version of the
program.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires that signal employee
certification programs identify the appropriate person to be contacted
in the event FRA needs to discuss an aspect of the railroad's program.
Paragraph (b)(1) also requires that railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) submit a
[[Page 44848]]
statement electing either to accept responsibility for training persons
not previously certified as signal employees (``initial signal employee
training'') or to not accept this responsibility.
If the railroad or parent company elects to not accept
responsibility for providing initial signal employee training, the
railroad or parent company will be limited to certifying signal
employees previously certified by another railroad. Prior to certifying
these signal employees, however, the railroad or parent company is
required by Sec. 246.125 to determine that the signal employee: (a) is
qualified on the signal system equipment and signal-related technology
deployed on the railroad territory where the signal employee is
expected to work; and (b) has demonstrated sufficient knowledge of the
certifying railroad or parent company's signal standards, test
procedures, and instructions for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of the certifying railroad or
parent company's signal system equipment and signal-related technology.
On the other hand, if the railroad or parent company elects to
accept responsibility for providing initial signal employee training to
persons not previously certified as signal employees, paragraph
(b)(1)(iii) requires the railroad or parent company to submit
information in their certification program explaining how such persons
will be trained. The railroad or parent company has two options. The
first option is to provide training through a program developed by the
railroad or through a training program adopted by the railroad. The
second option is to authorize another railroad or non-railroad entity
(which may include a railroad association or rail-labor organization)
to provide training. However, if the railroad or parent company chooses
the second option, the railroad or parent company will be responsible
for ensuring that the training provider adheres to the training program
submitted in the railroad or parent company's FRA-approved
certification program. A railroad or parent company that chooses to
authorize another railroad or non-railroad entity to provide the
training must also provide the name of the training provider in its
certification program.
For railroads and parent companies that elect to classify their
certified signal employees into more than one occupational category or
subcategory by class, task, location, or other suitable terminology,
paragraph (b)(1)(iv) requires the railroad or parent company to provide
detailed information about each occupational category (and subcategory,
if applicable) of certified signal employee service in Section One of
its certification program.
Paragraph (b)(2) requires railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) to address in Section Two of their certification programs
how they will provide training for previously certified signal
employees. A matter of particular concern to FRA is how each railroad
will ensure previously certified signal employees receive sufficient
training on the signal systems and signal-related technology deployed
on the railroad's territory. Railroads have the latitude to select the
specific subject matters to be covered, the duration of continuing
education sessions, the methods of presenting the information, and the
frequency with which continuing education will be provided. However,
railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) must describe in this
section how they will ensure their certified signal employees maintain
the necessary knowledge and skills and receive up-to-date and
comprehensive training on their signal system equipment and signal-
related technology (including new or modified equipment and software
modifications) so as to ensure their certified signal employees are
qualified on the equipment and technology and compliant with the
training standards set forth in Sec. 246.119.
Time and circumstances can diminish both abstract knowledge and the
proper application of that knowledge to discrete events. Time and
circumstances can also alter the value of previously obtained knowledge
and the application of that knowledge. Therefore, certified signal
employees also need to have their fundamental knowledge of applicable
Federal railroad safety laws and regulations, as well as railroad
signal system safety rules and practices, refreshed periodically.
Therefore, railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) must also
describe in Section Two how they will ensure their certified signal
employees remain knowledgeable about the safe discharge of their
responsibilities, in accordance with Sec. 246.119. In addition,
railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) must explain in Section
Two how training will be administered for previously certified signal
employees who have had their certification expire. (This requirement
was included in Sec. 246.125(b) in the NPRM.) If the railroad or
parent company fails to address in Section Two of its certification
program how training will be administered to these signal employees,
the railroad or parent company must require completion of its entire
training program by previously certified signal employees who have had
their certification expire.
Section Three of the certification program must address
requirements for the testing and evaluation of previously certified
signal employees. Paragraph (b)(3)(i) requires railroads (and parent
companies, if applicable) to address how their certification programs
will comply with the standards found in Sec. 246.121. Section 246.121
requires railroads to employ a written or electronic test containing
objective questions that address the following subject matters: (i)
compliance with all applicable Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders governing signal systems and signal-related
technology; (ii) compliance with all applicable railroad safety and
operating rules; and (iii) compliance with all applicable railroad
standards, procedures, and instructions for the installation,
operation, testing, maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of the
railroad's signal systems and related technology. In addition, the test
must include a practical demonstration component. Paragraph (b)(3)(ii)
requires railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) to explain
their procedures for testing visual and hearing acuity and for ensuring
that their medical examiners have sufficient information to make
determinations on whether candidates for signal employee certification
or recertification can safely work as certified signal employees.
Section Four of the certification program addresses the
requirements for training, testing, and evaluating persons not
previously certified as signal employees. Railroads and parent
companies that elect, in Section One of the certification program, to
not accept responsibility for providing initial signal employee
training can skip this section. Paragraph (b)(4) requires railroads and
parent companies that elect to provide training to persons who have not
been previously certified as signal employees to provide details in
Section Four of their certification programs on how they will train,
test, and evaluate these individuals to ensure they acquire and
demonstrate sufficient knowledge and skills to safely perform the job
of a certified signal employee.
Railroads and parent companies can authorize non-railroad entities
(including signal contractors) to provide the required training.
Railroads and parent companies that choose to authorize non-railroad
entities to provide the required training will likely find that most,
if not all, existing signal
[[Page 44849]]
employee training programs approved by FRA pursuant to part 243 of this
chapter will need to be revised to comply with the additional training
and knowledge testing requirements in this part that specifically apply
to signal employees.
Railroads (and parent companies, if applicable) are also required
by paragraph (b)(4)(iv) to explain how training will be administered to
previously uncertified signal employees who have extensive signal
experience. This requirement was previously contained in Sec.
246.125(b) in the proposed rule. If a railroad or parent company elects
to provide training to persons who have not been previously certified
as signal employees, but fails to specify how it will train these
signal employees, the railroad or parent company must require
previously uncertified signal employees with extensive signal
experience to complete its entire training program.
Paragraph (b)(5) requires railroads (and parent companies, if
applicable) to discuss in Section Five of their certification programs
how they monitor the operational performance of their certified signal
employees in accordance with Sec. 246.123. In particular, the railroad
or parent company must discuss the processes and procedures it will use
for ensuring that such monitoring and testing is performed. This must
include a description of the scoring system the railroad or parent
company will employ during monitoring observations and unannounced
tests.
Finally, paragraph (b)(6) requires Section Six of a railroad or
parent company's certification program to address how the railroad or
parent company will perform routine administration of the program. This
section must include a summary of how the program will comply with each
of the regulatory provisions listed in paragraph (b)(6).
Section 246.107 Signal Service Classifications
This section allows, but does not require, railroads to issue
certificates for one or more occupational categories or subcategories
of certified signal employee service. While some railroads with only
one type of signal employee service might not have any interest in
certifying multiple types of signal employee service, larger railroads
that have already established multiple categories of signal employee
service (such as signal maintainers, signal inspectors, locomotive
signal/electrical technicians, etc.) on their territories may find it
beneficial to issue certificates for multiple types of signal employee
service. Therefore, by allowing railroads to classify their certified
signal employees into multiple occupational categories or
subcategories, railroads will have the flexibility to shape the
structure of their certification programs to highlight the specific
tasks and responsibilities for each category and subcategory of
certified signal employee working on their territories.
A railroad that classifies its certified signal employees into
separate categories, such as signal maintainers, signal inspectors, and
locomotive signal/electrical technicians, can issue specific
certificates for each category of signal employee service. This section
also permits railroads to certify signal employees for signal system
work on specific railroad divisions or subdivisions, as opposed to
issuing one universal signal employee certificate that would certify
the signal employee to perform signal system work anywhere on the
certifying railroad's territory. As further explained in the section-
by-section analysis of Sec. 246.106(b), railroads that choose to
classify their certified signal employees into multiple occupational
categories and subcategories are required by Sec. 246.106(b)(1)(iv) to
provide detailed information about each occupational category (and
subcategory, if applicable) of its certified signal employees.
The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC)
recommended, in their comments, that FRA require railroads to have
multiple classifications of signal employees. Noting that there are
many technical differences in signal job categories, as well as varying
signal employee experience and skill levels, UTC asserted that
requiring signal employee classification will ensure signal employees
are trained to work only on the signal system for which they are
certified. FRA shares UTC's concern with railroad practices that result
in signal employees working on signal systems on which they have not
been sufficiently trained.
Accordingly, paragraph (b) of this section requires individuals to
immediately notify the railroad (or their employer, if they are not
employed by a railroad) if they are called to work on a signal system
or signal-related technology on which they have not been certified.
However, even more importantly, when notified that a person has been
called to work on a signal system or signal-related technology on which
they have not been certified, paragraph (c) prohibits the railroad from
requiring the person to work on the signal system or signal-related
technology unless the person is allowed to work under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor in accordance
with Sec. 246.124. FRA believes these requirements, in addition to the
overarching requirement that railroads develop signal employee
certification programs with training, knowledge testing, and
operational performance monitoring components for FRA approval, will
address UTC's concern regarding signal employees who are instructed to
work on signal systems on which the signal employee has not been
sufficiently trained.
With respect to paragraph (c), BRS expressed concern that the
wording in this paragraph may cause confusion. FRA has therefore
revised paragraph (c) to provide clarification. After a railroad's
signal employee certification program has been approved by FRA,
paragraph (c) prohibits the railroad from requiring any person to work
on a signal system or signal-related technology on which the person has
not been certified and qualified, unless the person works under the
direct and immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor.
Section 246.109 Determinations Required for Certification and
Recertification
This section lists the determinations that railroads are required
to make when evaluating a candidate's eligibility to be certified or
recertified as a signal employee. This section has been revised in the
final rule by including a reference to the qualification requirements
in Sec. 246.120. An additional minor revision has also been made to
replace the reference to ``vision . . . acuity standards'' in paragraph
(a)(3) of the NPRM with a reference to ``visual . . . acuity
standards'' in this final rule.
Section 246.111 Prior Safety Conduct as Motor Vehicle Operator
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.111, 240.115, and 242.111,
contains the requirements and procedures that railroads are required to
follow when evaluating the motor vehicle driving records of a candidate
for signal employee certification or recertification. BRS, IBEW, and
TTD submitted comments on this section expressing concern that a 60-day
time period may not allow enough time to request and obtain driving
records as part of the recertification process, due to administrative
delays outside the recertification candidate's control. However,
paragraph (c) requires candidates for signal employee recertification
to request their driving records at least 60 days prior to the date
[[Page 44850]]
on which their certification expires. Therefore, at least 120 days will
elapse between the date on which candidates for recertification
requests their driving records and the end of the 60-day period ``grace
period'' authorized by paragraph (c). However, if a candidate for
signal employee certification or recertification is unable to obtain
their driving records, despite the grace period provided in paragraph
(c), paragraph (e) authorizes either the railroad or the candidate for
signal employee certification or recertification to submit a waiver
petition for regulatory relief.
BRS and TTD recommended that FRA differentiate requirements for
obtaining driving records based on the position a signal employee
occupies and whether the signal employee is required to operate a motor
vehicle. In addition to BRS and TTD, IBEW and NRC expressed concern
that requiring railroads to include a review of driving records in
their certification programs may inadvertently result in barring
certified signal employees and otherwise perfect candidates for signal
employee certification who have unsatisfactory driving records from
obtaining signal employee certification and recertification.
The intent of this section is not to ensure that every certified
signal employee can operate company vehicles, if required to do so.
Instead, the intent of this section is to obtain and review motor
vehicle records to identify candidates for signal employee
certification and recertification who have either been convicted of (or
subject to the cancellation, revocation, suspension, or denial of a
motor vehicle driver's license for) operating a motor vehicle while
under the influence of, or impairment by, alcohol or a controlled
substance. By identifying these individuals, they can be referred for
evaluation (and potentially treatment) for an active substance abuse
disorder, given the safety sensitive nature of certified signal
employee work on railroad signal systems and other signal-related
technology. Accordingly, as explained in paragraph (m) of this section,
the only motor vehicle incidents railroads may consider are related to
being under the influence of, or impaired by, alcohol or a controlled
substance. This means railroads are not allowed to consider a person's
speeding violations or other aspects of their motor vehicle driving
record that are not related to alcohol or drug use when making a
determination for signal employee certification.
In the NPRM, paragraph (h)(2) of this section required all persons
seeking certification or recertification to request driving records
from the chief of the driver licensing agency of any jurisdiction,
including states or foreign countries, that issued or reissued that
person a driver's license in the past five years. This paragraph
mirrored 49 CFR 240.111(c)(2).\37\ However, FRA determined that a five-
year lookback period was unnecessary in this final rule because
paragraph (l)(2) of this section only allows railroads to consider
motor vehicle driving incidents that occurred within the three years
prior to the date of the railroad's certification decision. Thus, FRA
changed the lookback period to three years. Furthermore, rather than
focusing on when a jurisdiction issued or reissued a driver's license,
FRA thinks the more appropriate inquiry is whether a person held a
driver's license from the jurisdiction within the previous three years.
Therefore, this paragraph has been revised in accordance with these
changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 1998 required the five-
year lookback period for persons seeking locomotive engineer
certification. Public Law 100-342, sec. 4, 102 Stat. 624, 625
(1988). However, no such requirement applies to this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (k) of this section requires certified signal employees
and candidates seeking signal employee certification to notify their
certifying railroad of motor vehicle incidents described in paragraphs
(m)(1) and (2) (i.e., drug and alcohol offenses) of this section within
48 hours of conviction or completed state action to cancel, revoke,
suspend, or deny the employee or candidate's motor vehicle driver's
license for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of, or
impairment by, alcohol or a controlled substance or refusal to undergo
such testing. Paragraph (k) also provides that, for purposes of signal
employee certification, a railroad cannot have a more restrictive
company rule requiring a signal employee to report a conviction or
completed state action to cancel, revoke, suspend, or deny a motor
vehicle driver's license in less than 48 hours. AAR and ASLRRA
criticized the language in this provision that precludes railroads from
having more restrictive company rules requiring signal employees to
report a conviction or completed State action to cancel, revoke, or
deny a motor vehicle driver's license in less than 48 hours. AAR and
ASLRRA assert that, as a practical matter, railroads should be able to
request notification in less than 48 hours as a matter of company
policy if they determine notification is in the safety interest of the
railroad. AAR and ASLRRA further assert that they could easily envision
a scenario where safety would be decreased because an employee takes
advantage of the 48-hour grace period after being convicted to delay
notification. After considering these concerns, FRA is declining to
adopt this requested change. By keeping this requirement in paragraph
(k), a railroad cannot revoke, deny, or otherwise make a person
ineligible for certification until that person has received due process
from the state agency taking action against their motor vehicle
driver's license. However, this 48-hour restriction only applies to
actions taken against a person's signal employee certification and has
no effect on a person's right to be employed by that railroad. By
keeping this restriction, paragraph (k) maintains conformity with 49
CFR 240.111(h) and 242.111(l).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ This issue was also addressed and discussed 25 years ago
when FRA was amending its locomotive engineer certification rule.
See 63 FR 50626, 50639 (Sept. 22, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (l) of this section prohibits railroads from considering
motor vehicle driving incidents that occurred prior to the effective
date of this rule or more than three years before the date of the
railroad's certification decision. AAR and ASLRRA commented that there
is no safety reason to limit the review of motor vehicle records to
three years as this limitation makes it difficult to establish a
pattern of safety abuses.
However, the three-year limit on motor vehicle driving records that
can be reviewed for purposes of this rule is based on practical
considerations. The three-year limit in paragraph (l) is intended to be
consistent with minimum record retention practices of state driver
licensing agencies. The three-year limit is also consistent with 49 CFR
parts 240 and 242.
With respect to FRA's decision to prohibit railroads from
considering safety conduct that occurred prior to the effective date of
this rule, FRA is guided both by fairness and by the law. While
retroactive effects are not completely prohibited by the Administrative
Procedure Act, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that ``[r]etroactivity
is not favored in the law.'' \39\ Moreover, even if there were a
substantial justification for the retroactive application of a
rulemaking, ``courts should be reluctant to find such authority absent
an express statutory grant.'' \40\ Given that there is no express
statutory grant of authority for this rule to have retroactive effects,
FRA has decided not to allow railroads to
[[Page 44851]]
consider safety conduct that occurred prior to the effective date of
this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Bowen v. Georgetown University Hosp., 488 U.S. 204, 208
(1988).
\40\ Bowen, 488 U.S. at 208-09.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 246.117 Visual Acuity
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.121, 240.207, and 242.117,
contains requirements for visual acuity testing that railroads must
incorporate in their signal employee certification programs. As an
initial matter, in the NPRM, FRA used the terms ``visual acuity'' and
``vision acuity.'' In the interest of consistency, FRA is using the
term ``visual acuity'' throughout this final rule, which includes
changing the title of this section to ``visual acuity.'' \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ ``Visual acuity'' appears to be the term used in the
medical field. See Visual Acuity, American Optometric Association,
found at https://www.aoa.org/healthy-eyes/vision-and-vision-correction/visual-acuity?sso=y.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA solicited comments in the NPRM on whether visual acuity
standards are necessary for certified signal employees and if so,
whether they should be as stringent as existing standards for
locomotive engineers and conductors. Multiple comments were submitted,
including comments from labor organizations and railroad industry
associations. Most commenters, including BRS and TTD, expressed support
for requiring individuals to meet the distant visual acuity standard of
at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye when initially hired to work as a
signal employee. Noting that vision and hearing standards are critical
to job performance, NRC commented that the visual and hearing acuity
standards for certified signal employees should be the same as FRA's
visual and hearing acuity standards for certified locomotive engineers
and conductors.
In contrast, AAR and ASLRRA submitted comments urging FRA to
consider whether the visual acuity requirements are tailored to the
work performed by signal employees. AAR and ASLRRA recommended that,
prior to implementing visual and hearing acuity requirements, FRA
should analyze the components of a signal employee's duties and address
how particular visual and hearing acuity requirements impact the
ability of signal employees to safely perform their work.
In response to these comments, FRA closely reviewed the tasks
performed by signal employees and determined that a signal employee's
visual acuity is a critical component of a signal employee's roles and
responsibilities. In recent years the equipment on which signal
employees work has significantly evolved. Historically, employees were
required to interpret circuit plans, manuals, railroad standards, relay
positions, and the color of signals. North American signals generally
fall into three categories of multi-head electrically lit units. These
are the searchlight, color light, position light/color position light.
Each of these units requires a colored lens or roundel to be installed
in front of the light. Visual acuity is therefore critical to a person
performing signal employee work. Being able to distinguish the color of
signal lenses/roundels utilized in the industry signals is critical to
ensure the correct signal aspect is presented as intended to the train
crew. In the past, the color of a signal lens/roundel was often
embossed on the lens itself, which helped signal employees ensure the
correct lens was placed in the proper position within a signal head.
However, some lenses/roundels are not marked in a manner to indicate
their color. So, it is incumbent on the signal employee installing the
lenses/roundels to be able to distinguish its color.
With the introduction of light emitting diodes (LED), a signal
employee must be able to distinguish the actual color the LED emits.
When testing, this must be accomplished a significant distance away
from the signal. LED technology also allows a signal head to display a
variety of signal colors. Therefore, it is critical for signal
employees to distinguish the color of signals and not simply the
position of the signal head being lit. When testing earlier versions of
signals or the current LED versions, this must be accomplished a
significant distance away from the signal.
With the introduction of microprocessor equipment, signal employees
need to see the position of micro-switches and the color of micro-
indicators located on circuit boards. These items, which are often very
small (sometimes less than an 1/8-inch in size), are prevalent on
microprocessor equipment used within both signal and highway-rail grade
crossing warning systems. In addition, signal employees need to be able
to distinguish the correct color of proposed circuit changes on circuit
plans. Proposed circuit changes are often indicated by lines of
different colors on a circuit plan.
Therefore, after taking a closer look at the safety-sensitive tasks
performed by signal employees, FRA decided to retain the visual acuity
standards proposed in the NPRM. These visual acuity standards are
consistent with the visual acuity standards for other modal
professionals throughout the transportation industry, such as air
traffic controllers and pilots.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 14 CFR 67.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA also received comments that were critical of FRA's proposal in
paragraph (b)(3) in the proposed rule to periodically test signal
employees seeking recertification on their ability to recognize and
distinguish between the colors of railroad signals. BRS explained that
after the first year of employment, the emphasis on color distinction
becomes less relevant. BRS asserted that signal workers quickly become
familiar with blueprints, enabling them to determine the intended
aspect to be illuminated without solely relying on color
identification. IBEW expressed concern that FRA's proposal to test both
initial hires and signal employees seeking recertification on their
ability to recognize and distinguish between the colors of railroad
signals would unnecessarily penalize and disqualify signal workers who
are colorblind.
To accommodate signal employees who develop color vision
deficiencies during the course of their employment, BRS, IBEW, and TTD
recommended that FRA establish an alternative assessment. More
specifically, BRS and TTD recommended FRA establish an alternative
assessment that evaluates an employee's knowledge of signal aspects and
their ability to interpret blueprints accurately to help ensure
railroads retain a skilled signal workforce.
FRA acknowledges that some individuals may not be able to meet the
threshold visual acuity standards in this section but may be able to
compensate in other ways that will allow them to safely perform their
duties as a certified signal employee. However, FRA has determined that
the flexibility afforded by paragraph (d) of this section is preferable
to establishing an alternative assessment.
Paragraph (d) of this section permits a railroad to have procedures
whereby doctors can evaluate individuals who cannot meet the threshold
visual acuity standards in this section and make discrete
determinations about the individual's ability to compensate in ways
that will allow them to safely perform their tasks as a signal
employee. If the railroad's medical examiner concludes that the
individual could safely serve as a certified signal employee, the
railroad can certify that person after the railroad obtains the medical
examiner's professional medical opinion to that effect. If necessary,
medical examiners can condition their opinion on certain circumstances
or restrictions, such as the use of corrective lens.
APTA expressed support for the flexibility provided by paragraph
(d) and asserted this flexibility should be maintained so that signal
employees
[[Page 44852]]
who have the ability to recognize and distinguish the different aspects
of railroad signals can remain eligible for certification. While IBEW
expressed concern that paragraph (d) gives too much discretion to
railroad medical examiners, FRA disagrees. Whether a person meets the
standards for visual acuity in this final rule is a medical
determination. Therefore, it is appropriate for a medical professional
to determine whether a person can safely perform as a certified signal
employee. Second, a medical examiner will only exercise discretion
pursuant to this section if a person does not satisfy the objective
visual acuity criteria in paragraph (c) of this section. Finally,
railroad medical examiners have been handling these issues for over 30
years for locomotive engineer certification and for over 10 years for
conductor certification. To date, FRA is unaware of any significant
problems involving the exercise of this discretion.
Section 246.118 Hearing Acuity
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.121, 240.207, and 242.117,
contains requirements for hearing acuity testing that railroads must
incorporate in their signal employee certification programs.
Paragraph (c) of this section contains the general hearing
standards that a person must satisfy to be certified as a signal
employee unless they are determined to have sufficient hearing acuity
under paragraph (d) of this section. The standards in paragraph (c)
mirror the hearing acuity standards for locomotive engineers and
conductors in 49 CFR parts 240 and 242.
In the proposed rule, FRA solicited comments on whether hearing
acuity standards are necessary for certified signal employees and if
so, whether they should be as strict as the standards for locomotive
engineers and conductors. FRA received a range of comments in response
to these questions. BRS noted in their comments that railroaders
encounter high noise levels during their day-to-day work, due to a
variety of sources of noise in their work environment, including
locomotive engines, train horns, heavy equipment operations, and rail
grinding. While the use of earplugs is common practice to mitigate
noise exposure, BRS asserted that earplugs can only provide a certain
level of protection against hearing loss throughout a railroader's
career. Accordingly, BRS acknowledged the value of hearing acuity tests
for monitoring and detecting hearing loss.
BRS and IBEW contended, however, that hearing acuity tests should
be limited to testing candidates for signal employee certification and
recertification to verify that they can accurately differentiate
important auditory cues or signals. In addition, IBEW expressed concern
that this section gives too much discretion to railroad medical
examiners. On the other hand, NRC contended that vision and hearing
standards are critical to job performance. NRC commented that the
visual and hearing acuity standards for certified signal employees
should be the same as FRA's visual and hearing acuity standards for
certified locomotive engineers and conductors.
AAR and ASLRRA recommended that FRA consider whether the hearing
acuity requirements are tailored to the work performed by signal
employees. AAR and ASLRRA also asserted that, prior to implementing
vision and hearing requirements, ``FRA needs to analyze the components
of a signal employee's duties and address how particular vision and
[hearing] acuity requirements impact the ability of signal employees to
safely perform their work.'' \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ FRA-2022-0020-0035, pp. 28-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the range of comments on this issue, FRA closely reviewed the
tasks performed by signal employees and determined that a signal
employee's hearing acuity is critical to their personal safety and the
safety of others. A signal employee must be able to communicate with a
dispatcher to ensure on-track safety has been properly established for
themselves or others. Signal employees often rely on the sound of a
locomotive horn when they utilize train approach warning as a form of
protection for tasks that are performed near the track. On-track safety
is a key item covered in the required job briefings. Signal employees
must be able to understand the job briefing prior to fouling the track.
Signal employees must also communicate safety sensitive
instructions to the dispatcher to obtain protection for defective
signal system equipment, such as a stop and flag order to protect a
malfunctioning highway-rail grade crossing warning system. In addition,
signal employees need to hear other signal employees when they perform
signal tests. Employees are often called upon to call out signal
aspects while locking tests are performed. With the evolution of
microprocessor equipment, signal employees also need to be able to hear
the distinct codes being transmitted by the equipment, such as micro-
lock or electrocode. Signal employees listen for unusual sounds while
inspecting signal system equipment, such as switch machines and gate
mechanisms, as such sounds can indicate a need for additional
investigation or maintenance.
FRA acknowledges that some individuals may not be able to meet the
threshold hearing acuity standards in this section but may be able to
compensate in other ways that will allow them to safely perform their
duties as a certified signal employee. However, FRA has determined that
the flexibility afforded by paragraph (d) of this section is preferable
to limiting hearing acuity tests to verifying that the individual can
accurately differentiate between auditory cues or signals.
Therefore, after close review of the safety-sensitive tasks
performed by signal employees, FRA decided to retain the hearing acuity
standards proposed in the NPRM. For the reasons explained in the
section-by-section analysis for Sec. 246.117 above, FRA does not share
IBEW's concern that this section gives too much discretion to a
railroad medical examiner.
Section 246.119 Training Requirements
This section requires railroads to provide initial, periodic, and
qualification training to certified signal employees. Such training is
necessary to ensure certified signal employees have the knowledge,
skills, and abilities necessary to safely perform all of the safety-
related duties mandated by Federal law, regulations, and orders.
As an initial matter, FRA deleted paragraph (b) of this section in
the proposed rule. In the proposed rule, paragraph (b) would have
required the railroad to state in its certification program whether the
railroad elects to accept responsibility for training persons who have
not been previously certified as signal employees or only certify
persons who have been previously certified by other railroads. FRA
removed this language from this section because it is duplicative of
what is already required under Sec. 246.106(b)(1). Accordingly,
paragraph (b) in this final rule focuses on training requirements that
apply to railroads or parent companies that elect to accept
responsibility for training persons who have not been previously
certified as signal employees.
NRC commented that FRA should set minimum standards for training
program design and issue those standards in a circular or other
supplemental guidance. However, FRA does not plan to issue a circular
or supplemental guidance (such as an appendix to this part) at this
time because Sec. 246.106 addresses NRC's concern. Section 246.106,
which is derived from appendix B to part 240
[[Page 44853]]
and appendix B to part 242, provides railroads with more information on
how to design and structure their programs. Section 246.106 provides a
description of what information should be included in each section of
the program. FRA has found through its experience with locomotive
engineer and conductor certification that issuing a separate circular
or appendix is unnecessary as railroads can look to the appendices in
parts 240 and 242 for guidance on how to satisfy the requirements of
those rules. Thus, FRA does not see a need for issuing a separate
circular or appendix with respect to signal employee certification.
If a railroad (or parent company) accepts responsibility for
training persons who have not been previously certified as signal
employees, paragraph (b) of this section requires the railroad or
parent company to state in its certification program whether it will
conduct the training or whether it will authorize a third party to
provide the training on its behalf.
This section gives railroads (and parent companies, if applicable)
the latitude to design and develop the training and delivery methods
they will employ. Pursuant to paragraph (c), a railroad or parent
company that elects to accept responsibility for training persons who
have not been previously certified as signal employees is required to
explain how training will be structured, developed, and delivered,
including an appropriate combination of classroom, simulator, computer-
based, correspondence, practical demonstration, on-the-job training, or
other formal training. Paragraph (c)(3) also requires railroads (and
parent companies, if applicable) to review and modify their training
programs whenever new safety-related railroad laws, regulations,
orders, and procedures are issued, as well as whenever new signal
system equipment or signal-related technology are introduced into the
workplace.
TTD submitted comments expressing concern that many railroads are
not providing an acceptable level of training to employees. IBEW
expressed a similar concern and asserted that Sec. 246.125 allows one
railroad to rely upon a signal employee's certification awarded by
another railroad. Accordingly, IBEW recommended that FRA require 160
hours of on-the-job training, at least half of which should be in the
field.
FRA acknowledges these concerns and suggestions and is taking this
opportunity to clarify some of the requirements of this subpart. FRA
agrees that recent industry trends have resulted in declining quality
and/or quantity of training and testing, a concern FRA has voiced to
the industry on multiple occasions including recent disapproval of
conductor certification programs. These instances reveal that some
railroads have misinterpreted the discretion provided to them in parts
240 and 242 as permission to submit certification programs that are
sparse on details. Such railroads are mistaken as to what is required
under parts 240 and 242, and FRA audits have highlighted significant
issues with these programs and underscored the critical need for
railroads to provide detailed and comprehensive submissions.
While FRA believes railroads should be provided some flexibility in
the design of their certification programs to address specific signal-
related risks and unique needs, FRA's review and approval process
outlined in Sec. 246.103 is meant to ensure that railroads do not
abuse this discretion with respect to their signal employee
certification programs. This rule requires a railroad to document the
details of its training and testing program and Sec. 246.106 mandates
that each certification program include sufficient detail for effective
evaluation. FRA will disapprove programs that are vague or
insufficiently detailed, in accordance with Sec. 246.103(f)(2).
While every railroad is different and the training needed to be
certified signal employee for a Class I railroad may vary significantly
from the training needed to be a certified signal employee for a short
line railroad, FRA will review each signal employee certification
program and determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether the program
contains sufficient on-the-job training. Railroads are required to
provide enough detail in their certification programs to allow for
effective evaluation of the training that will be provided (including
on-the-job training) to ensure that their certified signal employees
can safely perform their assigned duties.
Also, as will be discussed further in the section-by-section
analysis of Sec. 246.125, this final rule does not allow railroads to
rely completely on the signal employee certification awarded by another
railroad. Each railroad is required to certify the signal employees who
will be working on their signal systems and signal-related technology
(or require that non-certified persons perform work on their signal
systems and signal-related technology under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor).
Paragraph (e) of this section contains the requirements a person,
not previously certified as a signal employee, has to satisfy in order
to become a certified signal employee. Paragraph (e)(2) states that the
person must successfully complete on-the-job training and demonstrate
on-the-job proficiency by successfully completing the tasks and using
the signal system equipment and signal-related technology necessary to
be a certified signal employee on the certifying railroad. The
paragraph has been revised in this final rule to clarify that, if the
railroad has elected to classify its certified signal employees into
more than one occupational category or subcategory, the person must
successfully complete the tasks applicable to the signal employee
occupational category or subcategory in which the person is seeking to
be certified.
NRC asked for clarification on whether railroads that accept
responsibility for providing initial signal employee training are
required by paragraph (e) to structure their training programs to
ensure candidates for initial signal employee certification demonstrate
on-the-job proficiency using wayside signal equipment, as well as
signal technology in the operations control center. However, the type
of equipment used by candidates for initial signal employee
certification to demonstrate on-the-job proficiency will vary depending
upon the nature of the work each candidate will be assigned to perform.
As discussed earlier, FRA considers individuals who maintain signal
technology in the operations control center (such as electronic control
system technicians and CTC maintainers) to be signal employees for
purposes of this part. Therefore, FRA expects that railroads who accept
responsibility for providing initial signal employee training and have
employees or contractors maintain signal technology in their operations
control centers will require candidates for signal employee
certification to demonstrate on-the-job proficiency using signal
technology in the operations control center if there is a reasonable
possibility that the candidate may be assigned to work there.
Paragraph (g) requires railroads, regardless of their election in
paragraph (b) of this section, to provide comprehensive training on the
installation, operation, testing, maintenance, and repair of the signal
systems and signal-related technology deployed on their territory. This
training must include training on both signal software and signal
equipment. To implement this requirement, paragraph (g) requires
railroads to address in their certification program how such training
will be provided and
[[Page 44854]]
how the railroad will ensure that each certified signal employee is
qualified on the signal system equipment and signal-related technology
deployed on the railroad's territory before the employee is required to
install, operate, test, maintain, or repair that equipment or
technology.
UTC staff and NRC expressed support for this requirement in their
comments on the proposed rule. UTC staff contended that comprehensive
training should include all new and existing signal systems and signal-
related technologies. NRC recommended that comprehensive training
include common principles, in addition to the specifics of the
equipment that the railroad's certified signal employees will work on.
As reflected in this section, railroads must provide comprehensive
training that includes detailed training on the specific signal system
equipment and signal-related technology that the signal employee will
be required to use, as well as detailed training on any new signal
system equipment and signal-related technology that will be deployed on
the railroad's territory before the employee is required to install,
operate, test, maintain, or repair the equipment or technology.
NRC recommended that comprehensive training for certified signal
employees include some level of design knowledge as a functional role.
NRC also recommended that installation staff and maintenance staff not
be trained on tasks that they will not perform as part of their job
duties. While FRA agrees that it would be beneficial for certified
signal employees to understand the functional role of the design of the
signal systems and signal-related technology on which they are assigned
to work, FRA has not incorporated this recommendation as an explicit
requirement in this final rule. In addition, this rule allows railroads
the flexibility to decide whether to classify their certified signal
employees into multiple categories (and subcategories), as well as the
flexibility to decide which tasks will be performed by their employees.
Therefore, while FRA has not included a regulatory provision that would
prohibit railroads from training installation and maintenance staff on
tasks they are unlikely to perform as part of their job duties,
railroads are only required by Sec. 246.119(g) to ensure that each
certified signal employee is qualified on the signal system equipment
and signal-related technology deployed on their territory before the
certified signal employee is required to install, operate, test,
maintain, or repair it.
Paragraph (g)(3) requires railroads to discuss, in their training
programs, the maximum amount of time that a certified signal employee
can be absent from performing work on signal systems or signal-related
technology that requires certification before requalification will be
required. This time period cannot exceed 12 months. However, railroads
may choose a shorter time period if they desire.
IBEW commented on this provision in the proposed rule, recommending
that FRA reduce the maximum period of time during which signal
employees can be absent from performing safety-sensitive work on signal
systems before refresher training will be required to six months. IBEW
also recommended that FRA require railroads to provide 16 hours of on-
the-job training, as part of the required refresher training. IBEW
recommended that FRA increase the number of required hours of on-the-
job training to 24 hours, if the signal employee is absent from
performing safety-sensitive work for 12-23 months. In addition, for
signal employees who are absent from performing safety-sensitive work
for 24 months or more, IBEW recommended that FRA require
recertification. FRA strongly recommends that railroads provide
refresher on-the-job training to signal employees who fail to
successfully complete the unannounced compliance test required by Sec.
246.123 after returning to work on the railroad's signal systems and
signal-related technology that requires certification. However, if a
certified signal employee has not performed work on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology that requires certification for
more than 12 months, they will no longer be qualified on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology as set forth in Sec.
246.120(c). Therefore, when the certified signal employee returns to
work on the railroad's signal systems and signal-related technology
that requires certification, they will be required to work under the
direct and immediate supervision of a mentor until they become
qualified on signal system equipment and signal-related technology
pursuant to Sec. 246.106(b)(2)(v). In addition, railroads are required
to submit their signal employee certification programs to FRA for
approval. Therefore, FRA will evaluate railroad plans to provide
refresher training as discussed in their signal employee certification
programs on a railroad-by-railroad basis.
Paragraph (h) of this section (which was paragraph (i) in the
proposed rule) addresses transfers of railroad ownership. NRC commented
on paragraph (i) in the proposed rule, and suggested that instead of
saying signal employees of the acquiring company ``may receive
familiarization training'' from the selling company, the paragraph
should state that signal employees of the acquiring company ``will
receive training from the selling company''.\44\ Whether a selling
company will provide familiarization training to the acquiring
company's signal employees is, however, a decision that should be made
by both parties. If FRA were to make the permissive language in this
paragraph mandatory, it would essentially entangle itself in the
contract negotiations between the two parties which is not FRA's role.
FRA's main concern with respect to this issue is that the training is
performed properly, not who performs the training. FRA does not see a
compelling reason for mandating that the selling company provide this
training and since NRC did not provide a rationale for this suggested
change, FRA is not adopting this suggestion. By not adopting this
suggestion, paragraph (h) in this final rule will remain consistent
with the analogous provisions found at 49 CFR 240.123(d)(1) and
242.119(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ FRA-2022-0020-0027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NRC also contends paragraph (h) should apply when there is a change
in the private operator of a commuter railroad. Since NRC did not
provide a rationale for why such a change would be necessary or
beneficial, FRA is not adopting this suggestion. However, FRA notes
that in situations involving a change in the operator of a commuter
railroad, there is nothing in part 246 that would prohibit the prior
operator from providing familiarization training to the signal
employees of the new operator.
Paragraph (i) of this section requires each railroad to provide for
the continuing education of its certified signal employees to ensure
each certified signal employee maintains the necessary knowledge
concerning compliance with all applicable Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders; compliance with all applicable railroad safety
and operating rules; and compliance with all applicable standards,
procedures, and instructions for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of new and existing signal
systems and new and existing signal-related technology deployed on its
territory.
[[Page 44855]]
Section 246.120 Requirements for Qualification
Section 246.120 has been added to the final rule to clarify that
railroads are required to provide sufficient training on the signal
system equipment and signal-related technology that have been deployed
on their territories to ensure their certified signal employees are
qualified on the railroad's signal systems and signal-related
technology, and, therefore, may reasonably be expected to be proficient
on their operation and use. Prior to attaining qualification, all
individuals assigned to work on the railroad's signal system equipment
and signal-related technology are required by paragraph (a)(2) of this
section to work under the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor
or qualified instructor.
Section 246.121 Knowledge Testing
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.125, 240.209, and 242.121,
requires railroads to include procedures for the initial and periodic
testing of certified signal employees in their certification programs.
Paragraph (b) of this section outlines the general requirements for
such testing. This testing must effectively examine a signal employee's
knowledge of: (a) all applicable Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders governing signal systems and signal-related
technology; (b) all applicable railroad safety and operating rules; and
(c) all applicable railroad standards, procedures, and instructions for
the installation, operation, testing, maintenance, troubleshooting, and
repair of the railroad's signal systems and related technology.
With respect to written tests used by railroads to determine
whether candidates for certification have sufficient knowledge of their
signal systems and signal-related technology, BRS, ITLC and TTD
recommended that FRA require railroads provide accommodations to
employees who require them, including giving candidates for signal
employee certification the option to request having the test questions
read aloud to them. TTD also recommended that railroads be required to
provide additional time to prepare, access to reference materials, and
extended time for testing, to employees who require these
accommodations. IBEW requested language advising that all employees
subject to tests required by this part are covered by all applicable
facets of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
In this subpart, FRA is establishing general parameters for the
testing that must be conducted to determine whether candidates for
certification have the skills and knowledge necessary to perform the
tasks that are assigned to certified signal employees by the certifying
railroad. FRA has determined that, in general, a person needs to be
able to read and comprehend written instructions to safely perform the
job of a certified signal employee. FRA is not, however, creating or
administering the tests required by this part. Railroads continue to
have the flexibility to determine how to develop and administer testing
in accordance with Federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title I
of the ADA. Therefore, FRA finds it unnecessary to include language in
this final rule to remind railroads that they need to comply with
Federal anti-discrimination laws.
In their joint comments on paragraph (b)(1) of this section, AAR
and ASLRRA noted the requirement to test knowledge of ``[t]he
railroad's rules and standards for disabling and removing signal
systems from service.'' AAR and ASLRRA recommended FRA clarify that it
does not intend to restrict tasks related to the disabling of signal
systems to signal employees with this rulemaking. Therefore, FRA
clarifies that those tasks associated with disabling signal systems
that are performed outside the signal bungalow are not considered
signal covered service for purposes of the Federal hours of service
law. Therefore, employees engaged in tasks performed outside the signal
bungalow are not performing signal system work that requires signal
employee certification. However, tasks associated with disabling signal
systems that are performed inside the signal bungalow are considered
signal covered service under the Federal hours of service law and,
therefore, signal system work that requires signal employee
certification pursuant to this part.
This section allows railroads the discretion to design the tests
that will be employed. For most railroads, this will entail modifying
their existing ``book of rules'' examination to include new subject
areas. This section does not specify the minimum number of questions to
be asked or the passing score to be obtained. IBEW submitted comments
on this provision, recommending that FRA require railroads to establish
80% as the minimum passing grade on tests required by the railroad's
signal employee certification program. However, FRA has decided to
refrain from requiring railroads to establish 80% as the minimum
passing grade on tests required by their signal employee certification
programs. Under this final rule, the testing procedures and
requirements selected by railroads will be discussed in the
certification programs, which the railroads must submit to FRA for
approval and provide a copy of to the president of each labor
organization representing its signal employees and to all of the
railroad's signal employees subject to this part. Therefore, labor
organizations and signal employees may comment on proposed tests, and
FRA will monitor the exercise of discretion being afforded to railroads
by this section.
Paragraph (b)(6) in the proposed rule would have required that
tests be conducted without open reference books unless use of such
materials is part of a test objective. BRS commented on this provision,
noting that some railroads allow open book testing per existing
agreements. TTD and NRC also commented on this paragraph and
recommended that FRA require railroads to provide access to reference
materials during knowledge testing. In addition, AAR and ASLRRA
recommended that FRA allow for greater use of open reference books and
other materials. Therefore, FRA re-evaluated its position on open book
testing, as reflected in the final rule. Unlike locomotive engineers
who cannot refer to reference materials while actively operating
trains, signal employees are often encouraged to refer to reference
materials when they have a question about the relevant standard or
threshold that needs to be met during maintenance or testing of a
signal system or signal-related technology. Accordingly, unlike
Sec. Sec. 240.125 and 242.121 in this chapter which limit the use of
open book testing for locomotive engineers and conductors, this final
rule has been revised to allow railroads the flexibility to administer
open book knowledge tests. However, railroads are required by paragraph
(b)(6) to address in their certification programs how they will use
open book knowledge tests. In extending this flexibility to railroads,
FRA expects that open book tests will be used for the primary purpose
of testing certification candidates' ability to use written materials.
Nonetheless, since the testing procedures and requirements selected by
railroads will be submitted to FRA for approval, FRA will monitor the
exercise of discretion being afforded to railroads by this section.
Paragraph (c) of this section has been revised to require the
railroad to provide the person(s) being tested with an opportunity to
consult with a mentor, signal instructor, or qualified instructor to
explain one or more test questions. This revision has been made to
expand the scope of individuals who are
[[Page 44856]]
authorized to explain test questions to persons being tested.
If a person fails a test administered in accordance with this
section, paragraph (d) of this section prohibits the railroad from
allowing that person to work as a certified signal employee until they
achieve a passing score on reexamination. The railroad will decide how
much time, if any, must pass after a test failure before a
certification candidate can be reexamined. Furthermore, the railroad
will decide what additional training, if any, a candidate will receive
after a test failure. The railroad will also have discretion to decide
whether there should be a limit on the number of times a candidate can
retake a test, and if so, the number of test retakes the railroad will
allow.
Section 246.123 Monitoring Operational Performance
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.129 and 242.123, requires
railroads subject to this part to describe in their certification
programs how they will monitor the operational performance of their
certified signal employees.
Paragraph (a) of this section requires railroads to include
procedures in their certification programs for giving each certified
signal employee at least one unannounced compliance test each calendar
year on the railroad's signal standards and test procedures or Federal
regulations concerning signal systems. Paragraph (a)(3) requires
railroads to describe the actions they will take if they find
deficiencies in a certified signal employee's performance during an
unannounced compliance test. IBEW commented on this provision,
recommending that FRA prohibit railroads from assessing discipline if
such deficiencies are found (with the exception of violations of Sec.
246.303(e)), so that railroads will focus on providing the signal
employee with coaching, counseling, and/or additional training, if
needed. However, FRA believes it is up to each railroad to decide the
appropriate action to take in light of various factors, including
collective bargaining agreements.
To avoid restricting the options available to railroads and
employee representatives to develop processes for handling test
failures, FRA designed this regulation to be as flexible as possible.
There are a variety of actions and approaches that a railroad can take,
such as developing and providing formal remedial training for certified
signal employees who fail tests or have deficiencies in their
performance. Railroads can also implement formal procedures whereby
certified signal employees are given the opportunity to explain, in
writing, the factors that they believe caused their test failure or
performance deficiency. These explanations could help railroads
identify areas on which to focus training or perhaps discover that the
reason for the failure/deficiency was due to something other than a
lack of skills. FRA believes there are numerous approaches that could
be considered and evaluated by railroads and their certified signal
employees. Railroads have the ability to adopt an approach that is best
for their organizations.
Paragraph (a)(4) requires railroads to describe how they will
monitor the performance of signal-related tasks by their certified
signal employees. For example, railroad monitoring could include
unaccompanied, post-installation inspections of signal cut-overs
(conducted within three days of the installation) to verify that the
certified signal employee properly installed and tested the signal
system, in accordance with the railroad's signal standards.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires railroads to have certified
signal employees administer the unannounced compliance tests required
by this section once a railroad's certification program has been
approved by FRA. Thus, at the latest, FRA expects railroads to perform
these unannounced compliance tests on their certified signal employees
during the calendar year immediately following the year their
certification program is first approved by FRA. For example, if FRA
approves one railroad's program in January 2025 and another railroad's
program in December 2025, both railroads would be required to perform
unannounced compliance tests on their certified signal employees in
2026. While FRA encourages these railroads to perform unannounced tests
after their programs are approved in 2025, FRA recognizes it may not be
practical to perform unannounced tests by the end of 2025, especially
for the railroad whose program was not approved until December 2025.
Paragraph (d) of this section reflects FRA's recognition that some
certified signal employees may not be performing tasks that require
certification. Therefore, railroads would not be required to give those
certified signal employees an unannounced compliance test. For example,
a certified signal employee may be on furlough, in military service,
off with an extended illness, or working in another craft. In
situations like these where a certified signal employee is not
performing tasks that require certification, the railroad would not
have to give an unannounced compliance test. However, when the
certified signal employee resumes work on signal systems that requires
certification, the railroad is required to provide an unannounced
compliance test within 30 days, if the certified signal employee has
not been given an unannounced compliance test each calendar year
pursuant to the railroad's procedures as described in the railroad's
certification program. Moreover, the railroad is required to retain a
written record documenting the dates on which the certified signal
employee stopped performing work requiring certification, the date the
certified signal employee resumed signal system work requiring
certification, and the date the certified signal employee received
their unannounced compliance test following their resumption of signal
system work requiring certification.
BRS recommended that FRA extend this 30-day period to six months
(and TTD expressed support for this recommendation) to allow more time
for signal employees to reacquaint themselves with the environment and
signal system equipment before being subjected to a compliance test by
railroad management. In addition, IBEW recommended that FRA revise this
provision to prohibit railroads from conducting unannounced compliance
tests within 15 days of the signal employee's return to signal system
work that requires certification. However, FRA anticipates that this
30-day period will only apply to a small number of certified signal
employees--namely, certified signal employees who have not performed
work that requires certification on signal systems and signal-related
technology for an extended period and who have not been given an
unannounced compliance test each calendar year.
In addition, if a certified signal employee has not performed work
that requires certification on signal system equipment or signal-
related technology for more than 12 months, they will no longer be
qualified on signal system equipment or signal-related technology as
set forth in Sec. 246.120(c). Therefore, when the certified signal
employee returns to signal system work that requires certification,
they will be unable to work on the railroad's signal system equipment
and signal-related technology unless they work under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor. The
certified signal employee must continue to work under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor until they
become qualified on signal system equipment and signal-
[[Page 44857]]
related technology pursuant to Sec. 246.106(b)(2)(v). Thus, even
without revising paragraph (d) of this section, a returning certified
signal employee will perform work on signal system equipment and
signal-related technology under the direct and immediate supervision of
a mentor or qualified instructor which should help reacquaint the
employee prior to the unannounced compliance test.
FRA's conductor certification regulations in 49 CFR part 242
contain a similar 30-day period within which the railroad must conduct
an unannounced compliance test for conductors who have not performed
work requiring certification for an extended period, and FRA is not
aware of any significant hardship caused by this requirement.
Therefore, given the availability of FRA's waiver process to address
any hardship that could potentially be caused by administering an
unannounced compliance test within 30 days of a certified signal
employee's return to signal system work, FRA has not extended the 30-
day unannounced compliance testing requirement in paragraph (d) of this
section or limited railroads to conducting the unannounced compliance
test within 15-30 days of the signal employee's return to signal system
work requiring certification.
Section 246.124 Mentoring
This section requires railroads to include in their certification
programs procedures for mentoring persons who have not been certified
by the railroad (such as employees of a signal contractor who have not
been certified by the railroad). Paragraph (a) of this section also
requires railroads to identify potential scenarios in which non-
certified persons may work on the railroad's signal system and signal-
related technology in their certification programs. In addition,
paragraph (e) of this section requires railroads to address in their
certification programs how mentoring will be provided to each person or
persons they are mentoring to allow the mentor to take immediate action
to prevent a violation of Sec. 246.303(e) from occurring.
These requirements to identify potential scenarios in which non-
certified persons may perform work on the railroad's signal system and
signal-related technology and to explain how mentoring will be provided
were added in response to comments submitted by APTA, BRS, and TTD.
APTA noted that the proposed rule might inadvertently prevent
contractors from installing signal system equipment until the railroad
trains the contractor's employees on the signal system. While APTA
expressed concern that requiring qualified instructors to have at least
one year of experience might lead to this unintended result, railroads
can have their own certified signal employees serve as mentors to
uncertified signal contractors who are hired to work on the railroad's
signal system or signal-related technology. In addition, depending on
the length of the project and the frequency with which the signal
contractor is hired to work on the railroad's signal system and signal-
related technology, the signal contractor and railroad may decide to
have one or more of the signal contractor's employees complete the
railroad's certification program and become certified to work on the
railroad. In this scenario, the signal contractor's employees, who are
certified to work on the railroad, could serve as mentors to the signal
contractor's uncertified signal employees. Nonetheless, as stated in
paragraph (b) of this section, after FRA has approved the railroad's
certification program, the railroad is prohibited from allowing
uncertified persons to work on its signal system and signal-related
technology unless the uncertified person works under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor.
TTD expressed concern that one year of experience does not provide
enough time for an employee to demonstrate real proficiency in the
signal craft and foster skill development by their mentees. As noted
earlier, BRS commented that, after the first year of implementing this
final rule, mentors should be required to have at least three years of
experience working with sophisticated signal systems. While FRA agrees
that it would, in most cases, be beneficial for mentors to have more
than one year of certified signal employee experience, FRA does not
have sufficient data to determine the potential impact on rail safety
of requiring signal employees to have at least three years of certified
signal employee experience to serve as mentors. However, to ensure that
a signal mentor is not assigned to supervise multiple work groups
scattered over a job site, FRA is requiring railroads to explain in
their certification programs how mentoring will be provided to ensure
each mentor is located in close proximity to each person or persons
they are mentoring to allow the mentor to take immediate action to
prevent a violation of Sec. 246.303(e) from occurring.
ITLC and BRS would have FRA exert more oversight over railroad
mentors, as they expressed support in their comments for requiring
railroads to establish structured mentorship programs. ITLC noted in
its comments that just because someone knows how to do a job does not
mean they have the skillset necessary to reinforce lessons and learning
objectives in a supportive way for another employee.
This rule establishes minimum requirements to ensure, among other
things, that signal employees receive sufficient training before they
are certified to work on signal systems and signal-related technology.
As noted above, FRA revised this section to require railroads to
identify scenarios in which uncertified persons would work on the
railroad's signal system and signal-related technology and to explain
how mentoring will be provided to ensure each mentor is located in
close proximity to each person or persons they are mentoring to allow
the mentor to take immediate action to prevent a violation of Sec.
246.303(e) from occurring.
FRA also revised the definition of ``mentor'' in this final rule to
require mentors to exercise ``direct and immediate supervision'' over
the work performed by the signal employees they mentor. This approach
is consistent with the approach taken in FRA's regulations on the
Training, Qualification, and Oversight for Safety-Related Railroad
Employees (codified in 49 CFR part 243). As noted in the preamble to
FRA's final rule on training and qualification standards, on-the-job
training should include instruction and hands-on experience, as well as
``sufficient opportunity for practice and feedback.'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 79 FR 66460, 66479 (Nov. 7, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA encourages railroads to utilize structured mentorship programs
to help train their mentors, in addition to the training that they
provide to their signal employees. However, FRA declines to require
railroads to establish structured mentorship programs, in addition to
signal employee certification programs. FRA has determined that
requiring railroads to establish structured mentorship programs falls
outside the scope of this rulemaking, given the lack of currently
available data illustrating the effect of structured mentorship
programs on signal system safety.
After a railroad's certification program has been approved by FRA,
paragraph (b) of this section prohibits the railroad from allowing
uncertified persons to work on signal systems or signal-related
technology that requires certification unless the person is working
under the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified
instructor.
[[Page 44858]]
Paragraph (c) of this section applies to railroads who elect to
classify their certified signal employees into more than one
occupational category or subcategory, in accordance with Sec. 246.107.
These railroads are required by paragraph (c) to address in their
certification programs how mentoring will be provided for certified
signal employees who move into a different occupational category or
subcategory of certified signal service. This paragraph has also been
revised in the final rule to require that the mentor be certified
within the occupational category or subcategory for the tasks being
performed by the person or persons working under their direct and
immediate supervision.
Paragraph (d) has been revised to state that, if allowed by the
railroad's certification program, any work on a signal system performed
by a person whose signal employee certification has been revoked shall
be performed under the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor or
qualified instructor. The proposed rule referred to mentors providing
direct oversight and supervision of signal employees whose
certification had been revoked.
Paragraph (e) of this section reflects FRA's intent that mentors
are held accountable for the work performed by the persons working
under their direct and immediate supervision. Therefore, in addition to
requiring railroads to address how mentoring will be provided to ensure
each mentor is located in close proximity to each person or persons
they are mentoring to allow the mentor to take immediate action to
prevent a violation of Sec. 246.303(e) from occurring, paragraph (e)
also requires railroads to address in their certification programs how
they will hold mentors accountable for the work performed by persons
working under their direct and immediate supervision. This paragraph
has been revised in the final rule to require that tests performed by
persons working under the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor
reflect the mentor's name.
Section 246.125 Certification Determinations Made by Other Railroads
This section of the rule, derived from 49 CFR 240.225 and 242.125,
contains requirements that apply when a certified signal employee is
about to begin work for a different railroad. This section allows a
railroad or parent company to rely on determinations made by another
railroad or parent company concerning a person's signal employee
certification.
This section has been revised in the final rule to reflect that
parent companies are authorized to certify signal employees if they
submit and obtain FRA approval of a signal employee certification
program on behalf of their subsidiary railroads. In addition, the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section in the proposed rule,
which pertain to specific training for previously uncertified signal
employees with extensive signal experience and for previously certified
signal employees whose certification has expired, have been moved to
Sec. 246.106(b).
Paragraph (c) in the proposed rule is now paragraph (b) in the
final rule. This paragraph has been revised to require the certifying
railroad or parent company to determine that the person is qualified on
the signal system equipment and signal-related technology deployed on
the railroad territory on which the person is expected to work. This
change has been made to incorporate the newly-added regulatory
requirements in Sec. 246.120, which require a railroad to make the
determination that a person is qualified on the signal system equipment
and signal-related technology deployed on the railroad territory on
which the person is expected to work prior to certifying them.
Subpart C--Administration of the Certification Program
Section 246.201 Time Limitations for Certification
This section contains various time constraints to preclude
railroads from relying on stale information when evaluating a candidate
for certification or recertification. Paragraph (a)(3) in the NPRM
stated that railroads could not rely on knowledge tests that were
conducted more than one year before the date of the railroad's
certification decision and paragraph (a)(4) stated that the knowledge
test must have been conducted no more than two years prior to the
certification decision if the railroad administers knowledge tests at
intervals that do not exceed two years. For the final rule, FRA decided
to combine these two paragraphs into paragraph (a)(3).
Section 246.205 List of Certified Signal Employees and Recordkeeping
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.221 and 242.205, requires
each railroad subject to this part to maintain a list of its certified
signal employees.
NRC submitted comments on this section asserting that FRA should
require each railroad to maintain a list of active certified signal
employees and their competencies. FRA agrees that railroads who
classify their certified signal employees into occupational categories
or subcategories by class, task, location, or other suitable
terminology pursuant to Sec. 246.107 should be required to indicate
the occupational categories and subcategories in which each certified
signal employee is certified to perform service. Therefore, paragraph
(a) of this section has been revised accordingly. However, Class III
railroads generally do not classify their signal employees into
occupational categories and subcategories, as these signal employees
generally perform whatever signal work is needed. Therefore, this
section has not been revised to require all railroads subject to this
part to maintain a list of the occupational categories and
subcategories in which each of their certified signal employee is
certified to perform service.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires railroads to update their
lists of certified signal employees at least annually, and to make
their lists of certified signal employees available, upon request, to
FRA representatives in a timely manner. In their comments, BRS and TTD
recommended that the final rule require railroads to share their lists
of certified signal employees with the national office of each
designated labor organization representing their signal employees.
Similarly, IBEW recommended that FRA require railroads to share their
lists of certified signal employees with labor organizations upon
request. BRS, TTD, and IBEW contend that requiring railroads to share
their lists of certified signal employees with the designated labor
organizations that represent their signal employees would create a
collaborative approach to safety, as well as a level of transparency
and communication that would contribute significantly to the overall
safety culture and reinforce the collective goals of supporting
accident prevention and the well-being of signal employees.
While FRA has no objection to railroads providing these lists to
their employees and their designated employee representatives, it is
unclear how this proposed requirement would advance the safety
interests of this rule. Sharing the lists of certified signal employees
is an internal matter that should be resolved between railroads and
their designated employee representatives. Thus, FRA does not see a
compelling reason to mandate a particular approach.
[[Page 44859]]
Section 246.207 Certificate Requirements
This section contains requirements for the certificate that
railroads are required to issue to each certified signal employee. The
requirements in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, which
pertain to the minimum content for certificates and authorization of
each person who would be designated to sign the certificates, are
derived from 49 CFR 240.223 and 242.207.
Paragraph (a) of this section specifies that railroads have the
option of issuing certificates electronically or in paper form. FRA is
making a minor change to paragraph (a)(1) in the proposed rule, by
allowing the signal employee certificate to identify either the
railroad or the parent company issuing the certificate. This change
acknowledges that, in some cases, a parent company may have one signal
employee certification program for one or more of the parent company's
subsidiary railroads. In this scenario, the certificate must identify
the parent company as having issued the certificate, as well as each of
the parent company's subsidiary railroads on which the person has been
certified as a signal employee. This change brings this paragraph into
conformity with parts 240 and 242.
Individuals who are certified by multiple railroads that are not
owned by the same parent company must receive a signal employee
certificate from each railroad that certifies them (or each parent
company of the railroad that certifies them). For railroads who choose
to classify their certified signal employees into occupational
categories or subcategories, pursuant to Sec. 246.107, paragraph
(a)(2) requires the railroad to list the specific signal employee
category(ies) or subcategory(ies) in which the person has been
certified.
AAR and ASLRRA commented that railroads should not be required to
include a person's year of birth on a signal employee certificate.
After consideration of this comment, FRA agrees that including the year
of birth on the signal employee certificate is unnecessary and is
removing this requirement in the final rule. The purpose of the
requirements in paragraph (a)(3) is to identify a certified signal
employee, and, as AAR and ASLRRA stated, the birth year provides little
to no assistance in confirming a person's identity, and there are other
ways, such as a physical description or photograph of the certified
signal employee, which is already included in paragraph (a)(3), that
better serve this goal. AAR and ASLRRA added that, instead of the birth
year, FRA could add a person's hire date to the list of requirements on
the certificate. However, the hire date provides even less relevant
information than the birth year in terms of identification. Thus, FRA
sees no reason to require the hire date on a signal employee
certificate.
Paragraph (f), derived from 49 CFR 240.301 and 242.211, requires a
railroad to promptly replace a person's signal employee certificate, at
no cost to the person, if the certificate is lost, stolen, mutilated,
or becomes unreadable. However, unlike Sec. 242.211(b), this section
does not contain detailed requirements for temporary replacement
certificates. Temporary replacement certificates generally contain most
of the information provided on official certificates. Therefore, it
does not appear to be especially burdensome for railroads to issue
temporary certificates to replace certificates that have been lost,
stolen, mutilated, or become unreadable. Nonetheless, by refraining
from proposing a formal process for the issuance of temporary
replacement certificates, FRA is allowing railroads to decide how and
when to issue temporary replacement certificates.
APTA commented that paragraph (f) could create a situation in which
an employee regularly loses their certificate. Accordingly, APTA
recommended that FRA clarify that this provision does not preclude use
of the railroad's progressive disciplinary process for accountability
purposes. FRA agrees that paragraph (f) is not intended to preclude the
use of reasonable discipline by railroads, in response to signal
employees who frequently lose their certificates.
Section 246.213 Multiple Certifications
This section addresses various issues involving persons who have,
or are seeking to obtain, multiple certifications.
Paragraph (d) discusses how the revocation of a person's signal
employee certification would affect a person's ability to work in
another railroad craft that requires certification, and vice versa. The
general rule articulated in paragraph (d) is that if a person's signal
employee certification is revoked for an alcohol or drug violation,
they may not work in another certified craft during the period of
revocation, and vice versa. However, if a person's signal employee
certification is revoked for a violation that does not involve alcohol
or drugs, the person may work in another certified craft during the
revocation period, and vice versa.
AAR and ASLRRA commented that if a person's signal employee
certificate is revoked for any reason, that person should not be
allowed to work in another certified craft during the period of
revocation, and vice versa. Their stated rationale is that if a person
commits a safety violation in one craft, that shows ``a disregard for
process, and there should not be an assumption that the employee's
disregard is function or craft specific.'' \46\ The associations also
contend that 49 CFR 240.308(f) and 49 CFR 242.213(h) do not allow a
decertified conductor to work as a locomotive engineer or vice versa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ FRA-2022-0020-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an initial matter, the assertion by AAR and ASLRRA that parts
240 and 242 do not allow a decertified conductor to work as a
locomotive engineer is not accurate. Under 49 CFR 240.308(f) and 49 CFR
242.213(h), if a person's conductor certification is revoked for a
violation described in 49 CFR 242.403(e)(6) through (11), they may
still work as a locomotive engineer during the revocation period. FRA's
rationale for this distinction is that 49 CFR 242.403(e)(6) through
(11) involve violations of 49 CFR part 218, subpart F, and since
locomotive engineers cannot have their certifications revoked for such
violations, ``it would be unfair to prohibit a person from working as
an engineer for a violation that currently would not result in the
revocation of his or her engineer certificate.'' \47\ For similar
reasons, FRA finds that it would be unfair to prohibit a person from
working as a certified signal employee because they passed a stop
signal while working as a locomotive engineer, or because they
committed some other violation that would not otherwise result in the
revocation of their signal employee certificate. AAR and ASLRRA's
proposal would lead to unfair treatment between persons with a single
certification and persons who are certified in multiple crafts. For the
reasons stated above, FRA believes that the proposed rule adopted the
same approach taken in parts 240 and 242 and does not see a reason to
make any changes to this section in the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 76 FR 69802, 69825 (Nov. 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, as noted in the NPRM,\48\ the tasks performed by a
certified signal employee are so inherently different from the tasks
performed by persons in other certified crafts that it does not
automatically follow that a person's revocable event as a signal
employee indicates they are more likely to have a revocable event while
performing another certified craft, and vice versa.
[[Page 44860]]
Therefore, under this final rule, a certified signal employee may
continue to work as a certified signal employee if their certification
is revoked for any of the violations described in 49 CFR 240.117(e) or
49 CFR 242.403(e) that do not involve use of alcohol or drugs.
Similarly, a person can continue to work in another certified craft if
their signal employee certification has been revoked for a violation
described in Sec. 246.303(e)(1) through (10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 88 FR 35654.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 246.215 Railroad Oversight Responsibilities
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.309 and 242.215, requires
each Class I railroad (including the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation), each railroad providing commuter service, and each Class
II railroad to conduct an annual review and analysis of its program for
responding to detected instances of poor safety conduct by certified
signal employees. FRA has formulated the information collection
requirements of this section to ensure that railroads collect data on
signal employee safety behavior and feed that information into their
operational monitoring efforts, thereby enhancing safety.
FRA has, however, also revised paragraph (d) of this section to
facilitate sharing of this information and to promote communication and
collaboration between railroads and labor organizations to improve
railroad safety. Paragraph (d) has been revised in the final rule to
allow for the president of a labor organization that represents the
railroad's signal employees to request that the railroad provide them a
report of the findings and conclusions reached during the railroad's
annual review and analysis required under this section. In the interest
of fairness, FRA is also allowing the railroad's certified signal
employees who are not represented by a labor organization to make such
a request.
Paragraph (e)(7) has also been revised in the final rule to include
a reference to incidents involving noncompliance with FRA's blue signal
regulations in part 218 of this chapter, in addition to noncompliance
with FRA's roadway worker regulations in part 214 of this chapter. This
change has been made to more accurately reflect the list of revocable
events in Sec. 246.303(e).
Subpart D--Denial and Revocation of Certification
This subpart parallels part 240 and part 242's approach to adverse
decisions concerning certification (i.e., decisions to deny
certification or recertification and revoke certification). With
respect to denials, the approach of this rule is predicated principally
on the theory that decisions to deny certification or recertification
will come at the conclusion of a prescribed evaluation process
conducted in accordance with the provisions set forth in this subpart.
Thus, this rule contains specific procedures designed to ensure that a
person in jeopardy of being denied signal employee certification or
recertification will be given a reasonable opportunity to examine and
respond to negative information that may serve as the basis for being
denied certification or recertification.
When considering revocation, this rule mandates that decisions to
revoke certification will only occur for the reasons specified in this
subpart. Since revocation decisions by their very nature involve a
clear potential for factual disagreement, this subpart is structured to
ensure that such decisions will only be made after a certified signal
employee has been afforded an opportunity for an investigatory hearing
at which the presiding officer determines whether there is sufficient
evidence to establish that the person's conduct warranted revocation of
their signal employee certification.
This subpart also provides for certificate suspension in certain
circumstances. Certificate suspension will be employed in instances
where there is reason to think the certificate should be revoked or
made conditional, but time is needed to resolve the situation.
Certificate suspension will be applicable in instances where a person
is awaiting an investigatory hearing to determine whether that person
violated certain provisions of FRA's alcohol and drug control rules, or
committed a violation of certain signal standards, procedures, or
practices, and situations in which the person is being evaluated or
treated for an active substance abuse disorder.
Section 246.303 Criteria for Revoking Certification
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.117, 240.305, and 242.403,
identifies the circumstances in which certified signal employees may
have their certification revoked.
Paragraph (c) has been revised in the final rule to reiterate that
a certified signal employee who is assigned to monitor, mentor, or
instruct a person is responsible for the work performed by that person.
(For purposes of this part, the definition of the term ``person'' in
Sec. 246.7 includes railroad employees, as well as employees of a
railroad contractor or subcontractor.) Accordingly, a certified signal
employee who is monitoring, mentoring, or instructing a person and
fails to take appropriate action to prevent a violation of paragraph
(e) of this section will have their certification revoked. FRA expects
each mentor to be actively involved in the tasks that are performed by
the person(s) they are mentoring, as these tasks must be performed
under the direct and immediate supervision of the mentor. Mentors must
be located in close proximity to each person or persons they are
mentoring to allow the mentor to take immediate action to avert a
violation of paragraph (e) of this section from occurring. Similarly,
qualified instructors who are engaged in evaluating or monitoring a
person performing signal employee tasks must also pay close attention
to the work being performed and be located in close proximity to the
person performing signal employee tasks to allow the qualified
instructor to take immediate action to avert a violation of paragraph
(e) of this section from occurring. Thus, FRA anticipates that a verbal
warning provided by a mentor or qualified instructor without any other
action will not, in most cases, be sufficient to allow the mentor or
qualified instructor to avoid responsibility for a violation of
paragraph (e) of this section caused by the work performed by the
person(s) being monitored, mentored, or instructed. Therefore,
paragraph (c) has been revised in the final rule by removing language
in the proposed rule which indicated that, in general, a verbal warning
would constitute appropriate action.
Paragraph (e) provides the eleven types of rule infractions that
could result in certification revocation. The infractions listed in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (11) are derived in part from the revocable
events provided in 49 CFR 242.117(e) but have been modified to account
for the duties and responsibilities of a certified signal employee.
AAR and ASLRRA commented on the rule infractions in paragraphs
(e)(5) and (e)(7). Paragraph (e)(5) refers to a certified signal
employee's failure to restore power to a train detection or highway-
rail or pathway grade crossing warning device or system after manual
interruption of the power source. For violations of this nature,
railroads are directed to consider only those violations that result in
activation failure. AAR and ASLRRA assert that it would be better to
proactively address the certified signal employee's misconduct before
an activation failure occurs. AAR and ASLRRA also assert that FRA
regulations do not require FRA to wait for an activation failure before
[[Page 44861]]
citing the railroad in such a scenario. However, FRA disagrees. A
situation involving failure to restore power to a grade crossing
warning system does not constitute a violation of FRA's grade crossing
regulations in part 234 of this chapter, in the absence of an
activation failure, unless the standby source of power was also
insufficient. Therefore, paragraph (e)(5) has not been revised.
AAR and ASLRRA also commented on the rule infractions in paragraph
(e)(7), which refers to a certified signal employee's failure to comply
with FRA's Roadway Worker Protection regulations in 49 CFR part 214.
AAR and ASLRRA noted that, given the language in paragraph (e)(7) in
the proposed rule, revocation of signal employee certification for a
person who ascertains that on-track safety needs to be provided but
fails to do so would not be allowed. FRA has revised paragraph (e)(7)
in the final rule to close this inadvertent loophole and require
railroads to consider violations involving a person who failed to
obtain proper on-track safety before fouling the railroad track.
NRC also commented on paragraph (e)(7), recommending revocation of
the person's roadway worker certification (instead of revoking signal
employee certification) in response to a violation of FRA's Roadway
Worker Protection regulations in 49 CFR part 214. However, a person,
whose signal employee certification is revoked, loses their ability to
perform work as a certified signal employee for the duration of the
revocation period, not just their ability to perform the specific task
or activity in which they were engaged when the revocable incident
occurred. In addition, railroads generally do not have roadway worker
certification programs, so this recommendation was not adopted.
Paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) refer to a certified signal
employee's failure to comply with FRA's Railroad Operating Practices
regulations related to work performed on, under, or between rolling
equipment. BRS and TTD asserted that the regulatory provisions cited in
paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) do not apply to signal employees and
recommended that FRA remove references to these regulatory provisions.
However, as discussed earlier, the signal employee certification
requirements in this part apply to any person who meets the definition
of signal employee contained in Sec. 246.7, regardless of the fact
that the person may have a job classification title other than that of
signal employee.\49\ Therefore, electricians who are engaged in testing
locomotive cab signal equipment are considered to be signal employees
(when engaged in this task) for purposes of this part. Accordingly,
railroads must address electricians who test locomotive cab signal
equipment in their signal employee certification programs, if
applicable. Also, electricians who are engaged in testing locomotive
cab signal equipment will be subject to revocation of their signal
employee certification if they fail to comply with Sec. 218.25,
218.27, or 218.29 during such testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Sec. 246.1(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
APTA noted that the revocable offenses listed in paragraphs (e)(7)
through (10) are related to an individual's personal safety, as opposed
to the safety of the railroad system, and therefore should be removed.
TTD submitted similar comments, asserting that the revocable offenses
listed in paragraphs (e)(8) through (10) do not apply to signal
employees. However, most signal employees are required to work on or
near the railroad tracks to perform their assigned tasks. Therefore,
FRA does not view compliance with its roadway worker regulations in 49
CFR part 214 as being solely related to an individual's personal
safety. Similar to the revocable offense for conductors who fail to
take appropriate action to prevent the locomotive engineer of the train
to which the conductor is assigned from occupying a segment of main
track without proper authority or permission, failure to comply with
FRA's roadway worker regulations in 49 CFR part 214 could impact not
only the safety of the individual whose actions are non-compliant, but
the safety of each member of a signal work gang who is relying on the
roadway worker protection obtained by the designated roadway worker-in-
charge.
Human factors are also one of the leading causes of train accidents
and incidents. Therefore, the revocable offenses listed in paragraphs
(e)(8) through (10), which involve non-compliance with FRA's blue
signal protection requirements in subpart B of part 218 of this
chapter, are intended to reduce the number of human factor-caused
accidents and incidents involving individuals who work on cab signal
and PTC equipment. In sum, the revocable offenses listed in paragraphs
(e)(7) through (10) are intended to reduce fatalities and injuries
caused by non-compliance with FRA's roadway worker and operating
practice regulations.
Paragraph (i) of this section prohibits a railroad from revoking a
person's signal employee certification if the revocable event occurred
during an operational test that was not conducted in conformance with
part 246, the railroad's operating rules, or the railroad's program
under 49 CFR 217.9. AAR and ASLRRA commented that FRA should take into
consideration the type of error that occurred and whether it harmed the
certified signal employee. If the error was a minor procedural error
that did not cause substantial harm to the certified signal employee,
AAR and ASLRRA contend there is no safety basis to preclude railroads
from revoking the person's signal employee certification if the person
committed a revocable offense during such test. FRA disagrees. When
railroads perform operational tests, they have a duty to ensure the
tests are done properly under both Federal law and the railroad's own
rules. Keeping paragraph (i) in its current form will incentivize
railroads to fulfill this duty. If FRA adopted the associations'
suggestion, it would create a gray area where one did not previously
exist. It would also complicate the job of the Certification Review
Board (CRB) as some individuals would presumably raise this issue in
their petitions to the CRB. The CRB would then have to determine
whether an error on an operational test caused the person substantial
harm. FRA finds that with respect to this issue, a bright-line rule is
preferable. It should not be a heavy burden for railroads to properly
perform these operational tests. Thus, FRA is not making any changes to
this paragraph from the proposed rule.
Section 246.305 Periods of Ineligibility
In this section FRA describes how a railroad must determine a
person's period of ineligibility if they have their signal employee
certification revoked. For certified signal employees, paragraph (a)
explains that the period of revocation will begin on the date of the
railroad's written notification to the person that recertification has
been denied or certification has been suspended.
Paragraph (b) of this section provides that the revocation period
will be based on the number of revocable violations a person has
committed over a certain period of time. AAR and ASLRRA requested that
FRA ``clarify that the 36-month period is on a rolling basis such that
each new revocation has the potential to extend the 36-month
[[Page 44862]]
clock.'' \50\ The 36-month period in paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) is a
lookback period from the most recent violation. For example, if a
certified signal employee committed a violation described in Sec.
246.303(e)(1) through (11) on January 1, 2028, the railroad would have
to determine how many revocable violations the certified signal
employee committed from January 1, 2025, to January 1, 2028. If the
certified signal employee had two additional revocable events during
this time period (making the violation on January 1, 2028 the third
such violation), then paragraph (b)(3) would apply and the railroad
would have to revoke the person's certification for one year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ FRA-2022-0020-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In their joint comment, AAR and ASLRAA also criticized the periods
of ineligibility in this section for being too lenient and recommended
that FRA revise paragraph (b)(4) so that if a certified signal employee
has four revocable events in a 36-month period, they are no longer
eligible to be certified. As an initial matter, this section only
addresses how long a person is ineligible to work as a certified signal
employee following an incident described in Sec. 246.303(e). This
section does not limit the discipline a railroad can issue in response
to a revocable event, other than limiting the amount of time the
railroad can revoke the person's signal employee certification. For
example, if a certified signal employee commits a violation described
in Sec. 246.303(e)(1) and the certified signal employee has no prior
history of committing a revocable event, paragraph (b)(1) of this
section prohibits the railroad from revoking the person's signal
employee certification for more than 30 days. However, the railroad can
choose to hold the person out of service for longer than 30 days or can
terminate its employment of the person, if the railroad thinks such
discipline is warranted.
FRA is declining to adopt AAR and ASLRRA's recommendation to revise
paragraph (b)(4) so that four revocable events in a 36-month period
would render a person permanently ineligible to hold certification. FRA
thinks a three-year revocation period is a reasonable penalty and it
aligns with the discipline structure found in parts 240 and 242.
Furthermore, FRA already has an established process in place for
disqualifying persons from performing safety-sensitive work on either a
temporary or permanent basis. If a railroad finds a person's actions
are so egregious that they warrant disqualification, the railroad can
refer the case to FRA, and the agency can determine whether to initiate
the disqualification procedures proscribed in 49 CFR part 209, subpart
D. FRA believes the process outlined in part 209 is preferable to
creating a blanket requirement in this rule that would permanently
disqualify a person from working as a certified signal employee.
Section 246.307 Process for Revoking Certification
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.307 and 242.407, covers the
procedures a railroad must follow to revoke a person's signal employee
certification.
Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section have been revised in the
final rule to include references to violations of Federal regulatory
provisions when discussing actions by a certified signal employee that
could result in revocation of signal employee certification. FRA would
also like to clarify that if the certifying railroad determines a
certified signal employee violated a Federal regulatory provision,
railroad test procedure, signal standard or practice described in Sec.
246.303(e), the railroad is required to revoke signal employee
certification even if the person's employment by the railroad is
terminated during the certification revocation process, so that the
person will be unable to work as a certified signal employee for
another railroad during the period of revocation.
Paragraph (b)(1) of this section requires a railroad to immediately
suspend a person's signal employee certification upon receipt of
reliable information regarding a violation of Sec. 246.303(e). Prior
to, or upon suspending, the signal employee certificate, paragraph
(b)(3) requires railroad to provide either verbal or written notice of
the reason for the suspension, the pending revocation, and an
opportunity for a hearing. If the initial notice was verbal, then the
notice would have to be promptly confirmed in writing. The amount of
time the railroad has to confirm the verbal notice in writing depends
on whether or not a collective bargaining agreement is in effect and
applicable. In the absence of such an agreement, a railroad has four
days to provide written notice. If a notice of suspension is amended
after a hearing is convened, or does not contain citations to all
Federal regulatory provisions, railroad test procedures, signal
standards, and practices that may apply to the potentially revocable
event, the CRB, if asked to review the revocation decision, might
subsequently find that this constitutes procedural error pursuant to
Sec. 246.405.
Paragraph (b)(5) of this section in the NPRM provided that no later
than the start of the hearing, the railroad would be required to
provide the certified signal employee with a copy of the written
information and a list of witnesses that the railroad would present at
the hearing. BRS and TTD submitted comments criticizing this paragraph,
contending that it put the certified signal employee in a disadvantaged
position, unable to adequately prepare their case or mount a proper
defense. BRS strongly recommended that the language in this provision
be modified to require the railroad to provide the certified signal
employee with the necessary written information and a comprehensive
list of witnesses upon request. Similarly, TTD requested that this
provision be revised to require that the certified signal employee and
their labor representative, if applicable, ``receive a copy of all
information and a list of witnesses sufficiently in advance of the
hearing in order to properly develop a defense.'' \51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ FRA-2022-0020-0032.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After considering these concerns, FRA is amending paragraph (b)(5)
to require railroads to provide certified signal employees with a copy
of the written information and a list of witnesses they will present at
the hearing at least 72 hours before the start of the hearing. FRA
thinks this change promotes fairness and will provide a certified
signal employee and their representative with sufficient time to
prepare a proper defense. However, if an applicable collective
bargaining agreement allows for railroads to provide this information
less than 72 hours before the start of the hearing, the railroad will
be in compliance with this paragraph as long as it satisfies the
requirements of the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
Paragraph (b)(5) in the NPRM also stated that if an employee of the
railroad provided information that will be presented at the hearing,
the railroad must make that employee available for examination at the
hearing. TTD commented that this provision should be modified to
require any witness upon which the railroad is relying to support its
allegations against the certified signal employee to be present at the
hearing for questioning by the certified signal employee and/or their
representative. However, FRA is declining to make this change, as FRA
recognizes that railroads are limited in their ability to compel non-
employees to testify at these hearings. FRA is, however, adding
language to paragraph (b)(5) to clarify that railroads must make an
employee
[[Page 44863]]
available for examination at the hearing if the employee provided
information that will be used by the railroad at the hearing,
regardless of whether an applicable collective bargaining agreement
addresses this issue.
FRA is also making some other changes to this section, from what
appeared in the proposed rule, to align with parts 240 and 242.
Paragraph (b)(6) of this section states that after the hearing, the
railroad must determine, based on the hearing record, whether
certificate revocation is warranted. FRA is adding language from 49 CFR
240.307(b)(5) and 242.407(b)(5) to this paragraph noting that the
railroad must also state the basis for its decision which is discussed
in more detail in paragraph (e). Similarly, FRA added language to
paragraph (d)(8) stating that while a railroad can consolidate a
revocation hearing with a disciplinary hearing, it must still make a
separate finding regarding revocation and it must ensure that the
railroad official making the finding(s) is not the investigating
officer. This new language, found in 49 CFR 240.307(e) and 242.407(e),
clarifies for railroads that the requirements in paragraph (d)(1) of
this section still apply when the revocation hearing is consolidated
with a disciplinary hearing.
In addition, FRA added language not found in the NPRM to clarify
what is required under paragraph (j) of this section. Paragraph (j)
requires railroads to keep records of evidence that lead the railroad
to not revoke a person's signal employee certification in accordance
with paragraph (h) or (i). In this final rule, FRA is acknowledging
that this requirement does not just apply if this information comes to
light during a revocation hearing. Railroads must also retain this
evidence if it becomes available before the railroad suspends the
person's signal employee certification or before the revocation hearing
is convened. The language FRA added to this final rule mirrors language
found in 49 CFR 240.307(j) and 242.407(j).
Subpart E--Dispute Resolution Procedures
This subpart details the opportunities and procedures for a person
to challenge a railroad's decision to deny certification or
recertification or to revoke a signal employee's certification. While
the dispute resolution process for signal employees largely mirrors the
processes for engineers under part 240 and conductors under part 242,
FRA has undertaken efforts to simplify these regulations to make them
clear and comprehensible to all interested parties.
Section 246.403 Petition Requirements
This section contains requirements for obtaining FRA review of a
railroad's decision to deny or revoke certification or deny
recertification.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires petitioners to seek review
in a timely fashion once the adverse decision is served on them. In the
interest of consistency and uniformity with parts 240 and 242,
petitioners have 120 days from the date the adverse decision was served
upon them to file a petition for review by the CRB.
Paragraph (b)(6) requires petitioners or their representatives to
state the facts and arguments in support of their petition. In other
words, they need to explain to the CRB why they think the railroad was
incorrect in denying or revoking the petitioner's certification.
Paragraph (b)(7) requires petitioners to submit all documents related
to the railroad's decision that are in their possession or reasonably
available to them. This may include the transcript and exhibits from
the petitioner's denial or revocation hearing. In most cases, these
documents will be essential to the Board's ability to make an informed
decision on the petition.
IBEW commented that FRA should add language to this section
requiring railroads to produce all records requested by the petitioner.
However, FRA does not think such a change is necessary because IBEW's
concern is already addressed by Sec. 246.405(b) which requires a
railroad to supplement the record with any relevant documents in its
possession that were not provided by the petitioner. This helps ensure
the CRB will have a complete record when the case is ready for their
review.
Section 246.405 Processing Certification Review Petitions
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.405 and 242.505, details how
petitions for review by the CRB will be handled. Paragraph (a) of this
section notes that, when FRA receives a CRB petition, FRA will send a
written notification to the parties involved in the petition. FRA will
send these acknowledgments via email. If a representative files a
petition on behalf of a petitioner, the petition must include the
petitioner's email address if the petitioner also wants to receive the
acknowledgment email and any other correspondence (including the
Board's decision) from FRA. The acknowledgment email will include the
docket number for the petition, so that both parties can access the
documents in the case on https://www.regulations.gov. FRA will not send
a copy of the petition to the railroad.
Paragraph (b) of this section provides railroads with the
opportunity to respond to a petition. While it is always optional for a
railroad to respond to a petitioner's arguments, if the petitioner did
not include relevant documents in their petition, such as hearing
transcripts or exhibits, the railroad is required to provide FRA with
those documents, even if it does not respond to the arguments in the
petition. Railroads have 60 days, from the date FRA sends the
acknowledgment email, to file a response to the petition in the docket
on https://www.regulations.gov. Railroads are permitted to submit
responses after the 60-day deadline, but the Board will only review
such late filings if practicable. In other words, there is no guarantee
that the Board will review a late response prior to issuing a decision.
Thus, if a railroad wishes to respond to a petition, it should meet the
60-day filing deadline. The railroad will fulfill its requirement to
serve a copy of its response on the other parties by sending its
response via email to petitioner, and the petitioner's representative
(if any).
Paragraph (c) of this section explains when a case will be referred
to the Board, and the Board's authority. If a railroad files a response
before the 60-day deadline in paragraph (b) of this section, the
petition will be referred to the Board upon receipt of the response.
Otherwise, the petition will be referred to the Board 60 days after the
date FRA sends the acknowledgment email. The Board has the authority to
grant a petition (rule in favor of the petitioner), deny a petition
(rule in favor of the railroad), or dismiss a petition. An example of
when the Board would dismiss a petition would be if the respondent
railroad did not deny or revoke the petitioner's certification, and
thus, there was no case or controversy before the Board. If there is
insufficient evidence in the record for the Board to decide on the
merits of a petition, the Board may choose to remand a petition or
issue an interim order, so that additional fact-finding can occur.
Paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this section provide the standards
of review that the Board will employ for procedural issues, factual
issues, and legal issues, respectively. These standards mirror the
standards of review used to review locomotive engineer and conductor
petitions. The Board will not correct all procedural errors committed
by a railroad. Instead, in such cases, the Board will only grant a
petition if the respondent railroad's procedural error caused
substantial harm to the
[[Page 44864]]
petitioner. For factual issues, the petitioner is required to show that
the respondent railroad did not have substantial evidence to support
its decision to deny or revoke the petitioner's certification. If the
Board must decide a legal issue, it will conduct de novo review,
meaning that it would not give deference to any decision or
interpretation made by the railroad.
Paragraph (g) of this section acknowledges that the Board's
decision-making power is limited to granting or denying a petition. In
other words, the Board is only empowered to make determinations
concerning qualifications under this regulation. The Board is not
empowered to mitigate the consequences of a railroad decision if the
decision is valid under this regulation. The contractual consequences,
if any, of these determinations will have to be resolved under dispute
resolution mechanisms that do not directly involve FRA. For example,
FRA cannot order a railroad to alter its seniority rosters or make an
award of back pay, in the event of a finding that a railroad wrongfully
denied certification.
Paragraph (h) of this section requires the Board to issue a written
decision that will be served on all affected parties. FRA will send the
decision to the parties by email and it will also be posted in the
case's docket on https://www.regulations.gov.
Section 246.407 Request for a Hearing
This section, derived from 49 CFR 240.407 and 49 CFR 242.507,
discusses the process for requesting an administrative hearing after a
party has been adversely affected by a CRB decision. Paragraph (b) of
this section provides that the adversely affected party must file their
request for a hearing within 20 days of service of the CRB's decision.
Just like CRB petitions, parties must file hearing requests
electronically. To file a hearing request, the adversely affected party
must upload the request to the docket on https://www.regulations.gov
that was used while the case was before the Board. This docket will
also be used to file documents while the case is before the hearing
officer.
BRS, TTD, and IBEW commented on paragraph (b) and recommended that
FRA increase the 20-day period for filing a request for hearing. BRS
recommended increasing the filing period to 90 days, while TTD and IBEW
recommended a 60-day filing period. In support of their
recommendations, these labor organizations asserted that 20 days is an
inadequate amount of time for the aggrieved party to confer with their
representative, determine the best course of action, and then compile
the information required in paragraph (c) to complete a request.
However, the required contents for hearing requests, as set forth
in paragraph (c) of this section, are minimal, and are similar to the
requirements in Sec. 246.403(b) for filing a petition with the CRB.
Thus, if the certified signal employee is the aggrieved party, most of
the information needed for the hearing request can be found in their
CRB petition. FRA does not foresee any major hinderance that would
prevent a certified signal employee or railroad from completing a
hearing request within the 20 days currently allotted. Moreover, a
similar 20-day deadline has been in effect for over a decade for
conductors and for over 30 years for locomotive engineers. FRA is
unaware of any major issues parties have had with meeting this
deadline, and therefore disagrees with the recommendation to change
this deadline for certified signal employees.
Appendices
This final rule has two appendices. Appendix A, derived from
appendix C to part 240 and appendix C to part 242, provides a narrative
discussion of the procedures that a person seeking signal employee
certification or recertification should follow to furnish a railroad
with information concerning their motor vehicle driving record.
Appendix B, derived from appendix D to part 240 and appendix D to part
242, provides a narrative discussion of the procedures that a railroad
will be required to employ when administering the vision and hearing
requirements of Sec. Sec. 246.117 and 246.118.
FRA made minor revisions to appendix A from what appeared in the
proposed rule. In paragraph (2), FRA added language noting that the
information in a certification candidate's motor vehicle driving
records that the railroad should consider is described in Sec.
246.111(m). FRA also added language to paragraph (4) to clarify that
under Sec. 246.301, a railroad is only required to provide a candidate
for signal employee certification or recertification with a copy of
their motor vehicle driving records if the records contain information
that could be the basis for denying certification (or recertification).
If no such adverse information exists, the railroad is not required to
provide the candidate with a copy of these records.
V. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 as Amended by Executive Order 14094
This final rule is not a significant regulatory action within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 as amended by Executive Order 14094,
Modernizing Regulatory Review. Details on the estimated costs of this
final rule can be found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), which
FRA has prepared and placed in the docket (FRA-2022-0020).
FRA is issuing regulations establishing a formal certification
process for railroad signal employees. As part of that process,
railroads will be required to develop a program for training current
and prospective signal employees, documenting and verifying that the
holder of the certificate has achieved certain training and
proficiency, and creating a record of safety compliance infractions
that other railroads can review when considering individuals for
certification. This final rule will ensure that signal employees are
properly trained, are qualified to perform their duties, and meet
Federal safety standards. Additionally, this regulation is expected to
improve railroad safety by reducing the rate of accidents/incidents.
The RIA presents estimates of the costs likely to occur over the
first 10 years of the final rule. The analysis includes estimates of
costs associated with development of certification programs, initial
and periodic training, knowledge testing, and monitoring of operational
performance. Additionally, costs are estimated for vision and hearing
tests, review of certification determinations made by other railroads,
and Government administrative costs.
FRA estimated 10-year costs of $9.4 million discounted at 7
percent. The annualized cost will be approximately $1.3 million
discounted at 7 percent. The following table shows the estimated 10-
year costs of the final rule.
[[Page 44865]]
Total 10-Year Discounted Costs
[2020 Dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present Value Present Value Annualized Annualized
Category 7% ($) 3% ($) 7% ($) 3% ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development of Certification Program.............. 1,504,135 1,541,874 214,155 180,755
Certification Eligibility Requirements............ 202,952 227,006 28,896 26,612
Recertification Eligibility Requirements.......... 243,632 310,417 34,688 36,390
Training.......................................... 2,079,835 2,379,911 296,122 278,998
Knowledge Testing................................. 746,865 898,884 106,337 105,377
Vision and Hearing................................ 1,097,523 1,320,891 156,263 154,849
Monitoring Operational Performance................ 1,178,812 1,408,753 167,836 165,149
Railroad Oversight Responsibilities............... 267,530 326,714 38,090 38,301
Certification Card................................ 103,175 124,175 14,690 14,557
Petitions and Hearings............................ 181,733 217,183 25,875 25,460
Government Administrative Cost.................... 1,780,113 2,065,541 253,448 242,144
-------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 9,386,306 10,821,350 1,336,399 1,268,592
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary benefit of this final rule is that it will ensure that
railroads properly train and monitor signal employee performance to
reduce the risk of accidents caused by signal employee error. This rule
will allow railroads to revoke certification of signal employees who
make serious safety-related violations.
This rule is expected to reduce the likelihood of an accident
occurring due to signal employee error. FRA has analyzed accidents over
the past 10 years to categorize those where signal employee training
and certification would have impacted the accident. FRA estimated
benefits from fewer train accidents, grade crossing accidents, and
activation failures.
The following table shows the estimated 10-year benefits of the
final rule. The total 10-year estimated benefits will be $2.9 million
(PV, 7%) and annualized benefits will be $0.4 million (PV, 7%).
Total 10-Year Discounted Benefits
[2020 Dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present Value Present Value Annualized Annualized
Category 7% ($) 3% ($) 7% ($) 3% ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grade Crossing Accidents.......................... 1,766,028 2,064,676 251,443 242,043
Train Accidents/Incidents......................... 960,671 1,123,127 136,778 131,665
Business Benefits from Fewer Activation Failures 53,817 62,917 7,662 7,376
(Railroad Industry)..............................
Business Benefits from Fewer Activation Failures 87,985 102,863 12,527 12,059
(Government).....................................
-------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 2,868,501 3,353,584 408,410 393,142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA has quantified the monetary impact from accidents reported on
FRA accident forms. However, some accident costs are not required to be
reported on FRA accident forms (e.g., environmental impact). For
example, the cost of property damage represents a portion of the total
cost of train accidents, such as, the cost of direct labor and damage
to on-track equipment, track, track structures, and roadbed. Other
direct accident costs, such as accident clean up, third-party property
damage, lost lading, environmental damage, loss of economic activity to
the community, and train delays are not included in FRA's accident/
incident reportable damages from the railroads. That impact may account
for additional benefits not quantified in this analysis. If these costs
not covered by FRA data were realized, accidents affected by this
rulemaking could have much greater economic impact than the
quantitative benefit estimates provided here.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 \52\ and Executive Order
13272 \53\ require agency review of proposed and final rules to assess
their impacts on small entities. FRA prepared this FRFA to evaluate the
impact of the final rule on small entities and describe the effort to
minimize the adverse impact. The estimated costs on small entities is
not significant as it represents less than one percent of average
annual revenue of affected entities. Accordingly, the FRA Administrator
hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
\53\ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Statement of the Need for, and Objectives of, the Rule
FRA perceives the potential for signal employee error to cause
accidents, and an existing lack of means to evaluate and address this
risk. Railroads' signal employee training programs may not be covering
all aspects of a signal employee's job responsibility. Additionally,
railroads may not be testing signal employees and ensuring that their
knowledge is maintained continuously.
DOT's general authority states, in relevant part, that the
Secretary ``as necessary, shall prescribe regulations and issue orders
for every area of railroad safety supplementing laws and regulations in
effect on October 16,
[[Page 44866]]
1970.'' \54\ The Secretary delegated this authority to the Federal
Railroad Administrator.\55\ The RSIA required the Secretary to submit a
report to Congress addressing whether certification of certain crafts
or classes of railroad employees or contractors was necessary to reduce
the number and rate of accidents and incidents or to improve railroad
safety. If the Secretary determined certification of certain crafts or
classes was necessary to meet these goals, Congress also authorized the
Secretary to promulgate regulations requiring certification. In the
report to Congress, the Secretary noted that signal repair employees,
along dispatchers, were the most viable candidates for certification.
This final rule will require railroads to develop a signal employee
certification program. The final rule will help ensure that signal
employees are properly trained, qualified to perform their duties, and
meet Federal safety standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 49 U.S.C. 20103.
\55\ 49 CFR 1.89(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments
FRA received several comments related to the costs of the proposed
rule. ASLRRA and AAR submitted comments related to the proposed rule.
Issues not concerning the economics of the rule have been discussed
above in the discussion of comments and conclusions. Comments were
received from ASLRRA relating to the cost estimates for developing the
certification programs, petitions and hearings, and annual monitoring.
FRA has revised costs for developing certification programs, estimating
550 hours for ASLRRA to develop a model or template program, as
suggested by ASLRRA in their comment. Additionally, FRA has increased
the time for individual railroads to develop their plan based on the
template. The estimated time per railroad has been increased to 15
hours (from 8 hours in the RIA for the proposed rule).
Further, FRA has revised the cost for petitions and hearings,
adding additional job categories and slightly increasing the time
estimated per petition and hearing.
3. Response to Comments Filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration
FRA did not receive any comments from the Small Business
Administration.
4. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Rule Will Apply
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires a review of
proposed and final rules to assess their impact on small entities,
unless the Secretary certifies that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 as a small business concern
that is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its
field of operation. The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has
authority to regulate issues related to small businesses, and
stipulates in its size standards that a ``small entity'' in the
railroad industry is a for profit ``line-haul railroad'' that has fewer
than 1,500 employees, a ``short line railroad'' with fewer than 1,500
employees, a ``commuter rail system'' with annual receipts of less than
$47.0 million dollars, or a contractor that performs support activities
for railroads with annual receipts of less than $34.0 million.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ U.S. Small Business Administration, ``Table of Small
Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry
Classification System Codes,'' March 27, 2023. https://www.sba.gov/sites/sbagov/files/2023-06/Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20March%2017%2C%202023%20%282%29.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small
entities in consultation with SBA and in conjunction with public
comment. Under that authority, FRA has published a proposed statement
of agency policy that formally establishes ``small entities'' or
``small businesses'' as railroads, contractors, and hazardous materials
shippers that meet the revenue requirements of a Class III railroad as
set forth in 49 CFR part 1201, General Instruction 1-1, which is $20
million or less in inflation-adjusted annual revenues,\57\ and commuter
railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of
50,000 or less.\58\ FRA is using this definition for the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ The Class III railroad revenue threshold is $46.3 million
or less, for 2022. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-X/subchapter-C/part-1201.
\58\ See 68 FR 24891 (May 9, 2003) (codified at appendix C to 49
CFR part 209).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When developing the rule, FRA considered the impact that the rule
would have on small entities. FRA has provided additional time for
Class III railroads to comply with the final rule as compared to Class
I railroads.
The final rule would be applicable to all railroads with signal
systems. However, some small railroads do not have a signal system as
part of their operations. FRA estimates there are 744 Class III
railroads, of which 704 operate on the general system. These railroads
are of varying size, with some belonging to larger holding companies.
Approximately 490 Class III railroads will be impacted by this
rulemaking because they have a signal system. The remaining Class III
railroads do not have a signal system, thus will have no need for
signal employee certification program.
5. Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Rule
The final rule requires Class III railroads to develop and
implement a Signal Employee Certification Program. This includes
certifying and recertifying signal employees, vision and hearing tests,
training, knowledge testing, and monitoring operational performance.
The following table shows the annualized costs for all provisions
of the final rule. The total annualized cost for all Class III
railroads is $434,884 (PV, 7 percent).
Annualized Costs for Class III Railroads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized 7%
Category ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development of Certification Program................... 110,011
Certification Eligibility Requirements................. 7,224
Recertification Eligibility Requirements............... 8,672
Training............................................... 74,030
Knowledge Testing...................................... 26,584
Vision and Hearing..................................... 156,263
Monitoring Operational Performance..................... 41,959
[[Page 44867]]
Certification Card..................................... 3,672
Petitions and Hearings................................. 6,469
----------------
Total.............................................. 434,884
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The industry trade organization representing small railroads,
ASLRRA, reports the average freight revenue per Class III railroad is
$4.75 million.\59\ The following table summarizes the average annual
cost and revenue for Class III railroads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association,
Short Line and Regional Railroad Facts and Figures, p. 10 (2017
pamphlet).
Annual Class III Railroads' Cost and Revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Class
Total costs for all Class III railroads Average annual cost Average Class III Average annual cost
III railroads, annualized 7 impacted by final per Class III railroad annual as percent of
percent ($) rule railroad ($) revenue ($) revenue
a b c = a / b d e = c / d
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
434,884 535 813 4,750,000 0.02%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimated average annual cost for a Class III railroad is $813.
This represents a small percentage (0.02%) of the average annual
revenue for a Class III railroad.
6. A Description of the Steps the Agency Has Taken To Minimize the
Economic Impact on Small Entities
This final rule requires railroads to develop a signal employee
certification program. Small railroads may use a template of a
certification program developed by ALSRRA to comply with the final
rule. Therefore, the burden on small entities is mostly for certifying
signal employees. Many small railroads contract signal employee service
to a third party. Signal employees will be required to be certified by
each railroad that they work for, but the contractor may be involved in
the process which would lessen the burden on individual short line
railroads.
FRA has allowed Class III railroads additional time to develop
their certification programs. Class III railroads will have 16 months
after the effective date of the final rule to submit a certification
program, whereas Class I railroads must submit a plan within 8 months.
FRA will also not require Class III railroads to conduct annual
reporting as required by Sec. 246.215 Railroad Oversight
Responsibilities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements for part 246 are being
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.\60\ This submission reflects adjustments in response to comments
on program development costs discussed above. These changes impacted
the paperwork burden under 49 CFR 246.101 and 246.103. The adjustments
increased the burden from 7,682 hours to 10,726 hours since the NPRM
publication. This table contains new information collection
requirements, and the estimated time to fulfill each requirement is as
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average time per Total annual Total cost
CFR Section Respondent universe Total annual responses responses burden hours Wage rate equivalent
(A).................... (B)................... (C) = A * B (D) \1\ (E) = C * D
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.9--Waivers--Petitions........... 553 railroads.......... 10.00 petition......... 3 hours............... 30.00 $77.44 $2,323.20
246.101/.103--Certification program 553 railroads + ASLRRA 182.66 plans (14 Class 120 hours + 550 hours 6,204.78 115.24 715,038.85
required and FRA review of and holding companies. I and commuter + 15 hours.
certification program--Development railroads plans + 0.33
of signal employee certification generic program
program in accordance with this developed by ASLRRA
part and procedures contained under and holding companies
Sec. 246.106 (Note: Each plans + 168.33 Class
certification program includes II and III railroads
procedure requirements under Sec. plans).
246.111 through Sec. 246.124.).
--(d)(1) Signal employees 553 railroads.......... 2 copies............... 15 minutes............ .50 77.44 38.72
certification submission--Copies of
the program provided to the
president of each rail labor
organization (RLO) that represents
the railroad's employees that are
subject to this part.
--(d)(2) Affirmative statements that 553 railroads.......... 2 affirmative 15 minutes............ .50 77.44 38.72
the railroad has provided a copy of statements.
the program to RLOs.
[[Page 44868]]
--(e) Comment Period--Affirmed 553 railroads.......... 31 comments............ 4 hours............... 124.00 77.44 9,602.56
comments on a railroad's program by
any designated representative of
employees subject to this part or
any directly affected employee who
does not have a designated
representative.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(g) Material Modifications of FRA- The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
approved program--Railroad to
submit a description of how it
intends to modify the program and a
copy of the modified program to FRA.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(h) Resubmission--Railroad can 553 railroads.......... 3.67 revised plans 20 hours.............. 73.40 77.44 5,684.10
resubmit its program or material Class I and commuter
modification as described in railroads.
paragraph (f)(2) of this section
after addressing all of the
deficiencies noted by FRA and the
resubmission must conform with the
procedures and requirements
contained in Sec. 246.106.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(i) Rescinding Prior Approval of The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
Program--Railroad to resubmit its
certification program and the
program must conform with the
procedures and requirements
contained in Sec. 246.106.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.105(c)(1) and (d)(1)-- 553 railroads.......... 3,781 designated lists. 5 minutes............. 315.08 77.44 24,399.80
Implementation schedule for
certification programs--Designation
of certified signal employee.
--(c)(2) and (d)(2) Issue a 553 railroads.......... 3,781 issued 3 minutes............. 189.05 77.44 14,640.03
certificate that complies with Sec. certificates.
246.207 to each person that it
designates.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(f) Written requests for delayed FRA anticipates zero submissions.
certification--Railroad may wait to
recertify the person making the
request until the end of the three-
year period after FRA has approved
the railroad's certification
program.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(g) Testing and evaluation-- The paperwork burden for testing and evaluation is included in the economic burden and the burden for certificates
Railroad shall only certify or is included under Sec. 246.105.
recertify a person as a signal
employee if that person has been
tested and evaluated in accordance
with procedures that comply with
subpart B of this part.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.106--Requirements for The paperwork requirements described in this section are accounted for throughout this table.
Certification Programs--Procedures
for Submission and Approval of
Signal Employee Certification
Programs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.109(a)--Determinations required The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.111 through Sec. 246.121 and Sec.
for certification and 246.303.
recertification--Eligibility
requirements.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.111(a) through (c)--Prior safety 553 railroads.......... 1,706 motor vehicle 5 minutes............. 142.17 77.44 11,009.64
conduct as motor vehicle operator-- records.
Eligibility requirements of this
section involving prior conduct as
a motor vehicle operator.
--(e) If driver information is not 553 railroads.......... 2 waivers.............. 2 hours............... 4.00 77.44 309.76
obtained as required pursuant to
paragraph (g) of this section, that
person or the railroad certifying
or recertifying that person may
petition for a waiver in accordance
with the provisions of part 211 of
this chapter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(f) Individual's duty--Consent to This is usual and customary procedure. The consent form is signed at the time of hiring to make driving
make information concerning driving information available to the railroad.
record available to that railroad.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(g) and (h) Request to obtain 553 railroads.......... 1,706 written requests. 5 minutes............. 142.17 59.00 8,388.03
driver's license information from
licensing agency.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(i) Requests for additional The paperwork burden for this requirement is included under Sec. 246.111(g)-(h).
information from licensing agency.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(j) Notification to railroad by 553 railroads.......... 2 notices.............. 10 minutes............ .33 77.44 25.56
persons of never having a license.
[[Page 44869]]
--(k) Report of motor vehicle 553 railroads.......... 40 self-reports........ 10 minutes............ 6.67 77.44 516.52
incidents described in paragraphs
(m)(1) and (2) of this section to
the employing railroad within 48
hours.
--(l) and (m) Evaluation of person's 553 railroads.......... 1,706 motor vehicle 5 minutes............. 142.17 71.89 10,220.60
driving record by railroad. record evaluations.
--(n)(1) DAC referral by railroad 553 railroads.......... 36 DAC referrals....... 5 minutes............. 3.00 115.24 345.72
after report of driving drug/
alcohol incident.
--(n)(2) DAC request and supply by 553 railroads.......... 1 request and supplied 30 minutes............ .50 115.24 57.62
persons of prior counseling or record.
treatment.
--(n)(3) Conditional certifications 553 railroads.......... 3 conditional 4 hours............... 12.00 115.24 1,382.88
recommended by DAC. certification
recommendations.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.113(b)--Prior safety conduct as This is usual and customary procedure and therefore there is no paperwork burden.
an employee of a different
railroad--Certification candidate
has not been employed by any other
railroad in the previous five
years, they do not have to submit a
request in accordance with
paragraph (d) of this section, but
they must notify the railroad of
this fact in accordance with
procedures established by the
railroad in its certification
program.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(c) Person seeking certification 553 railroads.......... 43.00 requests......... 15 minutes............ 10.75 77.44 832.48
or recertification under this part
shall submit a written request to
each railroad that employed the
person within the previous five
years.
--(e) Railroad shall provide the 553 railroads.......... 43.00 records.......... 15 minutes............ 10.75 77.44 832.48
information requested to the
railroad designated in the written
request.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(f) An explanation shall state why FRA anticipates zero submissions.
the railroad cannot provide the
information within the requested
time frame or cannot provide the
requested information.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.115(a)--Substance abuse 553 railroads.......... 1,535 determinations... 2 minutes............. 51.17 77.40 3,960.56
disorders and alcohol drug rules
compliance--Determination that
person meets eligibility
requirements.
--(b) Written documents from DAC 553 railroads.......... 79 filed documents..... 30 minutes............ 39.50 115.24 4,551.98
that person is not affected by a
disorder.
--(c)(3) Fitness requirement-- 553 railroads.......... 2 self-referrals....... 10 minutes............ .33 115.24 38.03
Voluntary self-referral by signal
employee for substance abuse
counseling or treatment under the
policy required by Sec. 219.1001
of this chapter.
--(d)(1) and (2) Prior alcohol/drug 553 railroads.......... 1,535 certification 10 minutes............ 255.83 115.24 29,481.85
conduct; Federal rule compliance. reviews.
--(d)(3)(i) Written determination 553 railroads.......... 30 written 1 hour................ 30.00 115.24 3,457.20
that most recent incident has determinations.
occurred.
--(d)(3)(ii) Notification to person 553 railroads.......... 30 notifications....... 30 minutes............ 15.00 77.44 1,161.60
that recertification has been
denied or certification suspended.
--(d)(4) Persons/conductors waiving 553 railroads.......... 20 waived 10 minutes............ 3.33 77.44 257.88
investigation/de-certifications. investigations.
246.117(a) through (c)--Visual 553 railroads.......... 400 records............ 2 minutes............. 13.33 71.89 958.29
acuity--Determination visual acuity
standards met--Medical examiner
certificate/record.
--(d)(1) Request for retest and 553 railroads.......... 10 records............. 2 minutes............. .33 hours $71.89 $23.72
another medical evaluation--Medical
examiner certificate/record.
--(d)(2) Railroad to provide a copy 553 railroads.......... 400 copies............. 5 minutes............. 33.33 71.89 2,396.09
of this part to medical examiner.
--(d)(3) Consultations by medical 553 railroads.......... 5 consultations + 5 30 minutes + 10 3.33 71.89 239.39
examiners with railroad officer and conditional minutes.
issue of conditional certification. certifications.
--(g) Notification by certified 553 railroads.......... 1 notification......... 10 minutes............ .17 71.89 12.22
signal employee of deterioration of
vision.
246.118(a) through (c)--Hearing 553 railroads.......... 400 medical records.... 2 minutes............. 13.33 71.89 958.29
acuity--Determination hearing
standards met--Medical records.
--(d)(1) Request for retest and 553 railroads.......... 10 records............. 2 minutes............. .33 71.89 23.72
another medical evaluation--Medical
examiner certificate/record.
--(d)(2) Railroad to provide a copy 553 railroads.......... 400 copies............. 5 minutes............. 33.33 71.89 2,396.09
of this part to medical examiner.
[[Page 44870]]
--(d)(3) Consultations by medical 553 railroads.......... 5 consultations + 5 30 minutes + 10 3.33 71.89 239.39
examiners with railroad officer and conditional minutes.
issue of conditional certification. certifications.
--(g) Notification by certified 553 railroads.......... 25 notifications....... 10 minutes............ 4.17 71.89 299.78
signal employee of deterioration of
hearing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.119(b)--Training requirements--A The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.101/.103.
railroad's election for the
training of signal employees shall
be stated in its certification
program.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(c) Initial training program for 553 railroads.......... 184 training programs.. 3 hours............... 553.00 hours 115.24 63,727.72
previously untrained person to be a
signal employee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(c)(3) Modification to training The paperwork burden for this requirement is outside the scope of the 3-year PRA review period.
program when new safety-related
railroad laws, regulations and etc.
are introduced into the workplace.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(d) Relevant information or The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.101/.103.
materials on safety or other rules
made available to certification
candidates.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(e) Completion of initial training 553 railroads.......... 3,781 written documents 10 minutes............ 630.17 77.44 48,800.36
program by a previously untrained or records.
person being certified as a signal
employee--Written documentation
showing person completed training
program and demonstrated
qualification.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(f) Completion of training The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.119.
program, demonstration of
knowledge, on-the-job proficiency,
and qualification--Written
documentation for each signal
employee certified by the railroad.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(h) Familiarization training for FRA anticipates zero submissions.
signal employees of acquiring
railroad from selling company/
railroad prior to commencement of
new operation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(i) Continuing education of 553 railroads.......... 2,000 training records. 15 minutes............ 500.00 71.89 35,945.00
certified signal employees.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.120--Requirements for The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.119.
qualification --Determining
eligibility.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(b) Notification by persons not The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.119.
qualified on the signal system.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.121(a) through (c)--Knowledge 553 railroads.......... 2,000 test records..... 5 minutes............. 166.67 77.44 12,906.92
testing--Determining eligibility.
--(d) Reexamination of the failed 553 railroads.......... 20 examination records. 5 minutes............. 1.67 77.44 129.32
test.
246.123(d)--Monitoring operational 553 railroads.......... 7,348 records.......... 2 minutes............. 244.93 77.44 18,967.38
performance--Unannounced compliance
tests--Retention of a written
record.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.124--Mentoring.................. The paperwork burden for this requirement is covered under Sec. 246.101/.103.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.125--Certification 553 railroads.......... 11.00 determinations... 30 minutes............ 5.50 77.44 425.92
determinations made by other
railroads.
246.203(b)--Retaining information 553 railroads.......... 2,000 record retentions 15 minutes............ 500.00 77.44 38,720.00
supporting determination--Records.
--(g) Electronic records............ 553 railroads.......... 2 amended record....... 15 minutes............ .50 77.44 38.72
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.205--List of certified signal The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under Sec. 246.105(c)(1)-(d)(1).
employees and recordkeeping..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.207 (a) through (e)--Certificate The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under Sec. 246.105(c)(2)-(d)(2).
requirements.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(f) and (g) Replacement of 553 railroads.......... 45 replacement 5 minutes............. 3.75 77.44 290.40
certificates. certificates.
--(h) Notification by signal 553 railroads.......... 110 notifications...... 30 seconds............ .92 71.89 66.14
employees that railroad request to
serve exceeds certification.
246.213(c) through (h)--Multiple 553 railroads.......... 3 notifications........ 10 minutes............ .50 77.44 38.72
Certificates--Notification of
denial of certification or
recertification by individuals
holding multiple certifications.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44871]]
--(i) In lieu of issuing multiple The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under Sec. 246.105.
certificates, a railroad may issue
one certificate to a person who is
certified in multiple crafts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
246.215--Railroad oversight 553 railroads.......... 17.33 annual reviews 8 hours............... 138.64 115.24 15,976.87
responsibilities--Review and and analyses.
analysis of administration of
certification program.
--(d) Report of findings and 553 railroads.......... 2 reports.............. 4 hours............... 8.00 115.24 921.92
conclusions reached during annual
review by railroad (if requested in
writing by FRA, RLO president, or
certified signal employee not
represented by a labor
organization) review and analysis
effort.
246.301(a)--Denial of certification-- 553 railroads.......... 6 notices + 3 responses 1 hour................ 9.00 77.44 696.96
Notification to candidate of
information and provision of
documents that form basis for
denying certification and candidate
response.
--(b) Denial Decision Requirements-- 553 railroads.......... 6 notifications........ 1 hour................ 6.00 hours 77.44 464.64
Written notification of denial of
certification or recertification by
railroad to candidate.
246.307(b)(1) through (5)--Process 553 railroads.......... 15 suspended 30 minutes............ 7.50 77.44 580.80
for revoking certification-- certification letters
Immediate suspension of signal and documentations.
employee's certification,
notifications, and provision of
written information and list of
witnesses.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(b)(6) Determinations based on the The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under Sec. 246.307(e).
record of the hearing, whether
revocation of the certification is
warranted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(b)(8) Retention of record of the 553 railroads.......... 15 records............. 15 minutes............ 3.75 77.44 290.40
hearing for three years after the
date the decision is rendered.
--(d)(9) Hearing Procedures--Written 553 railroads.......... 3 written waivers...... 10 minutes............ .50 59.00 29.50
waiver of right to hearing.
--(e) Revocation Decision 553 railroads.......... 15 written decisions 2 hours............... 30.00 115.24 3,457.20
Requirements--Written decisions by and service of
railroad official. decisions.
--(g) Revocation of certification 553 railroads.......... 3 revoked 10 minutes............ .50 115.24 57.62
based on information that another certifications.
railroad has done so.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(j) Placing relevant information The paperwork requirement for this burden is covered under Sec. 246.307(b)(7).
in record if sufficient evidence
meeting the criteria in paragraph
(h) or (i) of this section becomes
available.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(k) Good faith determination...... 553 railroads.......... 3 good faith 1 hour................ 3.00 77.44 232.32
determinations.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart E--Dispute Resolution The requirements under these provisions are exempted from the PRA under 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2). Since these provisions
Procedures--Sec. 246.401 through pertain to an administrative action or investigation, there is no PRA burden associated with these requirements.
Sec. 246.411.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A to part 246--Procedures The paperwork requirements described in this appendix are accounted for throughout this table.
for Obtaining and Evaluating Motor
Vehicle Driving Record Data.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix B to part 246--Medical The paperwork requirements described in this appendix are accounted for throughout this table.
Standards Guidelines.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals \2\...................... 553 railroads + ASLRRA 35,571 responses....... N/A................... 10,726 N/A 1,098,908
and holding companies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Throughout the tables in this document, the dollar equivalent cost is derived from the 2020 Surface Transportation Board's Full Year Wage A&B data
series using the appropriate employee group hourly wage rate that includes 75-percent overhead charges.
\2\ Totals may not add due to rounding.
All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions;
searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed
data; and reviewing the information. For information or a copy of the
paperwork package submitted to OMB, contact Ms. Arlette Mussington,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, at email:
[email protected] or telephone: 571-609-1285, or Ms. Joanne
Swafford, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at email:
[email protected] or telephone: at 757-897-9908.
OMB is required to decide concerning the collection of information
requirements contained in this final rule between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a
comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this document. FRA is not
authorized to impose a penalty on persons for violating information
collection requirements that do not display a current OMB control
number, if required. The current OMB control number for this rule is
2130-0638.
[[Page 44872]]
D. Federalism Implications
Executive Order 13132, Federalism,\61\ requires FRA to develop an
accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' are defined in the executive order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, to the extent practicable
and permitted by law, the agency may not issue a regulation with
federalism implications that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, the agency consults with
State and local governments, or the agency consults with State and
local government officials early in the process of developing the
regulation. National action limiting the policymaking discretion of the
States shall be taken only where there is constitutional and statutory
authority for the action and the national activity is appropriate in
light of the presence of a problem of national significance. Where
there are significant uncertainties as to whether national action is
authorized or appropriate, agencies shall consult with appropriate
State and local officials to determine whether Federal objectives can
be attained by other means.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. FRA has determined
that this final rule has no federalism implications, other than the
possible preemption of State laws under 49 U.S.C. 20106. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not
apply, and preparation of a federalism summary impact statement for the
rule is not required.
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 \62\ prohibits Federal agencies
from engaging in any standards or related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.
Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered
unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
for U.S. standards. This final rule is purely domestic in nature and is
not expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing
business overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ 19 U.S.C. Ch. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Environmental Assessment
FRA has evaluated this final rule consistent with the National
Environmental Policy Act \63\ (NEPA), the Council of Environmental
Quality's NEPA implementing regulations,\64\ and FRA's NEPA
implementing regulations \65\ and determined that it is categorically
excluded from environmental review and therefore does not require the
preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
statement (EIS). Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions identified in
an agency's NEPA implementing regulations that do not normally have a
significant impact on the environment and therefore do not require
either an EA or EIS.\66\ Specifically, FRA has determined that this
rule is categorically excluded from detailed environmental review.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
\64\ 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508.
\65\ 23 CFR part 771.
\66\ 40 CFR 1508.4.
\67\ See 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15) (categorically excluding
``[p]romulgation of rules, the issuance of policy statements, the
waiver or modification of existing regulatory requirements, or
discretionary approvals that do not result in significantly
increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The main purpose of this rulemaking is to establish certification
requirements for signal employees. This final rule will not directly or
indirectly impact any environmental resources and will not result in
significantly increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise.
In analyzing the applicability of a CE, FRA must also consider whether
unusual circumstances are present that would warrant a more detailed
environmental review.\68\ FRA has concluded that no such unusual
circumstances exist with respect to this regulation and the final rule
meets the requirements for categorical exclusion.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ 23 CFR 771.116(b).
\69\ 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and its implementing regulations, FRA has determined this undertaking
has no potential to affect historic properties.\70\ FRA has also
determined that this rulemaking does not approve a project resulting in
a use of a resource protected by Section 4(f).\71\ Further, FRA
reviewed this rule and found it consistent with Executive Order 14008,
``Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ See 54 U.S.C. 306108.
\71\ See DOT Act of 1966, as amended (Pub. L. 89-670, 80 Stat.
931); 49 U.S.C. 303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Environmental Justice
Executive Order 14096, ``Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All,'' which expands on Executive Order
12898, ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations,'' requires DOT agencies to
achieve environmental justice as part of their mission by identifying
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 environmental justice concerns. DOT Order 5610.2C
(``U.S. Department of Transportation Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'') instructs
DOT agencies to address compliance with Executive Order 12898 and
requirements within the DOT Order 5610.2C in rulemaking activities, as
appropriate, and also requires consideration of the benefits of
transportation programs, policies, and other activities where minority
populations and low-income populations benefit, at a minimum, to the
same level as the general population as a whole when determining
impacts on minority and low-income populations.\72\ FRA has evaluated
this final rule under Executive Orders 14096 and 12898 and DOT Order
5610.2C and has determined it will not cause disproportionate and
adverse human health and environmental effects on communities with
environmental justice concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ Executive Order 14096 is not currently referenced in DOT
Order 5610.2C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Under section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,\73\
each Federal agency ``shall, unless otherwise prohibited by law, assess
the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments, and the private sector (other than to the extent that such
regulations incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law).''
Section 202 of the Act \74\ further
[[Page 44873]]
requires that ``before promulgating any general notice of proposed
rulemaking that is likely to result in promulgation of any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any final rule for
which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the agency
shall prepare a written statement'' detailing the effect on State,
local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This final rule
will not result in the expenditure, in the aggregate, of $100,000,000
or more (as adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year, and thus
preparation of such a statement is not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Public Law 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531.
\74\ 2 U.S.C. 1532.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' requires
Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any
``significant energy action.'' \75\ FRA evaluated this final rule under
Executive Order 13211 and determined that this regulatory action is not
a ``significant energy action'' within the meaning of Executive Order
13211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
FRA has evaluated this rule in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, dated November 6, 2000.
This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian Tribal governments, and will not preempt Tribal laws. Therefore,
the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do
not apply, and a Tribal summary impact statement is not required.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 246
Administrative practice and procedure, Signal employee, Penalties,
Railroad employees, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Rule
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends chapter II,
subtitle B, of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, by adding
part 246 to read as follows:
PART 246--CERTIFICATION OF SIGNAL EMPLOYEES
Sec.
Subpart A--General
246.1 Purpose and scope.
246.3 Application and responsibility for compliance.
246.5 Effect and construction.
246.7 Definitions.
246.9 Waivers.
246.11 Penalties and consequences for noncompliance.
Subpart B--Program and Eligibility Requirements
246.101 Certification program required.
246.103 FRA review of certification programs.
246.105 Implementation schedule for certification programs.
246.106 Requirements for certification programs.
246.107 Signal service classifications.
246.109 Determinations required for certification and
recertification.
246.111 Prior safety conduct as motor vehicle operator.
246.113 Prior safety conduct with other railroads.
246.115 Substance abuse disorders and alcohol drug rules compliance.
246.117 Visual acuity.
246.118 Hearing acuity.
246.119 Training requirements.
246.120 Requirements for qualification.
246.121 Knowledge testing.
246.123 Monitoring operational performance.
246.124 Mentoring.
246.125 Certification determinations made by other railroads.
Subpart C--Administration of the Certification Program
246.201 Time limitations for certification.
246.203 Retaining information supporting determinations.
246.205 List of certified signal employees and recordkeeping.
246.207 Certificate requirements.
246.213 Multiple certifications.
246.215 Railroad oversight responsibilities.
Subpart D--Denial and Revocation of Certification
246.301 Process for denying certification.
246.303 Criteria for revoking certification.
246.305 Periods of ineligibility.
246.307 Process for revoking certification.
Subpart E--Dispute Resolution Procedures
246.401 Review board established.
246.403 Petition requirements.
246.405 Processing certification review petitions.
246.407 Request for a hearing.
246.409 Hearings.
246.411 Appeals.
Appendix A to Part 246--Procedures for Obtaining and Evaluating
Motor Vehicle Driving Record Data
Appendix B to Part 246--Medical Standards Guidelines
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20162, 21301, 21304, 21311;
28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 49 CFR 1.89; and Pub. L. 110-432, sec. 402, 122
Stat. 4884.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 246.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this part is to ensure that only those persons
who meet minimum Federal safety standards serve as certified signal
employees, to reduce the rate and number of accidents and incidents,
and to improve railroad safety.
(b) This part prescribes minimum Federal safety standards for the
eligibility, training, testing, certification and monitoring of all
signal employees to whom it applies. This part does not restrict a
railroad from adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent
requirements consistent with this part.
(c) The signal employee certification requirements prescribed in
this part apply to any person who meets the definition of signal
employee contained in Sec. 246.7, regardless of the fact that the
person may have a job classification title other than that of signal
employee.
Sec. 246.3 Application and responsibility for compliance.
(a) This part applies to all railroads, except:
(1) Railroads that do not have a signal system as defined in Sec.
246.7;
(2) Railroads that operate only on track inside an installation
that is not part of the general railroad system of transportation
(i.e., plant railroads, as defined in Sec. 246.7);
(3) Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations that are not
part of the general railroad system of transportation as defined in
Sec. 246.7; or
(4) Rapid transit operations in an urban area that are not
connected to the general railroad system of transportation.
(b) Although the duties imposed by this part are generally stated
in terms of the duty of a railroad, each person, as defined in Sec.
246.7, who performs any function required by this part must perform
that function in accordance with this part.
Sec. 246.5 Effect and construction.
(a) FRA does not intend, by use of the term signal employee in this
part, to alter the terms, conditions, or interpretation of existing
collective bargaining agreements that employ other job classification
titles when identifying a person who is engaged in installing,
troubleshooting, testing, repair, or maintenance of railroad signal
systems and signal-related technology.
(b) FRA does not intend by issuance of these regulations to alter
the authority of a railroad to initiate disciplinary
[[Page 44874]]
sanctions against its employees, including managers and supervisors, in
the normal and customary manner, including those contained in its
collective bargaining agreements.
(c) Except as provided in Sec. 246.213, nothing in this part shall
be construed to create or prohibit an eligibility or entitlement to
employment in other service for the railroad as a result of denial,
suspension, or revocation of certification under this part.
(d) Nothing in this part shall be deemed to abridge any additional
procedural rights or remedies not inconsistent with this part that are
available to the employee under a collective bargaining agreement, the
Railway Labor Act, or (with respect to employment at will) at common
law with respect to removal from service or other adverse action taken
as a consequence of this part.
Sec. 246.7 Definitions.
As used in this part:
Administrator means the Administrator of the FRA or the
Administrator's delegate.
Alcohol means ethyl alcohol (ethanol) and includes use or
possession of any beverage, mixture, or preparation containing ethyl
alcohol.
Contractor means a person under contract with a railroad, including
but not limited to, a prime contractor or a subcontractor.
Controlled substance has the meaning assigned by 21 U.S.C. 802 and
includes all substances listed on Schedules I through V as they may be
revised from time to time (21 CFR parts 1301 through 1316).
Disable means to render a device or system incapable of proper and
effective action or to materially impair the functioning of that device
or system.
Drug means any substance (other than alcohol) that has known mind
or function-altering effects on a human subject, specifically including
any psychoactive substance and including, but not limited to,
controlled substances.
Drug and alcohol counselor (DAC) means a person who meets the
credentialing and qualification requirements of a ``Substance Abuse
Professional'' (SAP), as provided in 49 CFR part 40.
File, filed, and filing mean submission of a document under this
part on the date when the Docket Clerk receives it, or if sent by mail,
the date mailing was completed.
FRA means the Federal Railroad Administration.
FRA representative means the FRA Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer and the Associate Administrator's
delegate, including any safety inspector employed by the Federal
Railroad Administration and any qualified State railroad safety
inspector acting under part 212 of this chapter.
Ineligible or ineligibility means that a person is legally
disqualified from serving as a certified signal employee. The term
covers a number of circumstances in which a person may not serve as a
certified signal employee. Revocation of certification pursuant to
Sec. 246.307 and denial of certification pursuant to Sec. 246.301 are
two examples in which a person would be ineligible to serve as a
certified signal employee. A period of ineligibility may end when a
condition or conditions are met, such as when a person meets the
conditions to serve as a certified signal employee following an alcohol
or drug violation pursuant to Sec. 246.115.
Knowingly means having actual knowledge of the facts giving rise to
the violation or that a reasonable person acting in the circumstances,
exercising due care, would have had such knowledge.
Medical examiner means a person licensed as a doctor of medicine or
doctor of osteopathy. A medical examiner can be a qualified full-time
salaried employee of a railroad, a qualified practitioner who contracts
with the railroad on a fee-for-service or other basis, or a qualified
practitioner designated by the railroad to perform functions in
connection with medical evaluations of employees. As used in this rule,
the medical examiner owes a duty to make an honest and fully informed
evaluation of the condition of an individual.
Mentor means a certified signal employee who has at least one year
of experience as a certified signal employee. For purposes of this
part, a mentor provides direct and immediate supervision over the work
of one or more signal employees.
On-the-job training means job training that occurs in the
workplace, i.e., the employee learns the job while doing the job.
Person means an entity of any type covered under 1 U.S.C. 1,
including but not limited to the following: a railroad; a manager,
supervisor, official, or other employee or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad equipment, track, or
facilities; any independent contractor or subcontractor providing goods
or services to a railroad; and any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor.
Physical characteristics means the actual track profile of and
physical location for points within a specific yard or route that
affect the movement of a locomotive or train. Physical characteristics
includes how signal systems and related technology are deployed within
the territory, for purposes of this part.
Plant railroad means a plant or installation that owns or leases a
locomotive, uses that locomotive to switch cars throughout the plant or
installation, and is moving goods solely for use in the facility's own
industrial processes. The plant or installation could include track
immediately adjacent to the plant or installation if the plant railroad
leases the track from the general system railroad and the lease
provides for (and actual practice entails) the exclusive use of that
trackage by the plant railroad and the general system railroad for
purposes of moving only cars shipped to or from the plant. A plant or
installation that operates a locomotive to switch or move cars for
other entities, even if solely within the confines of the plant or
installation, rather than for its own purposes or industrial processes,
will not be considered a plant railroad because the performance of such
activity makes the operation part of the general railroad system of
transportation.
Qualified means a person who has successfully completed all
instruction, training and examination programs required by the
railroad, and the applicable parts of this chapter and that the person
therefore may reasonably be expected to be proficient on all safety
related tasks the person is assigned to perform.
Qualified instructor means a person who has demonstrated, pursuant
to the railroad's written program, an adequate knowledge of the
subjects under instruction and, where applicable, has the necessary
signal experience to effectively instruct in the field, and has the
following qualifications:
(1) Is a certified signal employee under this part; and
(2) Has been selected as such by a designated railroad officer, in
concurrence with the designated employee representative, where present;
or
(3) In the absence of concurrence provided in paragraph (2) of this
definition, has a minimum of 12 months service working as a signal
employee.
If a railroad does not have designated employee representation,
then a person employed by the railroad need not comply with paragraph
(2) or (3) of this definition to be a qualified instructor.
[[Page 44875]]
Railroad means any form of nonhighway ground transportation that
runs on rails or electromagnetic guideways and any entity providing
such transportation, including:
(1) Commuter or other short-haul railroad passenger service in a
metropolitan or suburban area and commuter railroad service that was
operated by the Consolidated Rail Corporation on January 1, 1979; and
(2) High speed ground transportation systems that connect
metropolitan areas, without regard to whether those systems use new
technologies not associated with traditional railroads; but does not
include rapid transit operations in an urban area that are not
connected to the general railroad system of transportation.
Railroad officer means any supervisory employee of a railroad.
Serve or service, in the context of serving documents, has the
meaning given in Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as
amended. Similarly, the computation of time provisions in Rule 6 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as amended are also applicable in this
part. See also the definition of ``filing'' in this section.
Signal employee means, for purposes of this part, a person who is
engaged in installing, troubleshooting, testing, repairing, or
maintaining railroad signal systems or related technology.
Signal instructor means, for purposes of this part, a person who
has demonstrated, pursuant to the railroad's written signal employee
certification program, an adequate knowledge of the subject matter
under instruction and has the necessary experience to effectively
provide formal training of the subject matter.
Signal system, for purposes of this part, includes software and
equipment for the following: block signal systems, cab signal systems,
train control systems, positive train control systems, highway-rail and
pathway grade crossing warning systems, unusual contingency detection
devices, power-assisted switches, broken rail detection systems, switch
point indicators, as well as other safety-related devices, appliances,
technology, and systems installed on the railroad in signaled or non-
signaled territory.
Substance abuse disorder refers to a psychological or physical
dependence on alcohol or a drug, or another identifiable and treatable
mental or physical disorder involving the abuse of alcohol or drugs as
a primary manifestation. A substance abuse disorder is ``active''
within the meaning of this part if the person is currently using
alcohol or other drugs, except under medical supervision consistent
with the restrictions described in Sec. 219.103 of this chapter or has
failed to successfully complete primary treatment or successfully
participate in aftercare as directed by a DAC or SAP.
Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) means a person who meets the
qualifications of a substance abuse professional, as provided in 49 CFR
part 40.
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations that are not
part of the general railroad system of transportation means a tourist,
scenic, historic, or excursion operation conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose (i.e., there is no freight, intercity
passenger, or commuter passenger railroad operation on the track).
Unusual contingency detection device means a device used in the
detection of defective conditions on locomotives and rolling stock
(e.g., high-wide load, hot or defective bearing, defective wheel
detectors) or other unsafe environmental conditions (e.g., high-water,
high wind, sliding or slumping soil, rock or snow slide detectors).
These devices need not be connected to a signal system for this part to
apply.
Sec. 246.9 Waivers.
(a) A person subject to a requirement of this part may petition FRA
for a waiver of compliance with such requirement. The filing of such a
petition does not affect that person's responsibility for compliance
with that requirement while the petition is being considered.
(b) Each petition for a waiver under this section must be filed in
the manner and contain the information required by part 211 of this
chapter.
(c) If FRA finds that a waiver of compliance is in the public
interest and is consistent with railroad safety, FRA may grant the
waiver subject to any conditions FRA deems necessary.
Sec. 246.11 Penalties and consequences for noncompliance.
(a) Any person, as defined in Sec. 246.7, who violates any
requirement of this part or causes the violation of any such
requirement is subject to a civil penalty of at least the minimum civil
monetary penalty and not more than the ordinary maximum civil monetary
penalty per violation. However, penalties may be assessed against
individuals only for willful violations, and a penalty not to exceed
the aggravated maximum civil monetary penalty per violation may be
assessed, where:
(1) A grossly negligent violation, or a pattern of repeated
violations, has created an imminent hazard of death or injury to
persons, or
(2) A death or injury has occurred. See 49 CFR part 209, appendix
A.
(b) Each day a violation continues constitutes a separate offense.
(c) A person who violates any requirement of this part or causes
the violation of any such requirement may be subject to
disqualification from all safety-sensitive service in accordance with
part 209 of this chapter.
(d) A person who knowingly and willfully falsifies a record or
report required by this part may be subject to criminal penalties under
49 U.S.C. 21311.
(e) In addition to the enforcement methods referred to in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, FRA may address violations
of this part by use of the emergency order, compliance order, and/or
injunctive provisions of the Federal rail safety laws.
(f) FRA's website at https://railroads.dot.gov/ contains a schedule
of civil penalty amounts used in connection with this part.
Subpart B--Program and Eligibility Requirements
Sec. 246.101 Certification program required.
(a) Each railroad subject to this part shall have a written signal
employee certification program.
(b) Each certification program shall include all of the following:
(1) If applicable, an explanation and discussion of the
occupational categories and subcategories of certified signal service
that comply with the requirements in Sec. 246.107;
(2) A procedure for evaluating prior safety conduct as a motor
vehicle operator that complies with the criteria established in Sec.
246.111;
(3) A procedure for evaluating prior safety conduct as an employee
or certified signal employee with other railroads that complies with
the criteria established in Sec. 246.113;
(4) A procedure for evaluating potential substance abuse disorders
and compliance with railroad alcohol and drug rules that complies with
the criteria established in Sec. 246.115;
(5) A procedure for evaluating visual and hearing acuity that
complies with the criteria established in Sec. Sec. 246.117 and
246.118;
(6) A procedure for training that complies with the criteria
established in Sec. 246.119;
(7) A procedure for qualifying persons on its signal system and
signal-related technology that complies with the criteria established
in Sec. 246.120;
[[Page 44876]]
(8) A procedure for knowledge testing that complies with the
criteria established in Sec. 246.121;
(9) A procedure for monitoring operational performance that
complies with the criteria established in Sec. 246.123; and
(10) A procedure for mentoring uncertified signal employees that
complies with the criteria established in Sec. 246.124.
(c) Each certification program shall be version controlled. Any
change from the previous FRA-approved version of the certification
program must be tracked.
Sec. 246.103 FRA review of certification programs.
(a) Certification program submission schedule for railroads with
signal systems in operation. With the exception of railroads exempted
by Sec. 246.3(a), each railroad with a signal system in operation as
of July 22, 2024, shall submit its signal employee certification
program to FRA, in accordance with the procedures and requirements
contained in Sec. 246.106, according to the following schedule:
(1) All Class I railroads (including the National Railroad
Passenger Corporation) and railroads providing commuter service shall
submit their programs to FRA no later than March 17, 2025.
(2) All Class II railroads and Class III railroads (including a
switching, terminal, or other railroad not otherwise classified) shall
submit their programs to FRA no later than November 12, 2025.
(b) Certification program submission for new railroads. Each
railroad that commences operations after July 22, 2024 shall submit to
FRA, and obtain FRA approval of, its written signal employee
certification program, in accordance with the procedures and
requirements contained in Sec. 246.106, prior to installing,
implementing, or operating a signal system subject to this part.
(c) Method for submitting certification programs to FRA.
(1) Railroads must submit their written certification programs and
their requests for FRA approval (described in Sec. 246.106(a)) by
emailing the program and the request for FRA approval to
[email protected].
(2) A parent company may submit a written certification program on
behalf of one or more subsidiary railroads in accordance with Sec.
246.106(a).
(d) Notification requirements. Each railroad or parent company that
submits a certification program to FRA must:
(1) Simultaneously with its submission, provide a copy of the
program and the request for FRA approval to the president of each labor
organization that represents the railroad's signal employees and to all
of the railroad's signal employees who are subject to this part; and
(2) Include in its submission to FRA, a statement affirming that
the railroad or parent company has provided a copy of the program and
request for FRA approval to the president of each labor organization
that represents the railroad's signal employees and to all of the
railroad's signal employees who are subject to this part, along with a
list of the names and email addresses of each president of a labor
organization who was provided a copy of the program.
(e) Comment period. Any designated representative of signal
employees subject to this part or any directly affected person who does
not have a designated representative may comment on a railroad's or
parent company's program provided that:
(1) The comment is submitted no later than 60 days after the date
the program was submitted to FRA;
(2) The comment includes a concise statement of the commenter's
interest in the matter;
(3) The commenter affirms that a copy of the comment was provided
to the railroad or parent company; and
(4) The comment was emailed to [email protected].
(f) FRA review period. Upon receipt of a complete certification
program, FRA will commence a thorough review of the program to ensure
that it satisfies all of the requirements under this part.
(1) If FRA determines that the program satisfies all of the
requirements under this part, FRA will issue a letter notifying the
railroad or parent company that its program has been approved. Such
letter will typically be issued within 120 days of the date the program
was submitted to FRA.
(2) If FRA determines that the program does not satisfy all of the
requirements under this part, FRA will issue a letter notifying the
railroad or parent company that its program has been disapproved. Such
letter will typically be issued within 120 days of the date the program
was submitted to FRA and will identify the deficiencies found in the
program that must be corrected before the program can be approved.
After addressing these deficiencies, railroads and parent companies can
resubmit their programs in accordance with paragraph (h) of this
section.
(3) If a railroad or parent company does not receive an approval or
disapproval letter from FRA within 120 days of the date the program was
submitted to FRA, FRA's decision on the program will remain pending
until such time that FRA issues a letter either approving or
disapproving the program. A certification program is not approved until
FRA issues a letter approving the program.
(g) Material modifications. A railroad or parent company that
intends to make one or more material modifications to its FRA-approved
program must submit a request for approval (as described in Sec.
246.106(a)(3)) of how it intends to modify the program and a copy of
the modified program which indicates changes from the last approved
version.
(1) A modification is material if it would affect the program's
conformance with this part.
(2) The description of the modification and the modified program
must conform with the procedures and requirements contained in Sec.
246.106.
(3) The process for submission and review of material modifications
shall conform with paragraphs (c) through (f) of this section.
(4) A railroad or parent company shall not implement a material
modification to its program until FRA issues its approval of the
material modification in accordance with paragraph (f)(1) of this
section.
(h) Resubmissions. If FRA disapproves a railroad or parent
company's program or material modification, as described in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section, the railroad or parent company may resubmit its
program or material modification after addressing all of the
deficiencies noted by FRA.
(1) The resubmission must conform with the procedures and
requirements contained in Sec. 246.106.
(2) The process for submission and review of resubmitted programs
and resubmitted material modifications shall conform with paragraphs
(c) through (f) of this section.
(3) The following deadlines apply to railroads and parent companies
that have their programs or material modifications disapproved by FRA:
(i) For a railroad that submitted its program pursuant to paragraph
(a) of this section or a parent company that submitted a program on
behalf of one or more subsidiary railroads pursuant to the submission
deadline in paragraph (a) of this section, the railroad or parent
company must resubmit its program within 30 days of the date that FRA
notified the railroad of the deficiencies in its program. If a railroad
or parent company fails to resubmit its program within this timeframe
and continues its rail operations, FRA may consider such
[[Page 44877]]
actions to be a failure to implement a program.
(ii) For a railroad that submitted its program pursuant to
paragraph (b) of this section, there is no FRA-imposed deadline for
resubmitting its program. However, pursuant to Sec. 246.105(b), the
railroad shall not install, implement, or operate signal systems
subject to this part until its program has been approved by FRA.
(iii) For a railroad or parent company that submitted a material
modification to its FRA-approved program, there is no FRA-imposed
deadline for resubmitting the material modification. However, pursuant
to paragraph (g)(4) of this section, the railroad or parent company
cannot implement the material modification until it has been approved
by FRA.
(i) Rescinding prior approval of program. FRA reserves the right to
revisit its prior approval of a railroad or parent company's program at
any time.
(1) If upon such review FRA discovers deficiencies in the program,
FRA shall issue the railroad or parent company a letter rescinding its
prior approval of the program and notifying the railroad or parent
company of the deficiencies in its program that must be addressed.
(2) Within 30 days of FRA notifying the railroad or parent company
of the deficiencies in its program, the railroad or parent company must
address these deficiencies and resubmit its program to FRA. The
resubmitted program must conform with the procedures and requirements
contained in Sec. 246.106.
(3) The process for submission and review of resubmitted programs
under this paragraph (i) shall conform with paragraphs (c) through (f)
of this section.
(4) If a railroad or parent company fails to resubmit its program
to FRA within the timeframe prescribed in paragraph (i)(2) of this
section and the railroad continues its rail operations, FRA may
consider such actions to be a failure to implement a program.
(5) If FRA issues a letter disapproving the railroad or parent
company's resubmitted program, the railroad or parent company shall
resubmit its program in accordance with this paragraph (i).
(6) A program that has its approval rescinded under paragraph
(i)(1) of this section may remain in effect until whichever of the
following happens first:
(i) FRA approves the railroad or parent company's resubmitted
program; or
(ii) FRA disapproves the railroad or parent company's second
attempt at resubmitting its program.
(7) If FRA disapproves a railroad or parent company's second
attempt at resubmitting its program under this paragraph and the
railroad or parent company continues its rail operations, FRA may
consider such actions to be a failure to implement a program.
(j) Availability of Certification Program Documents. The following
documents will be available on FRA's website (railroads.dot.gov):
(1) A railroad or parent company's originally submitted program, a
resubmission of its program, or a material modification of its program;
(2) Any comments, submitted in accordance with paragraph (e) of
this section, to a railroad or parent company's originally submitted
program, a resubmission of its program, or a material modification of
its program; and
(3) Any approval or disapproval letter issued by FRA in response to
a railroad or parent company's originally submitted program, a
resubmission of its program, or a material modification of its program.
Sec. 246.105 Implementation schedule for certification programs.
(a) Each railroad that submits its signal employee certification
program to FRA in accordance with Sec. 246.103(a), may continue rail
operations while it awaits approval of its program by FRA. However, if
FRA disapproves a railroad's program on two occasions and the railroad
continues rail operations, FRA may consider such actions to be a
failure to implement a program.
(b) Each railroad that submits its signal employee certification
program to FRA in accordance with Sec. 246.103(b), must have its
program approved by FRA prior to installing, implementing, or operating
signal systems subject to this part. If a railroad installs,
implements, or operates a signal system before its program is approved
by FRA, FRA may consider such actions to be a failure to implement a
program.
(c) By March 17, 2025, each railroad shall:
(1) In writing, designate as certified signal employees all persons
authorized by the railroad to perform the duties of a certified signal
employee as of March 17, 2025; and
(2) Issue a certificate that complies with Sec. 246.207 to each
person that it designates.
(d) Between March 17, 2025 and the date FRA approves the railroad's
certification program, each railroad shall:
(1) In writing, designate as a certified signal employee any person
who has been authorized by the railroad to perform the duties of a
certified signal employee between March 17, 2025 and the date FRA
approves the railroad's certification program; and
(2) Issue a certificate that complies with Sec. 246.207 to each
person that it designates.
(e) After March 17, 2025, no railroad shall permit or require a
person to perform service as a certified signal employee unless that
person is a certified signal employee.
(f) No railroad shall permit or require a person, designated as a
certified signal employee under the provisions of paragraph (c) or (d)
of this section, to perform service as a certified signal employee for
more than three years after the date FRA approves the railroad's
certification program unless that person has been tested and evaluated
in accordance with procedures that comply with subpart B of this part.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this section, a
person who has been designated as a certified signal employee under the
provisions of paragraph (c) or (d) of this section and who is eligible
to receive a retirement pension in accordance with the terms of an
applicable agreement or in accordance with the terms of the Railroad
Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. 231) within three years from the date the
certifying railroad's program is approved, may request, in writing,
that a railroad not recertify that person, pursuant to subpart B of
this part, until three years from the date the certifying railroad's
program is approved.
(2) Upon receipt of a written request pursuant to paragraph (f)(1)
of this section, a railroad may wait to recertify the person making the
request until the end of the three-year period after FRA has approved
the railroad's certification program. If a railroad grants any request,
it must grant the request of all eligible persons to every extent
possible.
(3) A person who is subject to recertification under part 240 or
242 of this chapter may not make a request pursuant to paragraph (f)(1)
of this section.
(g) After a railroad's certification program has been approved by
FRA, the railroad shall only certify or recertify a person as a signal
employee if that person has been tested and evaluated in accordance
with procedures that comply with subpart B of this part.
Sec. 246.106 Requirements for certification programs.
(a) Railroad and parent company certification program submission.
(1)(i) A railroad's certification program submission must include a
copy of its
[[Page 44878]]
certification program and a request for FRA approval.
(ii) Any parent company that submits a single certification program
for one or more subsidiary railroads shall provide a list of its
railroads that will utilize the program.
(iii) If a parent company submits a certification program on behalf
of one or more of its subsidiary railroads, the parent company shall
assume responsibility for compliance with this part for all railroads
identified on the list required by paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this
section.
(2) For a railroad or parent company's initial certification
program submission, the request for FRA approval can be in letter or
narrative format and shall include a statement that the railroad or
parent company is seeking approval of its program from FRA.
(3) If a railroad or parent company is making a material
modification to a program that has been previously approved by FRA, the
request for FRA approval can be in letter or narrative format and shall
include a copy of the modified certification program that identifies
all proposed changes from the last FRA-approved version of the program.
(4) A railroad or parent company will receive approval or
disapproval notices from FRA by email.
(5) FRA may electronically store any materials required by this
part.
(b) Organization of the certification program. Each certification
program must be organized to present the required information in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this section. Each section of the
certification program must begin with the name, title, telephone
number, and email address of the person to be contacted concerning the
matters addressed by that section. If a person is identified in a prior
section, it is sufficient to merely repeat the person's name in a
subsequent section.
(1) Section One of the certification program: General information
and elections.
(i) The first section of the certification program must contain the
name of the railroad or parent company submitting the program, the
person to be contacted concerning the request for FRA approval
(including the person's name, title, telephone number, and email
address), and a statement electing either to accept responsibility for
training persons not previously certified as signal employees
(``initial signal employee training'') or to not accept this
responsibility.
(ii) If a railroad or parent company elects to not provide initial
signal employee training, the railroad or parent company shall make the
determinations required by Sec. 246.125. The railroad or parent
company will be limited to certifying signal employees previously
certified by another railroad. A railroad or parent company can change
its election by obtaining FRA approval of a material modification to
its program, in accordance with Sec. 246.103(g).
(iii) If a railroad or parent company elects to accept
responsibility for providing initial signal employee training to
persons not previously certified as signal employees, the railroad or
parent company must submit information explaining how such persons will
be trained but is not required to perform such training. A railroad or
parent company that elects to accept responsibility for providing
initial signal employee training may authorize another railroad or non-
railroad entity to perform the training. A railroad or parent company
that authorizes another railroad or non-railroad entity to perform such
training must provide the name of the training provider in its
certification program but shall remain responsible for ensuring that
the training provider adheres to the training program submitted in the
railroad or parent company's certification program.
(iv) If a railroad or parent company elects to classify its
certified signal employees into more than one occupational category or
subcategory by class, task, location, or other suitable terminology,
the railroad or parent company shall include the following in the first
section of its certification program:
(A) An up-to-date list and description of each occupational
category or subcategory of certified signal employee;
(B) A statement of the roles and responsibilities of each
occupational category or subcategory of certified signal employee; and
(C) A detailed list of the safety-related tasks and subtasks
performed by each occupational category or subcategory of certified
signal employee.
(2) Section Two of the certification program: Training previously
certified signal employees. The second section of the certification
program must contain information about the railroad or parent company's
program for training previously certified signal employees, including
all of the following information:
(i) As provided for in Sec. 246.119(i), each railroad must have a
program for the ongoing education of its certified signal employees to
ensure that they maintain the necessary knowledge concerning applicable
Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders; railroad signal
system safety and operating rules; and applicable standards,
procedures, and instructions for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of signal systems and signal-
related technology deployed on the railroad. The railroad or parent
company must describe in this section of the program how it will ensure
that its certified signal employees maintain the necessary knowledge
and skills to safely discharge their responsibilities so as to comply
with the standard set forth in Sec. 246.119(i).
(ii) The railroad or parent company must provide sufficient detail
in this section of its program to permit effective evaluation of its
training program in terms of the subject matters covered, the frequency
and duration of training sessions (including the interval between
attendance at such training sessions), the training environment
employed (for example, use of classroom, use of computer-based
training, use of film or slide presentations, and use of on-the-job
training), and which aspects of the training program will be voluntary
or mandatory.
(iii) The railroad or parent company must explain how the training
program will address a certified signal employee's loss of retained
knowledge over time.
(iv) The railroad or parent company must explain how the training
program will address changed circumstances over time, such as the
introduction of new or modified signal system equipment and signal-
related technology (including software modifications), to ensure
qualification on the railroad's signal system and signal-related
technology and compliance with the training standard set forth in Sec.
246.119.
(v) The railroad or parent company must explain how qualification
training will be provided, how long a certified signal employee can be
absent from performing work on signal systems and signal-related
technology before needing to be requalified (a time period that cannot
exceed 12 months), and once that threshold is reached, how the signal
employee will acquire the needed qualification.
(vi) The railroad or parent company must explain how it will
administer training for previously certified signal employees who have
had their certification expire. If a railroad or parent company's
certification program fails to specify how it will administer training
for these signal employees, then the railroad or parent company shall
require them to successfully complete
[[Page 44879]]
the railroad or parent company's entire training program.
(3) Section Three of the certification program: Testing and
evaluating previously certified signal employees. The third section of
the certification program must contain information about the railroad
or parent company's program for testing and evaluating previously
certified signal employees, including all of the following information:
(i) The railroad or parent company must describe in this section
how it will ensure that its previously certified signal employees
demonstrate their knowledge concerning the safe discharge of their
responsibilities, so as to comply with the standards set forth in Sec.
246.121.
(ii) The railroad or parent company must describe in this section
how it will have ongoing testing and evaluation to ensure that its
previously certified signal employees have the necessary visual and
hearing acuity as provided for in Sec. Sec. 246.117 and 246.118. This
section must also address how the railroad or parent company will
ensure that its medical examiners have sufficient information
concerning the railroad's operations, as well as the certified signal
employee's safety-related tasks, to effectively form appropriate
conclusions about the ability of a particular individual to safely
perform as a certified signal employee.
(4) Section Four of the certification program: Training, testing,
and evaluating persons not previously certified. Unless a railroad or
parent company has elected to not provide initial signal employee
certification training, the fourth section of the certification program
must contain information about the railroad or parent company's program
for educating, testing, and evaluating persons not previously certified
as signal employees, including all of the following information:
(i) As provided for in Sec. 246.119, a railroad or parent company
that is issuing an initial signal employee certification to a person
must have a program for the training, testing, and evaluation of its
signal employee certification candidates to ensure that they acquire
the necessary knowledge and skills. A railroad or parent company must
describe in this section how it will ensure that its signal employee
certification candidates acquire sufficient knowledge and skills and
demonstrate their knowledge and skills concerning the safe discharge of
their responsibilities. A railroad or parent company must also discuss
its procedures for mentoring candidates for signal employee
certification, in accordance with Sec. 246.124;
(ii) This section of the certification program must contain the
same level of detail about the initial signal employee training program
and the testing and evaluation of previously uncertified signal
employees as is required for previously certified signal employees in
paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section (Sections Two and Three of
the certification program);
(iii) Railroads and parent companies that elect to rely on other
entities to conduct signal employee certification training must explain
how certification candidates will be provided with the required
training on the signal systems and signal-related technology deployed
on the railroad or parent company's territory.
(iv) This section of the certification program must explain how the
railroad or parent company will administer the training of previously
uncertified signal employees with extensive signal experience. If a
railroad or parent company's certification program fails to specify how
it will train these signal employees, then the railroad or parent
company shall require them to successfully complete the railroad or
parent company's entire training program.
(5) Section Five of the certification program: Monitoring
operational performance by certified signal employees. The fifth
section of the certification program must contain information about the
railroad or parent company's program for monitoring the operational
performance of its certified signal employees, including all of the
following information:
(i) Section 246.123 requires that a railroad conduct ongoing
monitoring of its certified signal employees and that each certified
signal employee performing signal work that requires certification have
an annual unannounced compliance test. A railroad or parent company
must describe in this section of its certification program its ongoing
program for monitoring that its certified signal employees demonstrate
their skills concerning the safe discharge of their responsibilities.
(ii) A railroad or parent company must describe the scoring system
used by the railroad during an operational monitoring observation or
unannounced compliance test administered in accordance with the
procedures required under Sec. 246.123.
(6) Section Six of the certification program: Procedures for
routine administration of the signal employee certification program.
The final section of the certification program must contain a summary
of how the railroad or parent company's program and procedures will
implement various aspects of the regulatory provisions in this part
that relate to the routine administration of its certification program
for signal employees. Specifically, this section must address the
procedural aspects of the following provisions and must describe the
manner in which the railroad or parent company will implement its
program so as to comply with all of the following provisions:
(i) Section 246.301, which provides that each railroad must have
procedures for review and comment on adverse information.
(ii) Sections 246.111, 246.113, 246.115, and 246.303, which require
a railroad to have procedures for evaluating data concerning prior
safety conduct as a motor vehicle operator and as a railroad worker.
(iii) Sections 246.109, 246.201, and 246.301, which place a duty on
the railroad to make a series of determinations. When describing how it
will implement its certification program to comply with those sections,
a railroad or parent company must describe: the procedures it will
utilize to ensure that all of the necessary determinations have been
made in a timely fashion; who will be authorized to conclude that a
person will or will not be certified; and how the railroad or parent
company will communicate adverse decisions.
(iv) Sections 246.109, 246.117, 246.118, 246.119, and 246.121,
which place a duty on the railroad to make a series of determinations.
When describing how it will implement its program to comply with these
sections, a railroad or parent company must describe how it will
document the factual basis the railroad or parent company relied on in
making determinations under these sections.
(v) Section 246.124, which require each railroad to have procedures
for mentoring signal employees who have not been certified.
(vi) Section 246.125, which permits reliance on signal employee
certification determinations made by other railroads.
(vii) Sections 246.207 and 246.307, which contain the requirements
for replacing lost certificates and the conduct of certification
revocation proceedings.
Sec. 246.107 Signal service classifications.
(a) A railroad may classify its certified signal employees in
occupational categories or subcategories by class, task, location, or
other suitable
[[Page 44880]]
terminology, in accordance with an FRA-approved certification program
that complies with the requirements of this part.
(b) Any person called to work on a signal system or signal-related
technology on which they have not been certified shall immediately
notify the railroad or their employer that they are not certified to
work on the signal system or signal-related technology.
(c) After FRA has approved a railroad's certification program
pursuant to this part, no railroad shall permit a person to work on a
signal system or signal-related technology on which the person has not
been certified and qualified, unless the person works under the direct
and immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor in
accordance with Sec. 246.124.
Sec. 246.109 Determinations required for certification and
recertification.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad, prior to initially certifying or
recertifying any person as a signal employee, shall, in accordance with
its FRA-approved program, determine in writing that:
(1) The individual meets the prior safety conduct eligibility
requirements of Sec. Sec. 246.111 and 246.113;
(2) The individual meets the eligibility requirements of Sec. Sec.
246.115 and 246.303;
(3) The individual meets the visual and hearing acuity standards of
Sec. Sec. 246.117 and 246.118;
(4) If applicable, the individual has completed a training program
that meets the requirements of Sec. 246.119;
(5) The individual meets the qualification requirements of Sec.
246.120; and
(6) The individual has the necessary knowledge, as demonstrated by
successfully completing testing and practical demonstration that meet
the requirements of Sec. 246.121.
(b) Nothing in this section, Sec. 246.111, or Sec. 246.113 shall
be construed to prevent persons subject to this part from entering into
an agreement that results in a railroad obtaining the information
needed for compliance with this subpart in a different manner than that
prescribed in Sec. 246.111 or Sec. 246.113.
Sec. 246.111 Prior safety conduct as motor vehicle operator.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (e) of this
section, after FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad, prior to certifying or
recertifying any person as a signal employee, shall determine that the
person meets the eligibility requirements of this section involving
prior conduct as a motor vehicle operator.
(b) A railroad shall certify a person as a signal employee for 60
days if the person:
(1) Requested the information required by paragraph (g) of this
section at least 60 days prior to the date of the decision to certify
that person; and
(2) Otherwise meets the eligibility requirements provided in Sec.
246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(c) A railroad shall recertify a person as a signal employee for 60
days from the expiration date of that person's certification if the
person:
(1) Requested the information required by paragraph (g) of this
section at least 60 days prior to the date of the decision to recertify
that person; and
(2) Otherwise meets the eligibility requirements provided in Sec.
246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(d) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, if a
railroad who certified or recertified a person for 60 days pursuant to
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section does not obtain and evaluate the
information requested pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section within
those 60 days, that person will be ineligible to perform as a certified
signal employee until the information can be evaluated by the railroad.
(e) If a person requests the information required pursuant to
paragraph (g) of this section but is unable to obtain it, that person
or the railroad certifying or recertifying that person may petition for
a waiver of the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section in
accordance with the provisions of part 211 of this chapter. A railroad
shall certify or recertify a person during the pendency of the waiver
request if the person otherwise meets the eligibility requirements
provided in Sec. 246.109(a)(1) through (6).
(f) Except for persons designated as signal employees under Sec.
246.105(c) or (d) or for persons covered by paragraph (j) of this
section, each person seeking certification or recertification under
this part shall, no more than one year prior to the date of the
railroad's decision on certification or recertification:
(1) Take the actions required by paragraphs (g) through (i) of this
section to make information concerning their driving record available
to the railroad that is considering such certification or
recertification; and
(2) Take any additional actions, including providing any necessary
consent required by State, Federal, or foreign law to make information
concerning their driving record available to that railroad.
(g) Each person seeking certification or recertification under this
part shall request, in writing, that the chief of each driver licensing
agency identified in paragraph (h) of this section provide a copy of
that agency's available information concerning their driving record to
the railroad that is considering such certification or recertification.
(h) Each person shall request the information required under
paragraph (g) of this section from:
(1) The chief of the driver licensing agency of any jurisdiction,
including a State or foreign country, which last issued that person a
driver's license; and
(2) The chief of the driver licensing agency of any other
jurisdiction, including states or foreign countries, where the person
held a driver's license within the preceding three years.
(i) If advised by the railroad that a driver licensing agency has
informed the railroad that additional information concerning that
person's driving history may exist in the files of a State agency or
foreign country not previously contacted in accordance with this
section, such person shall:
(1) Request in writing that the chief of the driver licensing
agency which compiled the information provide a copy of the available
information to the prospective certifying railroad; and
(2) Take any additional action required by State, Federal, or
foreign law to obtain that additional information.
(j) Any person who has never obtained a motor vehicle driver's
license is not required to comply with the provisions of paragraph (g)
of this section but shall notify the railroad of that fact in
accordance with procedures established by the railroad in its
certification program.
(k) Each certified signal employee or person seeking certification
as a signal employee shall report motor vehicle incidents described in
paragraphs (m)(1) and (2) of this section to the certifying railroad
within 48 hours of being convicted for, or completed State action to
cancel, revoke, suspend, or deny a motor vehicle driver's license for,
such violations. For purposes of this paragraph (k) and paragraph (m)
of this section, ``State action'' means action of the jurisdiction that
has issued the motor vehicle driver's license, including a foreign
country. For purposes of signal employee certification, no railroad
shall require reporting earlier than 48 hours after the conviction, or
completed State action to cancel, revoke, suspend, or deny a motor
vehicle driver's license.
[[Page 44881]]
(l) When evaluating a person's motor vehicle driving record, a
railroad shall not consider information concerning motor vehicle
driving incidents that occurred:
(1) Prior to July 22, 2024; or
(2) More than three years before the date of the railroad's
certification decision; or
(3) At a time other than that specifically provided for in Sec.
246.111, Sec. 246.113, Sec. 246.115, or Sec. 246.303.
(m) When evaluating a person's motor vehicle driving record, a
railroad shall only consider information concerning the following types
of motor vehicle incidents:
(1) A conviction for, or completed State action to cancel, revoke,
suspend, or deny a motor vehicle driver's license for operating a motor
vehicle while under the influence of, or impaired by, alcohol or a
controlled substance; or
(2) A conviction for, or completed State action to cancel, revoke,
suspend, or deny a motor vehicle driver's license for refusal to
undergo such testing as is required by State or foreign law when a law
enforcement official seeks to determine whether a person is operating a
vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance.
(n) If such an incident, described in paragraph (m) of this
section, is identified:
(1) The railroad shall provide the data to the railroad's Drug and
Alcohol Counselor (DAC), together with any information concerning the
person's railroad service record, and shall refer the person for
evaluation to determine if the person has an active substance abuse
disorder.
(2) The person shall cooperate in the evaluation and shall provide
any requested records of prior counseling or treatment for review
exclusively by the DAC in the context of such evaluation.
(3) If the person is evaluated as not currently affected by an
active substance abuse disorder, the subject data shall not be
considered further with respect to certification. However, the railroad
shall, on recommendation of the DAC, condition certification upon
participation in any needed aftercare and/or follow-up testing for
alcohol or drugs deemed necessary by the DAC consistent with the
technical standards specified in 49 CFR part 219, subpart H, as well as
49 CFR part 40.
(4) If the person is evaluated as currently affected by an active
substance abuse disorder, the provisions of Sec. 246.115(c) will
apply.
(5) If the person fails to comply with the requirements of
paragraph (n)(2) of this section, the person shall be ineligible to
perform as a certified signal employee until such time as the person
complies with the requirements.
(o) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.113 Prior safety conduct with other railroads.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad shall determine, prior to issuing
any person a signal employee certificate, that the certification
candidate meets the eligibility requirements of this section.
(b) If the certification candidate has not been employed or
certified by any other railroad in the previous five years, they do not
have to submit a request in accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section, but they must notify the railroad of this fact in accordance
with procedures established by the railroad in its certification
program.
(c) Except as provided for in paragraph (b) of this section, each
person seeking certification or recertification under this part shall
submit a written request to each railroad that employed or certified
the person within the previous five years to provide the following
information to the railroad that is considering whether to certify or
recertify that person as a signal employee:
(1) Information about that person's compliance with Sec. 246.111
within the three years preceding the date of the request;
(2) Information about that person's compliance with Sec. 246.115
within the five years preceding the date of the request; and
(3) Information about that person's compliance with Sec. 246.303
within the five years preceding the date of the request.
(d) Each person submitting a written request required by paragraph
(c) of this section shall:
(1) Submit the request no more than one year before the date of the
railroad's decision on certification or recertification; and
(2) Take any additional actions, including providing any necessary
consent required by State or Federal law to make information concerning
their service record available to the railroad.
(e) Within 30 days after receipt of a written request that complies
with paragraph (c) of this section, a railroad shall provide the
information requested to the railroad designated in the written
request.
(f) If a railroad is unable to provide the information requested
within 30 days after receipt of a written request that complies with
paragraph (c) of this section, the railroad shall provide an
explanation, in writing, of why it cannot provide the information
within the requested time frame. If the railroad will ultimately be
able to provide the requested information, the explanation shall state
approximately how much more time the railroad needs to supply the
requested information. If the railroad will not be able to provide the
requested information, the railroad shall provide an adequate
explanation for why it cannot provide this information. Copies of this
explanation shall be provided to the railroad designated in the written
request and to the person who submitted the written request for
information.
(g) When evaluating a person's prior safety conduct with a
different railroad, a railroad shall not consider information
concerning prior safety conduct that occurred:
(1) Prior to July 22, 2024; or
(2) At a time other than that specifically provided for in Sec.
246.111, Sec. 246.113, Sec. 246.115, or Sec. 246.303.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program that
complies with the requirements of this section. When any person
(including but not limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor,
official, or agent of a railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or
lessee of railroad equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of
such owner, manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program that complies with
the requirements of this subject, that person shall be considered to
have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.115 Substance abuse disorders and alcohol drug rules
compliance.
(a) Eligibility determination. After FRA has approved a railroad's
signal employee certification program, the railroad shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal employee certificate, that the
person meets the eligibility requirements of this section.
(b) Documentation. In order to make the determination required
under paragraph (c) of this section, a railroad
[[Page 44882]]
shall have on file documents pertinent to that determination, including
a written document from its DAC which states their professional opinion
that the person has been evaluated as not currently affected by a
substance abuse disorder or that the person has been evaluated as
affected by an active substance abuse disorder.
(c) Fitness requirement. (1) A person who has an active substance
abuse disorder shall be denied certification or recertification as a
signal employee.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, a
certified signal employee who is determined to have an active substance
abuse disorder shall be ineligible to hold certification. Consistent
with other provisions of this part, certification may be reinstated as
provided in paragraph (e) of this section.
(3) In the case of a current employee of a railroad evaluated as
having an active substance abuse disorder (including a person
identified under the procedures of Sec. 246.111), the employee may, if
otherwise eligible, voluntarily self-refer for substance abuse
counseling or treatment under the policy required by Sec.
219.1001(b)(1) of this chapter; and the railroad shall then treat the
substance abuse evaluation as confidential except with respect to
ineligibility for certification.
(d) Prior alcohol/drug conduct; Federal rule compliance. (1) In
determining whether a person may be or remain certified as a signal
employee, a railroad shall consider conduct described in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section that occurred within a period of five
consecutive years prior to the review. A review of certification shall
be initiated promptly upon the occurrence and documentation of any
incident of conduct described in this paragraph (d).
(2) A railroad shall consider any violation of Sec. 219.101 or
Sec. 219.102 of this chapter and any refusal to provide a breath or
body fluid sample for testing under the requirements of part 219 of
this chapter when instructed to do so by a railroad representative.
(3) A period of ineligibility described in this section shall
begin:
(i) For a person not currently certified, on the date of the
railroad's written determination that the most recent incident has
occurred; or
(ii) For a person currently certified, on the date of the
railroad's notification to the person that recertification has been
denied or certification has been suspended.
(4) The period of ineligibility described in this section shall be
determined in accordance with the following standards:
(i) In the case of one violation of Sec. 219.102 of this chapter,
the person shall be ineligible to hold a certificate during evaluation
and any required primary treatment as described in paragraph (e) of
this section. In the case of two violations of Sec. 219.102 of this
chapter, the person shall be ineligible to hold a certificate for a
period of two years. In the case of more than two such violations, the
person shall be ineligible to hold a certificate for a period of five
years.
(ii) In the case of one violation of Sec. 219.102 of this chapter
and one violation of Sec. 219.101 of this chapter, the person shall be
ineligible to hold a certificate for a period of three years.
(iii) In the case of one violation of Sec. 219.101 of this
chapter, the person shall be ineligible to hold a certificate for a
period of nine months (unless identification of the violation was
through a qualifying referral program described in Sec. 219.1001 of
this chapter and the signal employee waives investigation, in which
case the certificate shall be deemed suspended during evaluation and
any required primary treatment as described in paragraph (e) of this
section). In the case of two or more violations of Sec. 219.101 of
this chapter, the person shall be ineligible to hold a certificate for
a period of five years.
(iv) If a person refuses to provide a breath or body fluid sample
for testing under the requirements of part 219 of this chapter when
instructed to do so by a railroad representative, the person shall be
ineligible to hold a certificate for a period of nine months.
(e) Future eligibility to hold certificate following alcohol/drug
violation. The following requirements apply to a person who has been
denied certification or who has had their certification suspended or
revoked as a result of conduct described in paragraph (d) of this
section:
(1) The person shall not be eligible for grant or reinstatement of
the certificate unless and until the person has:
(i) Been evaluated by a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) to
determine if the person currently has an active substance abuse
disorder;
(ii) Successfully completed any program of counseling or treatment
determined to be necessary by the SAP prior to return to service; and
(iii) In accordance with the testing procedures of 49 CFR part 219,
subpart H, has had a return-to-duty alcohol test with an alcohol
concentration of less than .02 and a return-to-duty body fluid sample
that tested negative for controlled substances.
(2) A certified signal employee placed in service or returned to
service under the conditions described in paragraph (e)(1) of this
section shall continue in any program of counseling or treatment deemed
necessary by the SAP and shall be subject to a reasonable program of
follow-up alcohol and drug testing without prior notice for a period of
not more than five years following return to service. Follow-up tests
shall include not fewer than six alcohol tests and six drug tests
during the first year following return to service.
(3) Return-to-duty and follow-up alcohol and drug tests shall be
performed consistent with the requirements of 49 CFR part 219, subpart
H.
(4) This paragraph (e) does not create an entitlement to utilize
the services of a railroad SAP, to be afforded leave from employment
for counseling or treatment, or to employment as a signal employee. Nor
does it restrict any discretion available to the railroad to take
disciplinary action based on conduct described herein.
(f) Confidentiality protected. Nothing in this part shall affect
the responsibility of the railroad under Sec. 219.1003(f) of this
chapter to treat qualified referrals for substance abuse counseling and
treatment as confidential; and the certification status of a signal
employee who is successfully assisted under the procedures of that
section shall not be adversely affected. However, the railroad shall
include in its referral policy a provision that, at least with respect
to a certified signal employee or a candidate for certification, the
policy of confidentiality is waived (to the extent that the railroad
shall receive from the SAP or DAC official notice of the substance
abuse disorder and shall suspend or revoke the certification, as
appropriate) if the person at any time refuses to cooperate in a
recommended course of counseling or treatment.
(g) Complying with certification program. Each railroad shall adopt
and comply with a program meeting the requirements of this section.
When any person (including but not limited to a railroad; any manager,
supervisor, official, or agent of a railroad; any owner, manufacturer,
lessor, or lessee of railroad equipment, track, or facilities; any
employee of such owner, manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent
contractor or subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program
which complies with the requirements of this section, that person shall
be considered to have violated the requirements of this section.
[[Page 44883]]
Sec. 246.117 Visual acuity.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad shall determine, prior to issuing
any person a signal employee certificate, that the person meets the
standards for visual acuity prescribed in this section and appendix B
to this part.
(b) Any examination required under this section shall be performed
by or under the supervision of a medical examiner or a licensed
physician's assistant.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each
certified signal employee shall have visual acuity that meets or
exceeds the following thresholds:
(1) For distant viewing, either:
(i) Distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye
without corrective lenses; or
(ii) Distant visual acuity separately corrected to at least 20/40
(Snellen) with corrective lenses and distant binocular acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses;
(2) A field of vision of at least 70 degrees in the horizontal
meridian in each eye; and
(3) The ability to recognize and distinguish between the colors of
railroad signals as demonstrated by successfully completing one of the
tests in appendix B to this part.
(d) A person not meeting the thresholds in paragraph (c) of this
section shall, upon request of the certification candidate, be subject
to further medical evaluation by a railroad's medical examiner to
determine that person's ability to safely perform as a certified signal
employee. In such cases, the following procedures will apply:
(1) In accordance with the guidance prescribed in appendix B to
this part, a person is entitled to:
(i) One retest without making any showing; and
(ii) An additional retest if the person provides evidence that
circumstances have changed since the last test to the extent that the
person may now be able to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(2) The railroad shall provide its medical examiner with a copy of
this part, including all appendices.
(3) If, after consultation with a railroad officer, the medical
examiner concludes that, despite not meeting the threshold(s) in
paragraph (c) of this section, the person has the ability to safely
perform as a certified signal employee, the railroad may conclude that
the person satisfies the visual acuity requirements of this section to
be a certified signal employee. Such certification will be conditioned
on any special restrictions the medical examiner determines in writing
to be necessary.
(e) To make the determination required under paragraph (a) of this
section, a railroad shall have on file the following for each
certification candidate:
(1) A medical examiner's certificate that the candidate has been
medically examined and either does or does not meet the visual acuity
standards prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) If necessary under paragraph (d) of this section, a medical
examiner's written professional opinion which states the basis for
their determination that:
(i) The candidate can be certified, under certain conditions if
necessary, even though the candidate does not meet the visual acuity
standards prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section; or
(ii) The candidate's visual acuity prevents the candidate from
being able to safely perform as a certified signal employee.
(f) If the examination required under this section shows that the
person needs corrective lenses to meet the standards for visual acuity
prescribed in this section and appendix B to this part, that person
shall use corrective lenses at all times while performing as a
certified signal employee unless the railroad's medical examiner
subsequently determines in writing that the person can safely perform
as a certified signal employee without corrective lenses.
(g) When a certified signal employee becomes aware that their
vision has deteriorated, they shall notify the railroad's medical
department or other appropriate railroad official of the deterioration.
Such notification must occur prior to performing any subsequent service
as a certified signal employee. The individual cannot return to service
as a certified signal employee until they are reexamined and determined
by the railroad's medical examiner to satisfy the visual acuity
standards prescribed in this section and appendix B to this part.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.118 Hearing acuity.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad shall determine, prior to issuing
any person a signal employee certificate, that the person meets the
standards for hearing acuity prescribed in this section and appendix B
to this part.
(b) Any examination required under this section shall be performed
by or under the supervision of a medical examiner or a licensed
physician's assistant.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each
certified signal employee shall have hearing acuity that meets or
exceeds the following thresholds with or without use of a hearing aid:
The person does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear
greater than 40 decibels at 500 hertz (Hz), 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz. The
hearing test or audiogram used to show a person's hearing acuity shall
meet the requirements of one of the following:
(1) As required in 29 CFR 1910.95(h) (Occupational Safety and
Health Administration);
(2) As required in Sec. 227.111 of this chapter; or
(3) Conducted using an audiometer that meets the specifications of,
and is maintained and used in accordance with, a formal industry
standard such as American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S3.6,
``Specifications for Audiometers.''
(d) A person not meeting the thresholds in paragraph (c) of this
section shall, upon request of the certification candidate, be subject
to further medical evaluation by a railroad's medical examiner to
determine that person's ability to safely perform as a certified signal
employee. In such cases, the following procedures will apply:
(1) In accordance with the guidance prescribed in appendix B to
this part, a person is entitled to:
(i) One retest without making any showing; and
(ii) An additional retest if the person provides evidence that
circumstances have changed since the last test to the extent that the
person may now be able to safely perform as a certified signal
employee.
(2) The railroad shall provide its medical examiner with a copy of
this part, including all appendices.
[[Page 44884]]
(3) If, after consultation with a railroad officer, the medical
examiner concludes that, despite not meeting the threshold(s) in
paragraph (c) of this section, the person has the ability to safely
perform as a certified signal employee, the railroad may conclude that
the person satisfies the hearing acuity requirements of this section to
be a certified signal employee. Such certification will be conditioned
on any special restrictions the medical examiner determines in writing
to be necessary.
(e) To make the determination required under paragraph (a) of this
section, a railroad shall have on file the following for each
certification candidate:
(1) A medical examiner's certificate that the candidate has been
medically examined and either does or does not meet the hearing acuity
standards prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) If necessary under paragraph (d) of this section, a medical
examiner's written professional opinion which states the basis for
their determination that:
(i) The candidate can be certified, under certain conditions if
necessary, even though the candidate does not meet the hearing acuity
standards prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section; or
(ii) The candidate's hearing acuity prevents the candidate from
being able to safely perform as a certified signal employee.
(f) If the examination required under this section shows that the
person needs a hearing aid to meet the standards for hearing acuity
prescribed in this section and appendix B to this part, that person
shall use a hearing aid at all times while performing as a certified
signal employee unless the railroad's medical examiner subsequently
determines in writing that the person can safely perform as a certified
signal employee without a hearing aid.
(g) When a certified signal employee becomes aware that their
hearing has deteriorated, they shall notify the railroad's medical
department or other appropriate railroad official of the deterioration.
Such notification must occur prior to performing any subsequent service
as a certified signal employee. The person cannot return to service as
a certified signal employee until they are reexamined and determined by
the railroad's medical examiner to satisfy the hearing acuity standards
prescribed in this section and appendix B to this part.
(h) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.119 Training requirements.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad or parent company's
certification program, the railroad or parent company shall determine,
prior to issuing any person a signal employee certificate, that the
person has successfully completed training, in accordance with the
requirements of this section.
(b) A railroad or parent company that elects to accept
responsibility to provide initial signal employee training to persons
who have not been previously certified as signal employees shall state
in its certification program whether it will conduct the training or
authorize another railroad or non-railroad entity to provide the
training.
(c) A railroad or parent company that elects to accept
responsibility to provide initial signal employee training to persons
not previously certified as signal employees shall submit a training
program which, at a minimum, includes the following:
(1) An explanation of how training will be structured, developed,
and delivered, including an appropriate combination of classroom,
simulator, computer-based, correspondence, practical demonstration, on-
the-job training, or other formal training. The curriculum shall be
designed to impart knowledge of, and ability to comply with, applicable
Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, as well as any
relevant railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those
Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders. The training
shall document a person's knowledge of, and ability to comply with,
Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, as well as
railroad rules and procedures.
(2) An on-the-job training component which shall include the
following:
(i) A syllabus describing content, required tasks, and related
steps the person learning the job shall be able to perform within a
specified timeframe. If the railroad or parent company has elected to
classify its certified signal employees into more than one occupational
category or subcategory, this syllabus shall include all safety-related
tasks and subtasks performed by each category or subcategory of
certified signal employee;
(ii) A statement of the conditions (e.g., prerequisites, tools,
equipment, documentation, briefings, demonstrations, and practice)
necessary for learning transfer; and
(iii) A statement of the standards by which proficiency is measured
through a combination of task/step accuracy, completeness, and
repetition.
(3) A description of the processes to review and modify its
training program when new safety-related railroad laws, regulations,
orders, procedures, software, or new signal system equipment or signal-
related technology are introduced into the workplace, including how it
is determined if additional or refresher training is needed.
(d) Prior to beginning the on-the-job exercises discussed in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section, each railroad or parent company shall
make any relevant information or materials, such as signal standards,
test procedures, operating rules, safety rules, or other rules,
available for referencing by certification candidates.
(e) Prior to a person not previously certified as a signal employee
being certified as a signal employee, a railroad or parent company
shall require the person to:
(1) Successfully complete the initial signal employee training
program developed pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section and any
associated examinations covering the skills and knowledge the person
will need to perform the tasks necessary to be a certified signal
employee;
(2)(i) Successfully complete on-the-job training and demonstrate
on-the-job proficiency by successfully completing the tasks and using
the signal system equipment and signal-related technology necessary to
be a certified signal employee on the certifying railroad. A
certification candidate may only perform such tasks under the direct
and immediate supervision of a mentor, signal instructor, or qualified
instructor. A qualified instructor must confirm that on-the-job
proficiency has been demonstrated.
(ii) If the railroad elects to classify its certified signal
employees into more than one occupational category or subcategory, the
person must demonstrate on-the-job proficiency by successfully
completing the tasks applicable to that occupational category or
subcategory in which the person is seeking to be certified. A qualified
[[Page 44885]]
instructor must confirm that on-the-job proficiency has been
demonstrated; and
(3) Demonstrate qualification on the signal system equipment and
signal-related technology deployed on the railroad's territory on which
the person is expected to work. A qualified instructor must confirm
that qualification has been demonstrated.
(f) In making the determination required under paragraph (a) of
this section, a railroad shall have written documentation showing that:
(1) The person completed an initial signal employee training
program that complies with paragraph (c) of this section (if the person
has not been previously certified as a signal employee); and
(2) The person demonstrated their knowledge and on-the-job
proficiency by achieving a passing grade under the testing and
evaluation procedures of the training program; and
(3) The person achieved a passing score on the qualification exam
on the signal system equipment and signal-related technology on which
the person will work as a certified signal employee.
(g) The certification program, required under this part and
submitted in accordance with the procedures and requirements described
in Sec. 246.106, shall include:
(1) How comprehensive training will be provided on the
installation, operation, testing, maintenance, and repair of the signal
systems and signal-related technology deployed on the railroad's
territory; and
(2) How the railroad will ensure that each certified signal
employee is qualified on the signal system equipment and signal-related
technology (whether existing or new) deployed on the railroad's
territory before the certified signal employee is required to install,
operate, test, maintain, or repair that signal system equipment or
signal-related technology; and
(3) The maximum time period that a certified signal employee can be
absent from performing work on signal system equipment or signal-
related technology that requires certification pursuant to this part
before requalification will be required. In accordance with Sec.
246.120(c), this time period cannot exceed 12 months.
(h) If ownership of a railroad is being transferred from one
company to another, the signal employees of the acquiring company may
receive familiarization training from the selling company prior to the
acquiring railroad commencing operation.
(i) A railroad shall provide for the continuing education of its
certified signal employees to ensure that each certified signal
employee maintains the necessary knowledge concerning:
(1) Railroad safety and operating rules;
(2) Compliance with all applicable Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders; and
(3) Compliance with all applicable standards, procedures, and
instructions for the installation, operation, testing, maintenance,
troubleshooting, and repair of new and existing signal systems and new
and existing signal-related technology deployed on the railroad.
(j) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.120 Requirements for qualification.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's certification program, a
railroad shall not permit or require a person to serve as a signal
employee, as defined in Sec. 246.7, unless that railroad determines
that:
(1) The person is a certified signal employee; and
(2) The person either:
(i) Is qualified, as defined in Sec. 246.7, on the signal system
equipment and signal-related technology (whether existing or new) and
therefore may reasonably be expected to be proficient on all safety
related tasks the person is assigned to perform; or
(ii) Is working under the direct and immediate supervision of a
mentor or qualified instructor.
(b) If a person is called to perform work on signal system
equipment or signal-related technology that they are not qualified on,
the person must immediately notify the railroad that they are not
qualified on the signal system equipment or signal-related technology.
(c) A person shall no longer be considered qualified on signal
system equipment or signal-related technology if they have not
performed work that requires certification pursuant to this part on
signal system equipment or signal-related technology in the previous 12
months.
(d) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.121 Knowledge testing.
(a) After FRA has approved a railroad's signal employee
certification program, the railroad shall determine, prior to issuing
any person a signal employee certificate and in accordance with the
requirements of this section, that the person has demonstrated
sufficient knowledge of the railroad's signal standards, test
procedures, and instructions for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of the railroad's signal
system equipment and signal-related technology.
(b) To make the knowledge determination required by paragraph (a)
of this section, a railroad shall have procedures for testing a person
being evaluated for certification as a signal employee that:
(1) Are designed to examine a person's knowledge of:
(i) All applicable Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders governing signal systems and signal-related technology;
(ii) All applicable railroad safety and operating rules; and
(iii) All applicable railroad standards, procedures, and
instructions for the installation, operation, testing, maintenance,
troubleshooting, and repair of the railroad's signal systems and
signal-related technology, including:
(A) The railroad's rules and standards for disabling and removing
signal systems from service; and
(B) The railroad's rules and standards for placing signal systems
back in service;
(2) Are objective in nature;
(3) Include a practical demonstration component;
(4) Are in written or electronic form;
(5) Are sufficient to accurately measure the person's knowledge of
the subjects listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and
(6) Allow for testing conducted with reference to books and other
written
[[Page 44886]]
materials, as addressed in the railroad's certification program.
(c) The railroad shall provide the certification candidate with an
opportunity to consult with a mentor, signal instructor or qualified
instructor to explain one or more test questions.
(d) If a person fails the test, no railroad shall permit or require
that person to work as a certified signal employee prior to that
person's achieving a passing score during a reexamination of the test.
(e) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.123 Monitoring operational performance.
(a) Each railroad's certification program shall describe how it
will monitor the operational performance of its certified signal
employees by including procedures for:
(1) Giving each certified signal employee at least one unannounced
compliance test each calendar year in one of the following areas: the
railroad's signal system standards and test procedures, or Federal
regulations concerning signal systems, except as provided for in
paragraph (d) of this section;
(2) Giving unannounced compliance tests to certified signal
employees who return to signal work that requires certification
pursuant to this part, as described in paragraph (d) of this section;
(3) What actions the railroad will take if it finds deficiencies in
a certified signal employee's performance during an unannounced
compliance test; and
(4) Monitoring the performance of signal-related tasks.
(b) An unannounced compliance test shall:
(1) Be performed by a certified signal employee; and
(2) Be given to each certified signal employee at least once each
calendar year, except as provided for in paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) If the railroad's certification program classifies signal
employees pursuant to Sec. 246.107, the unannounced compliance test
shall be within scope of the certified signal employee's
classification.
(d) A certified signal employee who is not performing signal work
that requires certification pursuant to this part does not need to be
given an unannounced compliance test. However, when the certified
signal employee returns to signal work that requires certification
pursuant to this part, the railroad shall:
(1) Give the certified signal employee an unannounced compliance
test within 30 days of their return to signal work that requires
certification; and
(2) Retain a written record that includes the following
information:
(i) The date the certified signal employee stopped performing work
that required certification pursuant to this part;
(ii) The date the certified signal employee returned to signal work
that required certification pursuant to this part; and
(iii) The date and the result of the unannounced compliance test
was performed following the signal employee's return to signal work
requiring certification.
(e) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.124 Mentoring.
(a) Each railroad's certification program shall include procedures
for the mentoring of persons who have not been certified by the
railroad. Each railroad shall identify potential scenarios in which
mentoring of non-certified persons will be provided.
(b) After FRA has approved a railroad's certification program
pursuant to this part, the railroad shall not permit or require any
person to perform work on a signal system or signal-related technology
on its territory that requires certification unless the railroad first
determines that:
(1) The person is a certified signal employee who has been
certified by the railroad and qualified on all applicable signal system
equipment and signal-related technology deployed on the railroad; or
(2) The person is working under the direct and immediate
supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor.
(c) If the railroad elects to classify its certified signal
employees into more than one occupational category or subcategory
pursuant to Sec. 246.107:
(1) The railroad shall address in its certification program how
mentoring will be provided for certified signal employees who move into
a different occupational category or subcategory of certified signal
service; and
(2) Mentors shall be certified within the occupational category or
subcategory of the task being performed by the person or persons
working under their direct and immediate supervision.
(d) If allowed by the railroad's certification program, any work on
a signal system performed by a person whose signal employee
certification has been revoked shall be performed under the direct and
immediate supervision of a mentor or qualified instructor.
(e) Each railroad's certification program shall address how
mentoring will be provided to ensure that mentors are located in close
proximity to each person or persons they are mentoring to allow the
mentor to take immediate action to prevent a violation of Sec.
246.303(e) from occurring. Each railroad's certification program shall
also address how mentors will be held accountable for the work
performed by persons working under the mentor's direct and immediate
supervision. Any records of tests performed by persons working under
the direct and immediate supervision of a mentor shall reflect the
mentor's name.
(f) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including but not
limited to a railroad; any manager, supervisor, official, or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor or
subcontractor) violates any requirement of a program which complies
with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered
to have violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.125 Certification determinations made by other railroads.
(a) A railroad or parent company that is considering certification
of a person as a signal employee (``certifying railroad or parent
company'') may rely on certain determinations made by another railroad
or parent company concerning that person's certification.
[[Page 44887]]
(b) A certifying railroad or parent company that relies on the
certification determinations made by another railroad shall be
responsible for making the following determinations:
(1) The person's signal employee certification is still valid under
Sec. Sec. 246.201 and 246.307;
(2) The person has been qualified on the signal system equipment
and signal-related technology deployed on the railroad territory on
which the person is expected to work in accordance with Sec. 246.119;
and
(3) The person has demonstrated the necessary knowledge concerning
the certifying railroad or parent company's signal standards, test
procedures, and instructions for the installation, operation, testing,
maintenance, troubleshooting, and repair of the certifying railroad or
parent company's signal system equipment and signal-related technology
in accordance with Sec. 246.121.
Subpart C--Administration of the Certification Program
Sec. 246.201 Time limitations for certification.
(a) After FRA approves a railroad's signal employee certification
program, that railroad shall not certify or recertify a person as a
signal employee if the railroad is making:
(1) A determination concerning eligibility under Sec. Sec.
246.111, 246.113, 246.115, and 246.303 and the eligibility data being
relied on was furnished more than one year before the date of the
railroad's certification decision;
(2) A determination concerning vision or hearing acuity and the
medical examination being relied on was conducted more than 450 days
before the date of the railroad's certification decision; or
(3) A determination concerning demonstrated knowledge and the
knowledge examination being relied on was conducted more than one year
before the date of the railroad's certification decision, or more than
two years before the date of the railroad's certification decision if
the railroad administers knowledge testing pursuant to Sec. 246.121 at
intervals that do not exceed two years.
(b) The time limitations of paragraph (a) of this section do not
apply to a railroad that is making a certification decision in reliance
on determinations made by another railroad in accordance with Sec.
246.125.
(c) Except if a person is designated as a certified signal employee
under Sec. 246.105(c) or (d), no railroad shall certify a person as a
signal employee for an interval of more than three years.
(d) Each railroad shall issue each certified signal employee a
certificate that complies with Sec. 246.207 no later than 30 days from
the date of its decision to certify or recertify that person.
Sec. 246.203 Retaining information supporting determinations.
(a) After FRA approves a railroad's signal employee certification
program, any time the railroad issues, denies, or revokes a certificate
after making the determinations required under Sec. 246.109, it shall
maintain a record for each certified signal employee and certification
candidate. Each record shall contain the information, described in
paragraph (b) of this section, that the railroad relied on in making
the determinations required under Sec. 246.109.
(b) A railroad shall retain the following information:
(1) Relevant data from the railroad's records concerning the
person's prior safety conduct and eligibility;
(2) Relevant data furnished by another railroad;
(3) Relevant data furnished by a governmental agency concerning the
person's motor vehicle driving record;
(4) Relevant data furnished by the person seeking certification
concerning their eligibility;
(5) The relevant test results data concerning visual and hearing
acuity;
(6) If applicable, the relevant data concerning the professional
opinion of the railroad's medical examiner on the adequacy of the
person's visual or hearing acuity;
(7) Relevant data from the railroad's records concerning the
person's success or failure on knowledge test(s) under Sec. 246.121;
(8) A sample copy of the written knowledge test or tests
administered; and
(9) The relevant data from the railroad's records concerning the
person's success or failure on unannounced tests the railroad performed
to monitor the person's performance in accordance with Sec. 246.123.
(c) If a railroad is relying on successful completion of a training
program conducted by another entity, the relying railroad shall
maintain a record for each certification candidate that contains the
relevant data furnished by the training entity concerning the person's
demonstration of knowledge relied on by the railroad in making its
determinations.
(d) If a railroad is relying on a certification decision initially
made by another railroad, the relying railroad shall maintain a record
for each certification candidate that contains the relevant data
furnished by the other railroad which it relied on in making its
determinations.
(e) All records required under this section shall be retained by
the railroad for a period of six years from the date of the
certification, recertification, denial, or revocation decision and
shall, upon request, be made available to FRA representatives in a
timely manner.
(f) It shall be unlawful for any railroad to knowingly or any
individual to willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or participate in the making of a false
entry on the record(s) required by this section; or
(2) Otherwise falsify such records through material misstatement,
omission, or mutilation.
(g) Nothing in this section precludes a railroad from maintaining
the information required to be retained under this section in an
electronic format provided that:
(1) The railroad maintains an information technology security
program adequate to ensure the integrity of the electronic data storage
system, including the prevention of unauthorized access to the program
logic or individual records;
(2) The program and data storage system must be protected by a
security system that utilizes an employee identification number and
password, or a comparable method, to establish appropriate levels of
program access meeting all of the following standards:
(i) No two individuals have the same electronic identity; and
(ii) A record cannot be deleted or altered by any individual after
the record is certified by the employee who created the record;
(3) Any amendment to a record is either:
(i) Electronically stored apart from the record that it amends; or
(ii) Electronically attached to the record as information without
changing the original record;
(4) Each amendment to a record uniquely identifies the person
making the amendment; and
(5) The system employed by the railroad for data storage permits
reasonable access and retrieval of the information which can be easily
produced in an electronic or printed format that can be:
(i) Provided to FRA representatives in a timely manner; and
(ii) Authenticated by a designated representative of the railroad
as a true and accurate copy of the railroad's records if requested to
do so by an FRA representative.
[[Page 44888]]
Sec. 246.205 List of certified signal employees and recordkeeping.
(a) After a railroad's certification program has received its
initial approval from FRA, pursuant to Sec. 246.103(f)(1), the
railroad must maintain a list of each person who is currently certified
as a signal employee by the railroad. The list must include the date of
the railroad's certification decision and the date the person's signal
employee certification expires. If a railroad classifies its certified
signal employees into occupational categories or subcategories by
class, task, location, or other suitable terminology, the list must
indicate the occupational categories and subcategories in which each
certified signal employee is certified to perform service.
(b) The list shall:
(1) Be updated at least annually;
(2) Be made available, upon request, to FRA representatives in a
timely manner; and
(3) Be available either:
(i) In electronic format pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section;
or
(ii) At the divisional or regional headquarters of the railroad.
(c) If a railroad elects to maintain its list in an electronic
format, it must:
(1) Maintain an information technology security program adequate to
ensure the integrity of the electronic data storage system, including
the prevention of unauthorized access to the program logic or the list;
(2) Have its program and data storage system protected by a
security system that utilizes an employee identification number and
password, or a comparable method, to establish appropriate levels of
program access meeting all of the following standards:
(i) No two individuals have the same electronic identity; and
(ii) An entry on the list cannot be deleted or altered by any
individual after the entry is certified by the employee who created the
entry;
(3) Have any amendment to the list either:
(i) Electronically stored apart from the entry on the list that it
amends; or
(ii) Electronically attached to the entry on the list as
information without changing the original entry;
(4) Ensure that each amendment to the list uniquely identifies the
person making the amendment;
(5) Ensure that the system employed for data storage permits
reasonable access and retrieval of the information which can be easily
produced in an electronic or printed format that can be:
(i) Provided to FRA representatives within a timely manner; and
(ii) Authenticated by a designated representative of the railroad
as a true and accurate copy of the railroad's records if requested to
do so by an FRA representative.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any railroad to knowingly or any
individual to willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or participate in the making of a false
entry on the list required by this section; or
(2) Otherwise falsify such list through material misstatement,
omission, or mutilation.
Sec. 246.207 Certificate requirements.
(a) Each person who becomes a certified signal employee in
accordance with this part shall be issued a paper or electronic
certificate that:
(1)(i) Identifies the railroad issuing the certificate; or
(ii) Identifies the parent company issuing the certificate, if a
parent company submits a certification program for one or more of its
subsidiary railroads. The certificate issued by the parent company
shall also list each subsidiary railroad on which the person is
certified to work as a signal employee;
(2) Indicates it is a signal employee certificate and, if
applicable, lists all signal employee occupational categories or
subcategories developed pursuant to Sec. 246.107 in which the person
is certified;
(3) Provides the following information about the certified signal
employee:
(i) Name;
(ii) Employee identification number; and
(iii) Either a physical description or photograph of the person;
(4) Identifies any conditions or limitations, including conditions
to ameliorate vision or hearing acuity deficiencies, that restrict,
limit, or alter the person's abilities to work as a certified signal
employee;
(5) Shows the effective date of the certification;
(6) Shows the expiration date of the certification unless the
certificate was issued pursuant to Sec. 246.105(c) or (d);
(7) Has been signed by an individual designated in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section; and
(8) Is electronic or of sufficiently small size to permit being
carried in an ordinary pocket wallet.
(b) Each railroad or parent company shall designate in writing any
person it authorizes to sign the certificates described in this
section. The designation shall identify such persons by name or job
title.
(c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit any railroad or parent
company from including additional information on the certificate or
supplementing the certificate through other documents.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any railroad or parent company to
knowingly or any individual to willfully:
(1) Make, cause to be made, or participate in the making of a false
entry on a certificate; or
(2) Otherwise falsify a certificate through material misstatement,
omission, or mutilation.
(e) Except as provided for in paragraph (g) of this section, each
certified signal employee shall:
(1) Have their certificate in their possession while on duty as a
signal employee; and
(2) Display their certificate upon request from:
(i) An FRA representative;
(ii) A state inspector authorized under part 212 of this chapter;
(iii) An officer of the issuing railroad; or
(iv) An officer of the person's employer if the certified signal
employee is not employed by the issuing railroad.
(f) If a person's signal employee certificate is lost, stolen,
mutilated, or becomes unreadable, the railroad shall promptly replace
the certificate at no cost to the person.
(g) A certified signal employee is exempt from the requirements of
paragraph (e) of this section if:
(1) The railroad made its certification or recertification decision
within the last 30 days and the person has not yet received their
certificate; or
(2) The person's signal employee certificate was lost, stolen,
mutilated, or became unreadable, and the railroad has not yet issued a
replacement certificate to the person who reported their lost
certificate.
(h) Any person who is notified or called to work as a certified
signal employee and such work would cause the person to exceed
certificate limitations, set forth in accordance with subpart B of this
part, shall immediately notify the railroad that they are not
authorized to perform that work and it shall be unlawful for the
railroad to require such work.
(i) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to alter a certified
signal employee's duty to comply with other provisions of this chapter
concerning railroad safety.
Sec. 246.213 Multiple certifications.
(a) A person who holds a signal employee certificate may:
(1) Hold a signal employee certificate for multiple types of signal
service; and
(2) Be certified in other crafts, such as a locomotive engineer or
conductor.
(b) A railroad that issues multiple certificates to a person,
shall, to the
[[Page 44889]]
extent possible, coordinate the expiration date of those certificates.
(c) Paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section apply to persons
who are currently certified as a signal employee for multiple railroads
or are seeking to become certified signal employees for multiple
railroads.
(1) A person who holds a current signal employee certificate from
more than one railroad shall immediately notify the other certifying
railroad(s) if they are denied signal employee certification or
recertification under Sec. 246.301 by a railroad or have their signal
employee certification suspended or revoked under Sec. 246.307 by a
railroad.
(2) If a person has their signal employee certification suspended
or revoked by a railroad under Sec. 246.307, they shall not work as a
certified signal employee for any railroad during the period that their
certification is suspended or revoked, except as provided for in Sec.
246.124(d).
(3) If a person has their signal employee certification suspended
or revoked by a railroad under Sec. 246.307, they shall notify any
railroad from whom they are seeking signal employee certification that
their signal employee certification is currently suspended or revoked
by another railroad.
(d) Paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section apply to persons
who are currently certified as a signal employee and also currently
certified in another railroad craft, such as a locomotive engineer or
conductor:
(1) If a person's signal employee certification is revoked under
Sec. 246.307 for a violation of Sec. 246.303(e)(11), they shall not
work in another certified railroad craft, such as a locomotive engineer
or conductor, during the period of revocation.
(2) If a person's signal employee certification is revoked under
Sec. 246.307 for a violation of Sec. 246.303(e)(1) through (10), they
may work in another certified railroad craft, such as a locomotive
engineer or conductor, during the period of revocation.
(3) If any of a person's non-signal employee certifications are
revoked for failure to comply with Sec. 219.101 of this chapter, they
shall not work as a certified signal employee for any railroad during
the period of revocation.
(4) If any of a person's non-signal employee certifications are
revoked for any reason other than a failure to comply with Sec.
219.101 of this chapter, they may work as a certified signal employee
during the period of revocation.
(e) A person who has had their signal employee certification
revoked for failure to comply with Sec. 219.101 of this chapter shall
not obtain any other certification pursuant to this chapter from any
railroad during the period of revocation.
(f) A person who has had any of their non-signal employee
certifications revoked for failure to comply with Sec. 219.101 of this
chapter shall not obtain signal employee certification pursuant to this
part from any railroad during the period of revocation.
(g) A railroad that denies a person signal employee certification
or recertification under Sec. 246.301 shall not, solely on the basis
of that denial, deny or revoke that person's non-signal employee
certifications or recertifications.
(h) A railroad that denies a person any non-signal employee
certification or recertification pursuant to this chapter shall not,
solely on the basis of that denial, deny or revoke that person's signal
employee certification or recertification.
(i) In lieu of issuing multiple certificates, a railroad may issue
one certificate to a person who is certified in multiple crafts as long
as the single certificate complies with all of the certificate
requirements for those crafts.
(j) A person who is certified in multiple crafts and who is
involved in a revocable event, as described in this chapter, may only
have one certificate revoked for that event. The determination by the
railroad as to which certificate to revoke must be based on the work
the person was performing at the time the revocable event occurred.
Sec. 246.215 Railroad oversight responsibilities.
(a) No later than March 31 of each year (beginning in calendar year
2027), each Class I railroad (including the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation), each railroad providing commuter service, and each Class
II railroad shall conduct a formal annual review and analysis
concerning the administration of its program for responding to detected
instances of poor safety conduct by certified signal employees during
the prior calendar year.
(b) Each review and analysis shall involve:
(1) The number and nature of the instances of detected poor safety
conduct including the nature of the remedial action taken in response
thereto;
(2) The number and nature of FRA reported accidents/incidents
attributed to poor safety performance by signal employees; and
(3) The number and type of operational monitoring test failures
recorded by certified signal employees conducting compliance tests
pursuant to Sec. 246.123.
(c) Based on that review and analysis, each railroad shall
determine what action(s) it will take to improve the safety of railroad
operations to reduce or eliminate future accidents/incidents of that
nature.
(d) If requested in writing by FRA, by the president of a labor
organization that represents the railroad's signal employees, or by a
railroad's certified signal employee who is not represented by a labor
organization, the railroad shall provide a report of the findings and
conclusions reached during such annual review and analysis effort.
(e) For reporting purposes, information about the nature of
detected poor safety conduct shall be capable of segregation for study
and evaluation purposes into the following categories:
(1) Incidents involving noncompliance with railroad rules and
procedures governing the removal from service of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade crossing warning devices and
systems; and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and systems;
(iii) Other devices or signal systems subject to this part.
(2) Incidents involving noncompliance with railroad rules and
procedures governing the restoration of service of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade crossing warning devices and
systems; and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and systems;
(iii) Other devices or signal systems subject to this part.
(3) Incidents involving interference with the normal functioning
of:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade crossing warning devices and
systems; and
(ii) Wayside signal devices and systems.
(4) Incidents involving noncompliance with railroad rules and test
procedures governing the inspection and testing of grade crossing
warning devices and systems after installation, modification,
disarrangement, maintenance, testing, and repair.
(5) Incidents involving noncompliance with railroad test procedures
on devices or signal systems subject to this part.
(6) Incidents resulting in a signal false proceed, grade crossing
activation failure, or accident or personal injury related to the same.
[[Page 44890]]
(7) Incidents involving noncompliance with the on-track safety
requirements and blue signal requirements in parts 214 and 218 of this
chapter.
(8) Incidents involving noncompliance with part 219 of this
chapter.
(f) For reporting purposes, each category of detected poor safety
conduct identified in paragraph (e) of this section shall be capable of
being annotated to reflect the following:
(1) The total number of incidents in that category;
(2) The number of incidents within that total which reflect
incidents requiring an FRA accident/incident report under part 225 of
this chapter; and
(3) The number of incidents within that total which were detected
as a result of a scheduled operational monitoring effort.
(g) For reporting purposes, each instance of detected poor safety
conduct identified in paragraph (b) of this section shall be capable of
being annotated to reflect the following:
(1) The nature of the remedial action taken, and the number of
events subdivided, so as to reflect which of the following actions was
selected:
(i) Imposition of informal discipline;
(ii) Imposition of formal discipline;
(iii) Provision of informal training; or
(iv) Provision of formal training; and
(2) If the nature of the remedial action taken was formal
discipline, the number of events further subdivided so as to reflect
which of the following punishments was imposed by the railroad:
(i) The person was withheld from service;
(ii) The person was dismissed from employment; or
(iii) The person was issued demerits. If more than one form of
punishment was imposed, only the punishment deemed the most severe
shall be shown.
(iv) The person's classification or type of signal employee service
was removed or reduced.
(h) For reporting purposes, each instance of detected poor safety
conduct identified in paragraph (b) of this section which resulted in
the imposition of formal or informal discipline shall be annotated to
reflect the following:
(1) The number of instances in which the railroad's internal
appeals process reduced the punishment initially imposed at the
conclusion of its hearing; and
(2) The number of instances in which the punishment imposed by the
railroad was reduced by any of the following entities: The National
Railroad Adjustment Board, a Public Law Board, a Special Board of
Adjustment, or other body for the resolution of disputes duly
constituted under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act.
(i) For reporting purposes, an instance of poor safety conduct
involving a person who is a certified signal employee and is certified
in another craft such as locomotive engineer or conductor, need only be
reported once (e.g., either under this section or Sec. 240.309 or
Sec. 242.215 of this chapter). The determination as to where to report
the instance of poor safety conduct should be based on the work the
person was performing at the time the conduct occurred.
Subpart D--Denial and Revocation of Certification
Sec. 246.301 Process for denying certification.
(a) A railroad shall notify a candidate for certification or
recertification of information known to the railroad that forms the
basis for denying the person certification and provide the candidate a
reasonable opportunity to explain or rebut that adverse information in
writing prior to denying certification. A railroad shall provide the
candidate with any documents or records, including written statements,
related to failure to meet a requirement of this part that support its
pending denial decision.
(b) If a railroad denies a person certification or recertification,
it shall issue a decision that complies with all of the following
requirements:
(1) It must be in writing.
(2) It must explain the basis for the railroad's denial decision.
(3) It must address any explanation or rebuttal information that
the candidate provides pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
(4) It must include the date of the railroad's decision.
(5) It must be served on the person no later than 10 days after the
railroad's decision.
(c) A railroad shall not deny the person's certification for
failing to comply with a railroad test procedure, signal standard, or
practice which constitutes a violation under Sec. 246.303(e)(1)
through (10) if sufficient evidence exists to establish that an
intervening cause prevented or materially impaired the person's ability
to comply with that railroad test procedure, signal standard, or
practice.
Sec. 246.303 Criteria for revoking certification.
(a) It shall be unlawful to fail to comply with any of the railroad
rules or practices described in paragraph (e) of this section.
(b) A certified signal employee who fails to comply with a railroad
test procedure, signal standard or practice described in paragraph (e)
of this section shall have their certification revoked.
(c) A certified signal employee who is assigned to monitor, mentor,
or instruct a signal employee and fails to take appropriate action to
prevent a violation of paragraph (e) of this section shall have their
certification revoked.
(d) A certified signal employee who is called by a railroad to
perform a duty other than that of a signal employee shall not have
their signal employee certification revoked based on actions taken or
not taken while performing that duty except for violations described in
paragraph (e)(11) of this section.
(e) When determining whether to revoke a person's signal employee
certification, a railroad shall only consider violations of Federal
regulatory provisions or railroad rules, procedures, signal standards,
and practices that involve:
(1) Interfering with the normal functioning of a highway-rail grade
crossing warning system under Sec. 234.209 of this chapter, or signal
system under Sec. 236.4 of this chapter, without providing an
alternative means of protection. (Railroads shall only consider those
violations that result in an activation failure or false proceed
signal.)
(2) Failure to comply with a railroad rule or procedure when
removing from service:
(i) Highway-rail or pathway grade crossing warning devices and
systems;
(ii) Wayside signal devices or signal systems; or
(iii) Other devices or signal systems subject to this part.
(3) Failure to comply with railroad rule or procedure when placing
in service or restoring to service:
(i) Highway-rail and pathway grade crossing warning devices and
systems;
(ii) Wayside signal devices or signal systems; or
(iii) Other devices or signal systems subject to this part.
(4) Failure to perform an inspection or test to ensure a highway-
rail or pathway grade crossing warning device or system functions as
intended, when required by railroad rule or procedure, after:
(i) Installation, maintenance, testing or repair of the warning
device or system;
(ii) Modification or disarrangement of the warning device or
system; or
(iii) Malfunction or failure of the warning device or system;
[[Page 44891]]
(5) Failure to restore power to train detection device or highway-
rail or pathway grade crossing warning device or system after manual
interruption of the power source. (Railroads shall consider only those
violations that result in activation failures.)
(6) Failure to comply with railroad validation or cutover
procedures.
(7) Failure to comply with Sec. Sec. 214.313, 214.319, 214.321,
214.323, 214.325, 214.327, or 214.329. Railroads shall consider only
those violations directly involving a person who failed to obtain
proper on-track safety before fouling a track.
(8) Failure to comply with Sec. 218.25 of this chapter (Workers on
a main track);
(9) Failure to comply with Sec. 218.27 of this chapter (Workers on
other than main track);
(10) Failure to comply with Sec. 218.29 of this chapter (Alternate
methods of protection);
(11) Failure to comply with Sec. 219.101 of this chapter. However,
such incidents shall be considered as a violation only for the purposes
of Sec. 246.305(a)(2) and (b).
(f) In making the determination as to whether to revoke a person's
signal employee certification, a railroad shall only consider conduct
described in paragraphs (e)(1) through (10) of this section that
occurred within the three years prior to the determination.
(g) If in any single incident the person's conduct contravened more
than one Federal regulatory provision or railroad rule, procedure,
signal standard, or practice, that event shall be treated as a single
violation for the purposes of this section.
(h) A violation of one or more railroad rules, procedures, signal
standards, or practices described in paragraphs (e)(1) through (10) of
this section that occurs during a properly conducted compliance test
subject to the provisions of this chapter shall be counted in
determining the periods of ineligibility described in Sec. 246.305.
(i) A compliance test that is not conducted in compliance with this
part, a railroad's operating rules, or a railroad's program under Sec.
217.9 of this chapter, will not be considered a legitimate test of
skill or knowledge, and will not be considered for revocation purposes.
(j) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with a program meeting the
requirements of this section. When any person (including, but not
limited to, each railroad, railroad officer, supervisor, and employee)
violates any requirement of a program which complies with the
requirements of this section, that person shall be considered to have
violated the requirements of this section.
Sec. 246.305 Periods of ineligibility.
(a) The starting date for a period of ineligibility described in
this section shall be:
(1) For a person not currently certified, the date of the
railroad's written determination that the most recent incident has
occurred; or
(2) For a person currently certified, the date of the railroad's
notification to the person that recertification has been denied or
certification has been suspended.
(b) A period of ineligibility shall be determined according to the
following standards:
(1) In the case of a single incident involving a violation of one
or more of the Federal regulatory provisions or railroad rules,
procedures, signal standards, or practices described in Sec.
246.303(e)(1) through (10), the person shall have their certificate
revoked for a period of 30 calendar days.
(2) In the case of two separate incidents involving a violation of
one or more of the Federal regulatory provisions or railroad rules,
procedures, signal standards, or practices described in Sec.
246.303(e)(1) through (10), that occurred within 24 months of each
other, the person shall have their certificate revoked for a period of
six months.
(3) In the case of three separate incidents involving violations of
one or more of the Federal regulatory provisions or railroad rules,
procedures, signal standards, or practices, described in Sec.
246.303(e)(1) through (11), that occurred within 36 months of each
other, the person shall have their certificate revoked for a period of
one year.
(4) In the case of four separate incidents involving violations of
one or more of the Federal regulatory provisions or railroad rules,
procedures, signal standards, or practices, described in Sec.
246.303(e)(1) through (11), that occurred within 36 months of each
other, the person shall have their certificate revoked for a period of
three years.
(5) Where, based on the occurrence of violations described in Sec.
246.303(e)(11), different periods of ineligibility may result under the
provisions of this section and Sec. 246.115, the longest period of
revocation shall control.
(c) Any or all periods of revocation provided in paragraph (b) of
this section may consist of training.
(d) A person whose certification is denied or revoked shall be
eligible for grant or reinstatement of the certificate prior to the
expiration of the initial period of ineligibility only if:
(1) The denial or revocation of certification in accordance with
the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section is for a period of one
year or less;
(2) Certification is denied or revoked for reasons other than
noncompliance with Sec. 219.101 of this chapter;
(3) The person is evaluated by a railroad officer and determined to
have received adequate remedial training;
(4) The person successfully completes any mandatory program of
training or retraining, if that is determined to be necessary by the
railroad prior to return to service; and
(5) At least one half of the pertinent period of ineligibility
specified in paragraph (b) of this section has elapsed.
Sec. 246.307 Process for revoking certification.
(a) If a railroad determines that a person, who is currently
certified as a signal employee by the railroad, has violated a Federal
regulatory provision, railroad test procedure, signal standard or
practice described in Sec. 246.303(e), the railroad shall revoke the
person's signal employee certification in accordance with the
procedures and requirements of this section.
(b) Except as provided for in Sec. 246.115(f), if a railroad
acquires reliable information that a person, who is currently certified
as a signal employee by the railroad, has violated a Federal regulatory
provision, railroad rule, procedure, signal standard, or practice
described in Sec. 246.303(e) or Sec. 246.115(d), the railroad shall
undertake the following process to determine whether revocation of the
person's signal employee certification is warranted:
(1) The person's signal employee certification shall be suspended
immediately.
(2) The person's employer(s) (if different from the suspending
railroad) shall be immediately notified of the certification suspension
and the reason for the certification suspension.
(3) Prior to or upon suspending the person's signal employee
certification, the railroad shall provide the person with notice of:
the reason for the suspension; the pending revocation; and an
opportunity for a hearing before a presiding officer other than the
investigating officer. This notice may initially be given either orally
or in writing. If given orally, the notice must be subsequently
confirmed in writing in a manner that conforms with the notification
provisions of the applicable
[[Page 44892]]
collective bargaining agreement. If there is no applicable collective
bargaining agreement notification provision, the written notice must be
made within four days of the date the certification was suspended.
(4) The railroad must convene the hearing within the time frame
required under the applicable collective bargaining agreement. If there
is no applicable collective bargaining agreement or the applicable
collective bargaining agreement does not include such a requirement,
the hearing shall be convened within ten days of the date the
certification is suspended unless the person requests or consents to a
delay to the start of the hearing.
(5) Except as provided for in paragraph (c) of this section, the
railroad shall provide the certified signal employee with a copy of the
written information and a list of witnesses the railroad will present
at the hearing at least 72 hours before the start of the hearing. If
this information was provided by an employee of the railroad, the
railroad shall make that employee available for examination during the
hearing notwithstanding the terms of an applicable collective
bargaining agreement.
(6) Following the hearing, the railroad must determine, based on
the record of the hearing, whether revocation of the certification is
warranted and state explicitly the basis for the conclusion reached.
The railroad shall have the burden of proving that revocation of the
person's signal employee certification is warranted under Sec.
246.303.
(7) If the railroad determines that revocation of the person's
signal employee certification is warranted, the railroad shall impose
the proper period of revocation provided for in Sec. 246.305 or Sec.
246.115.
(8) The railroad shall retain the record of the hearing for three
years after the date the decision is rendered.
(c) A hearing required by this section which is conducted in a
manner that conforms procedurally to the applicable collective
bargaining agreement shall satisfy the procedural requirements of this
section.
(d) Except as provided for in paragraph (c) of this section, a
hearing required under this section shall be conducted in accordance
with the following procedures:
(1) The hearing shall be conducted by a presiding officer who can
be any proficient person authorized by the railroad other than the
investigating officer.
(2) The presiding officer shall convene and preside over the
hearing and exercise the powers necessary to regulate the conduct of
the hearing for the purpose of achieving a prompt and fair
determination of all material issues in dispute.
(3) The presiding officer may:
(i) Adopt any needed procedures for the submission of evidence in
written form;
(ii) Examine witnesses at the hearing; and
(iii) Take any other action authorized by or consistent with the
provisions of this part and permitted by law that may assist in
achieving a prompt and fair determination of all material issues in
dispute.
(4) All relevant and probative evidence shall be received into the
record unless the presiding officer determines the evidence to be
unduly repetitive or have such minimal relevance that its admission
would impair the prompt, orderly, and fair resolution of the
proceeding.
(5) Parties may appear at the hearing and be heard on their own
behalf or through designated representatives. Parties may offer
relevant evidence including testimony and may conduct such examination
of witnesses as may be required for a full disclosure of the relevant
facts.
(6) Testimony by witnesses at the hearing shall be recorded
verbatim. Witnesses can testify in person, over the phone, or
virtually.
(7) The record in the proceeding shall be closed at the conclusion
of the hearing unless the presiding officer allows additional time for
the submission of evidence.
(8) A hearing required under this section may be consolidated with
any disciplinary action or other hearing arising from the same facts,
but in all instances a railroad official, other than the investigating
officer, shall make separate findings as to the revocation required
under this section.
(9) A person may waive their right to a hearing. That waiver shall:
(i) Be made in writing;
(ii) Reflect the fact that the person has knowledge and
understanding of these rights and voluntarily surrenders them; and
(iii) Be signed by the person making the waiver.
(e) Except as provided for in paragraph (c) of this section, a
decision, required by this section, on whether to revoke a person's
signal employee certification shall comply with the following
requirements:
(1) No later than ten days after the close of the record, a
railroad official, other than the investigating officer, shall prepare
and sign a written decision as to whether the railroad is revoking the
person's signal employee certification.
(2) The decision shall:
(i) Contain the findings of fact on all material issues as well as
an explanation for those findings with citations to all applicable
railroad rules, signal standards and procedures and any applicable
Federal regulations;
(ii) State whether the railroad official found that the person's
signal employee certification should be revoked;
(iii) State the period of revocation under Sec. 246.305 (if the
railroad official concludes that the person's signal employee
certification should be revoked); and
(iv) Be served on the person and their representative, if any, with
the railroad retaining proof of service for three years after the date
the decision is rendered.
(f) The period that a person's signal employee certification is
suspended in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall be
credited towards any period of revocation that the railroad assesses in
accordance with Sec. 246.305.
(g) A railroad shall revoke a person's signal employee
certification if, during the period that certification is valid, the
railroad acquires information that another railroad has revoked the
person's signal employee certification in accordance with the
provisions of this section. Such revocation shall run concurrently with
the period of revocation imposed by the railroad that initially revoked
the person's signal employee certification. The requirement to provide
a hearing under this section is satisfied when any single railroad
holds a hearing. No additional hearing is required prior to a
revocation by more than one railroad arising from the same facts.
(h) A railroad shall not revoke a person's signal employee
certification if sufficient evidence exists to establish that an
intervening cause prevented or materially impaired the person's ability
to comply with the railroad test procedure, signal standard, or
practice which constitutes a violation under Sec. 246.303.
(i) A railroad may decide not to revoke a person's signal employee
certification if sufficient evidence exists to establish that the
violation of the railroad test procedure, signal standard, or practice
described in Sec. 246.303(e) was of a minimal nature and had no direct
or potential effect on rail safety.
(j) If sufficient evidence meeting the criteria in paragraph (h) or
(i) of this section becomes available, including prior to a railroad's
action to suspend the certificate as provided for in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section or prior to the convening of the hearing
[[Page 44893]]
provided for in this section, the railroad shall place the relevant
information in the records maintained in compliance with:
(1) Section 246.215 for Class I railroads (including the National
Railroad Passenger Corporation), railroads providing commuter service,
and Class II railroads; and
(2) Section 246.203 for Class III railroads.
(k) If a railroad makes a good faith determination, after
performing a reasonable inquiry, that the course of conduct provided
for in paragraph (h) or (i) of this section is warranted, the railroad
will not be in violation of paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it
decides not to suspend the person's signal employee certification.
Subpart E--Dispute Resolution Procedures
Sec. 246.401 Review board established.
(a) Any person who has been denied certification or
recertification, or has had their certification revoked and believes
that a railroad incorrectly determined that they failed to meet the
certification requirements of this part when making the decision to
deny or revoke certification, may petition the Administrator to review
the railroad's decision.
(b) The Administrator has delegated initial responsibility for
adjudicating such disputes to the Certification Review Board (Board).
The Board shall be composed of FRA employees.
Sec. 246.403 Petition requirements.
(a) To obtain review of a railroad's decision to deny
certification, deny recertification, or revoke certification, a person
shall file a petition for review that complies with this section.
(b) Each petition shall:
(1) Be in writing;
(2) Be filed no more than 120 days after the date the railroad's
denial or revocation decision was served on the petitioner, except as
provided for in paragraph (d) of this section;
(3) Be filed on https://www.regulations.gov;
(4) Include the following contact information for the petitioner
and petitioner's representative (if petitioner is represented):
(i) Full name;
(ii) Daytime telephone number; and
(iii) Email address;
(5) Include the name of the railroad and the name of the
petitioner's employer (if different from the railroad that revoked
petitioner's certification);
(6) Contain the facts that the petitioner believes constitute the
improper action by the railroad and the arguments in support of the
petition; and
(7) Include all written documents in the petitioner's possession or
reasonably available to the petitioner that document the railroad's
decision.
(c) If requested by the Board, the petitioner must provide a copy
of the information under 49 CFR 40.329 that laboratories, medical
review officers, and other service agents are required to release to
employees. The petitioner must provide a written explanation in
response to a Board request if written documents, that should be
reasonably available to the petitioner, are not supplied.
(d) The Board may extend the petition filing period in its
discretion provided the petitioner provides good cause for the
extension and:
(1) The request for an extension is filed before the expiration of
the period provided for in paragraph (b)(2) of this section; or
(2) The failure to timely file was the result of excusable neglect.
(e) A party aggrieved by a Board decision to deny a petition as
untimely or not in compliance with the requirements of this section may
file an appeal with the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 246.411.
Sec. 246.405 Processing certification review petitions.
(a) Each petition shall be acknowledged in writing by FRA. The
acknowledgment shall be sent to the petitioner (if an email address is
provided), petitioner's representative (if any), the railroad, and
petitioner's employer (if different from the railroad that revoked
petitioner's certification). The acknowledgment shall contain the
docket number assigned to the petition and will notify the parties
where the petition can be accessed.
(b) Within 60 days from the date of the acknowledgment provided in
paragraph (a) of this section, the railroad may submit to FRA any
information that the railroad considers pertinent to the petition and
shall supplement the record with any relevant documents in its
possession, such as hearing transcripts and exhibits, that were not
submitted by the petitioner. Late filings will only be considered to
the extent practicable. A railroad that submits such information shall:
(1) Identify the petitioner by name and the docket number for the
petition;
(2) Provide the railroad's email address;
(3) Serve a copy of the information being submitted to the
petitioner and petitioner's representative (if any); and
(4) Be filed on https://www.regulations.gov.
(c) The petition will be referred to the Board for a decision after
a railroad's response is received or 60 days from the date of the
acknowledgment provided in paragraph (a) of this section, whichever is
earlier. Based on the record, the Board shall have the authority to
grant, deny, dismiss, or remand the petition. If the Board finds that
there is insufficient basis for granting or denying the petition, the
Board may issue an order affording the parties an opportunity to
provide additional information or argument consistent with its
findings.
(d) When considering procedural issues, the Board will grant the
petition if the petitioner shows:
(1) That a procedural error occurred; and
(2) The procedural error caused substantial harm to the petitioner.
(e) When considering factual issues, the Board will grant the
petition if the petitioner shows that the railroad did not provide
substantial evidence to support its decision.
(f) When considering legal issues, the Board will determine whether
the railroad's legal interpretations are correct based on a de novo
review.
(g) The Board will only consider whether the denial or revocation
of certification or recertification was improper under this part and
will grant or deny the petition accordingly. The Board will not
otherwise consider the propriety of a railroad's decision. For
example,the Board will not consider whether the railroad properly
applied its own more stringent requirements.
(h) The Board's written decision shall be served on the petitioner
and/or petitioner's representative (if any), the railroad, and
petitioner's employer (if different from the railroad that revoked
petitioner's certification).
Sec. 246.407 Request for a hearing.
(a) If adversely affected by the Board's decision, either the
petitioner before the Board or the railroad involved shall have a right
to an administrative proceeding as prescribed by Sec. 246.409.
(b) To exercise that right, the adversely affected party shall file
a written request for a hearing within 20 days of service of the
Board's decision on that party. The request must be filed in the docket
on https://www.regulations.gov that was used when the case was before
the Board.
(c) A written request for a hearing must contain the following:
(1) The name, telephone number, and email address of the requesting
party and the party's designated representative (if any);
[[Page 44894]]
(2) The name, telephone number, and email address of the
respondent;
(3) The docket number for the case while it was before the Board;
(4) The specific factual issues, industry rules, regulations, or
laws that the requesting party alleges need to be examined in
connection with the certification decision in question; and
(5) The signature of the requesting party or the requesting party's
representative (if any).
(d) Upon receipt of a hearing request complying with paragraph (c)
of this section, FRA shall arrange for the appointment of a presiding
officer who shall schedule the hearing for the earliest practicable
date.
(e) If a party fails to request a hearing within the period
provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the Board's decision will
constitute final agency action.
Sec. 246.409 Hearings.
(a) An administrative hearing for a signal employee certification
petition shall be conducted by a presiding officer, who can be any
person authorized by the Administrator.
(b) The presiding officer shall convene and preside over the
hearing. The hearing shall be a de novo hearing to find the relevant
facts and determine the correct application of this part to those
facts. The presiding officer may determine that there is no genuine
issue covering some or all material facts and limit evidentiary
proceedings to any issues of material fact as to which there is a
genuine dispute.
(c) The presiding officer may exercise the powers of the
Administrator to regulate the conduct of the hearing for the purpose of
achieving a prompt and fair determination of all material issues in
controversy.
(d) The presiding officer may authorize discovery of the types and
quantities which in the presiding officer's discretion will contribute
to a fair hearing without unduly burdening the parties. The presiding
officer may impose appropriate non-monetary sanctions, including
limitations as to the presentation of evidence and issues, for any
party's willful failure or refusal to comply with approved discovery
requests.
(e) Every petition, motion, response, or other authorized or
required document shall be signed by the party filing the same, or by a
duly authorized officer or representative of record, or by any other
person. If signed by such other person, the reason therefor must be
stated and the power of attorney or other authority authorizing such
other person to subscribe the document must be filed with the document.
The signature of the person subscribing any document constitutes a
certification that they have read the document; that to the best of
their knowledge, information, and belief, every statement contained in
the document is true and no such statements are misleading; and that it
is not interposed for delay or to be vexatious.
(f) After the request for a hearing is filed, all documents filed
or served upon one party must be served upon all parties. Each party
may designate a person upon whom service is to be made when not
specified by law, regulation, or directive of the presiding officer. If
a party does not designate a person upon whom service is to be made,
then service may be made upon any person having subscribed to a
submission of the party being served, unless otherwise specified by
law, regulation, or directive of the presiding officer. Proof of
service shall accompany all documents when they are tendered for
filing.
(g) If any document initiating, filed in, or served in, a
proceeding is not in substantial compliance with the applicable law,
regulation, or directive of the presiding officer, the presiding
officer may strike or dismiss all or part of such document, or require
its amendment.
(h) Any party to a proceeding may appear and be heard in person or
by an authorized representative.
(i) Any person testifying at a hearing or deposition may be
accompanied, represented, and advised by an attorney or other
representative, and may be examined by that person.
(j) Any party may request to consolidate or separate the hearing of
two or more petitions by motion to the presiding officer when they
arise from the same or similar facts or when the matters are for any
reason deemed more efficiently heard together.
(k) Except as provided in Sec. 246.407(e) and paragraph (s)(4) of
this section, whenever a party has the right or is required to take
action within a period prescribed by this part, or by law, regulation,
or directive of the presiding officer, the presiding officer may extend
such period, with or without notice, for good cause, provided another
party is not substantially prejudiced by such extension. A request to
extend a period which has already expired may be denied as untimely.
(l) An application to the presiding officer for an order or ruling
not otherwise specifically provided for in this part shall be by
motion. The motion shall be filed with the presiding officer and, if
written, served upon all parties. All motions, unless made during the
hearing, shall be written. Motions made during hearings may be made
orally on the record, except that the presiding officer may direct that
any oral motion be reduced to writing. Any motion shall state with
particularity the grounds therefor and the relief or order sought and
shall be accompanied by any affidavits or other evidence desired to be
relied upon which is not already part of the record. Any matter
submitted in response to a written motion must be filed and served
within 14 days of the motion, or within such other period as directed
by the presiding officer.
(m) Testimony by witnesses at the hearing shall be given under oath
and the hearing shall be recorded verbatim. The presiding officer shall
give the parties to the proceeding adequate opportunity during the
course of the hearing for the presentation of arguments in support of
or in opposition to motions, and objections and exceptions to rulings
of the presiding officer. The presiding officer may permit oral
argument on any issues for which the presiding officer deems it
appropriate and beneficial. Any evidence or argument received or
proffered orally shall be transcribed and made a part of the record.
Any physical evidence or written argument received or proffered shall
be made a part of the record, except that the presiding officer may
authorize the substitution of copies, photographs, or descriptions,
when deemed to be appropriate.
(n) The presiding officer shall employ the Federal Rules of
Evidence for United States Courts and Magistrates as general guidelines
for the introduction of evidence. Notwithstanding paragraph (m) of this
section, all relevant and probative evidence shall be received unless
the presiding officer determines the evidence to be unduly repetitive
or so extensive and lacking in relevancy that its admission would
impair the prompt, orderly, and fair resolution of the proceeding.
(o) The presiding officer may:
(1) Administer oaths and affirmations;
(2) Issue subpoenas as provided for in Sec. 209.7 of this chapter;
(3) Adopt any needed procedures for the submission of evidence in
written form;
(4) Examine witnesses at the hearing;
(5) Convene, recess, adjourn, or otherwise regulate the course of
the hearing; and
(6) Take any other action authorized by or consistent with the
provisions of this part and permitted by law that may expedite the
hearing or aid in the disposition of the proceeding.
(p) The petitioner before the Board, the railroad involved in
taking the
[[Page 44895]]
certification action, and FRA shall be parties at the hearing. All
parties may participate in the hearing and may appear and be heard on
their own behalf or through designated representatives. All parties may
offer relevant evidence, including testimony, and may conduct such
cross-examination of witnesses as may be required to make a record of
the relevant facts.
(q) The party requesting the administrative hearing shall be the
``hearing petitioner.'' The party that the Board issued its decision in
favor of will be a respondent. At the start of each proceeding, FRA
will be a respondent as well. The hearing petitioner shall have the
burden of proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence.
(r) The record in the proceeding shall be closed at the conclusion
of the evidentiary hearing unless the presiding officer allows
additional time for the submission of additional evidence. In such
instances the record shall be left open for such time as the presiding
officer grants for that purpose.
(s) At the close of the record, the presiding officer shall prepare
a written decision in the proceeding. The decision:
(1) Shall contain the findings of fact and conclusions of law, as
well as the basis for each, concerning all material issues of fact or
law presented on the record;
(2) Shall be served on all parties to the proceeding;
(3) Shall not become final for 35 days after issuance;
(4) Constitutes final agency action unless an aggrieved party files
an appeal within 35 days after issuance; and
(5) Is not precedential.
Sec. 246.411 Appeals.
(a) Any party aggrieved by the presiding officer's decision may
file an appeal in the presiding officer's docket. The appeal must be
filed within 35 days of issuance of the decision. A copy of the appeal
shall be served on each party. The appeal shall set forth objections to
the presiding officer's decision, supported by reference to applicable
laws and regulations and with specific reference to the record. If no
appeal is timely filed, the presiding officer's decision constitutes
final agency action.
(b) A party may file a reply to the appeal within 25 days of
service of the appeal. The reply shall be supported by reference to
applicable laws and regulations and with specific reference to the
record, if the party relies on evidence contained in the record.
(c) The Administrator may extend the period for filing an appeal or
a reply for good cause shown, provided that the written request for
extension is served before expiration of the applicable period provided
in this section.
(d) The Administrator has sole discretion to permit oral argument
on the appeal. On the Administrator's own initiative or written motion
by any party, the Administrator may grant the parties an opportunity
for oral argument.
(e) The Administrator may remand, vacate, affirm, reverse, alter,
or modify the decision of the presiding officer and the Administrator's
decision constitutes final agency action except where the terms of the
Administrator's decision (for example, remanding a case to the
presiding officer) show that the parties' administrative remedies have
not been exhausted.
(f) An appeal from a Board decision pursuant to Sec. 246.403(e)
must be filed in the Board's docket within 35 days of issuance of the
decision. A copy of the appeal shall be served on each party. The
Administrator may affirm or vacate the Board's decision, and may remand
the petition to the Board for further proceedings. An Administrator's
decision to affirm the Board's decision constitutes final agency
action.
Appendix A to Part 246--Procedures for Obtaining and Evaluating Motor
Vehicle Driving Record Data
(1) The purpose of this appendix is to outline the procedures
available to individuals and railroads for complying with the
requirements of Sec. 246.111. This provision requires that
railroads consider the motor vehicle driving record of each person
prior to issuing them certification or recertification as a signal
employee.
(2) To fulfill that obligation, a railroad is required to review
a certification candidate's recent motor vehicle driving record for
information described in Sec. 246.111(m). Generally, that will be a
single record on file with the state agency that issued the
candidate's current motor vehicle driver's license. However, a motor
vehicle driving record can include multiple documents if the
candidate has been issued a motor vehicle driver's license by more
than one state agency or a foreign country.
(3) The right of railroad workers, their employers, or
prospective employers to have access to a state motor vehicle
licensing agency's data concerning an individual's driving record is
controlled by state law. Although many states have mechanisms
through which employers and prospective employers, such as
railroads, can obtain such data, there are some states where privacy
concerns make such access very difficult or impossible. Since
individuals are generally entitled to obtain access to their driving
record data that will be relied on by a state motor vehicle
licensing agency when that agency is taking action concerning their
driving privileges, FRA places the responsibility on individuals who
want to serve as certified signal employees to request that their
current state motor vehicle licensing agency (or agencies) furnish
such data directly to the railroad that is considering certification
(or recertification) of the individual as a signal employee.
Depending on the procedures established by the state motor vehicle
licensing agency, the individual may be asked to send the state
agency a brief letter requesting such action or to execute a state
agency form that accomplishes the same effect. Requests for an
individual's motor vehicle driving record normally involve payment
of a nominal fee established by the state agency as well. In rare
instances, when a certification (or recertification) candidate has
been issued multiple licenses, an individual may be required to
submit multiple requests.
(4) Once the railroad has obtained the individual's motor
vehicle driving record(s), the railroad is required to afford the
certification (or recertification) candidate an opportunity to
review and comment on the record(s) in writing pursuant to Sec.
246.301 if the motor vehicle driving records contain information
that could form the basis for denying the person certification. This
opportunity to review and comment must occur before the railroad
renders a certification decision based on information in the
record(s). The railroad is required to evaluate the information in
the certification (or recertification) candidate's motor vehicle
driving record(s) pursuant to the provisions of this part.
Appendix B to Part 246--Medical Standards Guidelines
(1) The purpose of this appendix is to provide greater guidance
on the procedures that should be employed in administering the
vision and hearing requirements of Sec. Sec. 246.117 and 246.118.
(2) For any examination performed to determine whether a person
meets the visual acuity requirements in Sec. 246.117, it is
recommended that such examination be performed by a licensed
optometrist or a technician who reports to a licensed optometrist.
It is also recommended that any test conducted pursuant to Sec.
246.117 be performed according to any directions supplied by the
test's manufacturer and any ANSI standards that are applicable.
(3) For any examination performed to determine whether a person
meets the hearing acuity requirements in Sec. 246.118, it is
recommended that such examination be performed by a licensed or
certified audiologist or a technician who reports to a licensed or
certified audiologist. It is also recommended that any test
conducted pursuant to Sec. 246.118 be performed according to any
directions supplied by the test's manufacturer and any ANSI
standards that are applicable.
(4) In determining whether a person has the visual acuity that
meets or exceeds the requirements of this part, the following
testing protocols are deemed acceptable testing methods for
determining whether a person has the ability to recognize and
distinguish among the colors used as signals in the railroad
industry. The acceptable test methods are shown in the left hand
column
[[Page 44896]]
and the criteria that should be employed to determine whether a
person has failed the particular testing protocol are shown in the
right hand column.
Table 1 to Appendix B to Part 246
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accepted tests Failure criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pseudoisochromatic Plate Tests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Optical Company 1965.......... 5 or more errors on plates 1-
15.
AOC--Hardy-Rand-Ritter plates--second Any error on plates 1-6 (plates
edition. 1-4 are for demonstration--
test plate 1 is actually plate
5 in book).
Dvorine--Second edition................ 3 or more errors on plates 1-
15.
Ishihara (14 plate).................... 2 or more errors on plates 1-
11.
Ishihara (16 plate).................... 2 or more errors on plates 1-8.
Ishihara (24 plate).................... 3 or more errors on plates 1-
15.
Ishihara (38 plate).................... 4 or more errors on plates 1-
21.
Richmond Plates 1983................... 5 or more errors on plates 1-
15.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multifunction Vision Tester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keystone Orthoscope.................... Any error.
OPTEC 2000............................. Any error.
Titmus Vision Tester................... Any error.
Titmus II Vision Tester................ Any error.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) In administering any of these protocols, the person
conducting the examination should be aware that railroad signals do
not always occur in the same sequence and that ``yellow signals'' do
not always appear to be the same. It is not acceptable to use
``yarn'' or other materials to conduct a simple test to determine
whether the certification candidate has the requisite vision. No
person shall be allowed to wear chromatic lenses during an initial
test of the person's color vision; the initial test is one conducted
in accordance with one of the accepted tests in the chart and Sec.
246.117(c)(3).
(6) An examinee who fails to meet the criteria in the chart may
be further evaluated as determined by the railroad's medical
examiner. Ophthalmologic referral, field testing, or other practical
color testing may be utilized depending on the experience of the
examinee. The railroad's medical examiner will review all pertinent
information and, under some circumstances, may restrict an examinee
who does not meet the criteria for serving as a certified signal
employee. The intent of Sec. Sec. 246.117(d) and 246.118(d) is not
to provide an examinee with the right to make an infinite number of
requests for further evaluation, but to provide an examinee with at
least one opportunity to prove that a hearing or vision test failure
does not mean the examinee cannot safely perform as a certified
signal employee. Appropriate further medical evaluation could
include providing another approved scientific screening test or a
field test. All railroads should retain the discretion to limit the
number of retests that an examinee can request, but any cap placed
on the number of retests should not limit retesting when changed
circumstances would make such retesting appropriate. Changed
circumstances would most likely occur if the examinee's medical
condition has improved in some way or if technology has advanced to
the extent that it arguably could compensate for a hearing or vision
deficiency.
(7) Certified signal employees who wear contact lenses should
have good tolerance to the lenses and should be instructed to have a
pair of corrective glasses available when on duty.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Amitabha Bose,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-09958 Filed 5-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P