Appendix D to Part 218 - Requirements and Considerations for Implementing Technology Aided Point Protection
49:4.1.1.1.13.8.11.1.17 : Appendix D
Appendix D to Part 218 - Requirements and Considerations for
Implementing Technology Aided Point Protection Introduction
This appendix provides further explanation and requirements for
exercising the option to provide point protection with the aid of
technology as permitted in § 218.99(b)(3)(i). The regulation
permits the visual determination necessary to provide point
protection, i.e., a determination that the track is clear, for a
shoving or pushing movement to “be made with the aid of monitored
cameras or other technological means, provided that it and the
procedures for use provide an equivalent level of protection to
that of a direct visual determination by a crewmember or other
qualified employee properly positioned to make the observation as
prescribed in this section and appendix D to this part.” This
appendix addresses the general requirements and considerations for
all technology aided point protection as well as specific
additional requirements for those operations involving remote
control operations at public highway-rail grade crossings, private
highway-rail grade crossings outside the physical confines of a
railroad yard, pedestrian crossings outside the physical confines
of a railroad yard, and yard Access Crossings.
I. General Requirements and Considerations
A. Although railroading is now one of the nation's older forms
of mechanized transportation, equipment, components and operations
all have evolved through new and improved technologies. Installing
cameras in yards so that a location could be remotely monitored
from somewhere else has become a railroading reality as cameras
have become smaller, less expensive, and have increased resolution.
It is possible to set up these cameras and monitors so that they
provide at least an equivalent level of safety to that of an
employee protecting the point. Part 218, subpart F permits such an
operation to substitute for an employee's direct visual
determination where the technology provides an equivalent level of
protection to that of a direct visual determination. See §
218.99(b)(3)(i). Of course, to provide an equivalent level of
protection, an employee needs to be properly qualified (see
§ 218.95(a)(2)) and the technology must work as intended. Most
malfunctions of the technology should be detectable, and result in
abandoning the use of the technology for determining point
protection until the malfunction can be corrected.
B. The substitution of such technology for a direct visual
determination is dependent on many factors. Each situation will
have its own particular factual circumstances that shall require
consideration in determining whether an equivalent level of safety
can be achieved. For instance, with regard to the basic camera
setup, a railroad shall consider whether an operator must see in
color (largely a necessity if viewing signals), the width of the
angle of view, the size and location of the monitor, whether the
technology is for day-time use only, and whether its use should be
limited to fair weather conditions. However, under all
circumstances, the monitor shall display sufficient information to
enable the viewer to make a determination that the track ahead of
the shoving or pushing move is clear pursuant to the definition of
“track is clear” in § 218.93.
C. Each railroad that chooses to implement such camera/monitor
setups shall implement attendant procedures and qualify each
employee who will be utilizing the technology. Railroads shall
ensure that any monitored camera has sufficient resolution and real
time coverage to provide protection equal to a direct visual
determination. See § 218.99(b)(3)(i). Concerning attendant
procedures, one such procedure may be for an employee viewing a
monitor to communicate updates to the locomotive engineer or
controlling crewmember at appropriate intervals. FRA equates the
employee monitoring the camera to the employee controlling the
movement who must not engage in any task unrelated to the oversight
of the movement; thus, each railroad utilizing such cameras shall
implement attendant procedures limiting any of the monitoring
employee's ancillary duties that might distract from the employee's
ability to visually determine that the track is clear and provide
continuous communication to the employee controlling the
movement.
D. There is also the consideration of whether the person viewing
the monitor is the locomotive engineer, remote control operator,
other crewmember or other qualified person, such as a yardmaster.
If the monitor is not being viewed by the operator who is
controlling the movement, then, there shall be a clear
understanding and channel of communication between the operator and
the employee who is viewing the monitor - as the latter would be
protecting the movement. Providing an equivalent level of
protection to that of a direct visual determination requires a
thorough job briefing in which there is an understanding of who is
observing the movement, what is the observer's range of vision, at
what locomotive speed can the observation be made and how
information will be conveyed to the operator/engineer, if that
person is not the one viewing the monitor.
E. There may be occasions when a railroad finds it advantageous
to use a non-crewmember, e.g., a yardmaster, to provide point
protection, line switches, or check the status of a derail for a
remote control crew; however, several potential problems may result
when non-crewmembers are used to carry out some crewmember
functions. Of foremost concern is the great potential for an error
in communication or a misunderstanding between the non-crewmember
and the crewmembers regarding the activity or status of equipment.
A yardmaster who is occupied with his or her other responsibilities
might not give the task the attention it deserves, or could be
distracted and give an incorrect answer to a question by a
crewmember (e.g., “is the move lined?”). The result could be that
the task does not get completed or there is an error in task
execution. Further, the crewmembers might not have any alternative
way of determining that there is a problem with the point
protection provided by the non-crewmember until it is too late.
Consequently, to the extent they will be called upon to perform
these duties, each railroad shall include yardmasters and other
non-crewmembers in any operating rule promulgated in accordance
with § 218.99(b)(2).
II. Additional Requirements for Remote Control Locomotive
Operations at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings, Pedestrian Crossings,
and Yard Access Crossings
A. In addition to the general requirements and considerations
for all technology aided point protection in lieu of direct visual
determinations, additional requirements are necessary to address
concerns specific to the use of camera/monitor setups for remote
control locomotive operations to protect the point at highway-rail
grade crossings, pedestrian crossings, and yard access crossings.
Railroad operating rules currently permit a movement to travel over
a crossing without the physical presence of a crewmember if a
crossing is equipped with gates, if it can be determined that the
gates are in the fully lowered position, and if the crossing is
clear of vehicles and pedestrians. Remote control movements at
highway-rail grade crossings, pedestrian crossings, and yard access
crossings that utilize camera/monitor setups pose a greater direct
risk to members of the general public than yard movements utilizing
camera/monitor setups to check whether a track is clear. In
addition, such setups can rapidly develop problems with motor
vehicles and pedestrians unaccustomed to railroad operating rules
and procedures. For these reasons, additional safeguards are
necessary.
B. In consideration of the dangers posed by the use of
camera/monitor setups for remote control locomotive operations at
highway-rail grade crossings, pedestrian crossings, and yard access
crossings, the following procedures shall be complied with in order
to establish an equivalent means of safety in accordance with §
218.99(b)(3)(i):
1. Before camera-assisted remote control locomotive operations
are permitted at highway-rail grade crossings, pedestrian
crossings, and yard access crossings, a Crossing Diagnostic Team
shall evaluate the crossing. The diagnostic team shall have
representatives from the railroad, FRA, the State department of
transportation (or another State agency having jurisdiction over
the highway-rail grade crossing, pedestrian crossing, or yard
access crossing), and local government authorities. The diagnostic
team shall evaluate the suitability of each crossing for remote
camera operations. Among the factors it shall consider are the
following: the average annual daily traffic counts; the number of
highway lanes; highway speed limits; the presence of adjacent
signalized highway intersections; the number of railroad tracks;
the angle of the roadway intersection; the volume of school bus,
transit bus, emergency vehicle, commercial motor vehicle, and
hazardous materials traffic over the crossing; the minimum remote
control locomotive operator sight distances of roadway approaches
to the crossing; and other relevant factors that could affect the
safety of the crossing. The diagnostic team shall also consider the
appropriate number of cameras and appropriate camera angles needed
to provide for the remote operation of remote control locomotives
over the crossing. The diagnostic team shall agree to a written
diagnostic evaluation summary of the factors considered and shall
provide the railroad with agreed upon parameters by which the
camera-assisted remote control operation may continue in operation
if the factors required for suitability change; thus, any change in
the factors considered by the diagnostic team outside of the
acceptable parameters shall require the railroad to receive a
revised evaluation approval from a diagnostic team before
continuing any such operation. In addition, any of the Federal,
State, or local governmental authorities may trigger review of a
prior evaluation approval at any time there is a question of the
suitability of the operation. It is possible that, of the
requirements listed below, requirements numbered 2, 4, 5, and 6
would be unnecessary at highway-rail grade crossings or yard access
crossings equipped with approved supplemental safety devices
(see 49 CFR part 222, app. A) that prevent motorists from
driving around lowered gates; under such circumstances, the
diagnostic team shall make such determinations. If a Crossing
Diagnostic Team, as described in this paragraph, evaluated a
crossing for the factors described herein, prior to April 14, 2008,
another diagnostic team evaluation is not required to comply with
this rule; however, the requirements listed below shall still apply
to any such remotely controlled movements over that crossing.
2. Camera-assisted remote control locomotive operations shall
only be permitted at crossings equipped with flashing lights,
gates, and constant warning time train detection systems where
appropriate, based on train speeds.
3. A crewmember or other qualified employee shall not view the
monitor in place of the remote control operator, as is permitted
for other shoving or pushing movements. See § 218.99(b)(3).
For purposes of remote control locomotive operations with
camera/monitor setups to protect the point at highway-rail grade
crossings, pedestrian crossings, and yard access crossings, the
remote control operator controlling the movement shall view the
monitor during such operations.
4. The cameras shall be arranged to give the remote control
locomotive operator controlling the movement a view of the rail
approaches to the crossing from each direction so that the operator
can accurately judge the end of the movement's proximity to the
crossing.
5. The cameras shall be arranged to give the remote control
locomotive operator a clear view to determine the speed and driver
behavior (e.g., driving erratically) of any approaching motor
vehicles.
6. Either the camera resolution shall be sufficient to determine
whether the flashing lights and gates are working as intended or
the crossing shall be equipped with a remote health monitoring
system that is capable of notifying the remote control locomotive
operator immediately if the flashing lights and gates are not
working as intended.
7. The railroad shall notify the Associate Administrator for
Safety in writing when this type of protection has been installed
and activated at a crossing.
III. Conclusion
The technology used to aid point protection will undoubtedly
develop and improve over time. FRA encourages the use and
development of this technology as is evidenced by the option in
this rule to utilize such technology. Meanwhile, as a regulating
body, FRA cannot determine whether a new technology to aid point
protection provides an equivalent level of protection to that of a
direct visual determination unless we are made aware of the new
technology. Consequently, aside from the camera/monitor setups
described in this appendix, each railroad that intends to implement
a technology used to aid point protection shall notify the
Associate Administrator for Safety in writing of the technology to
be used prior to implementation.
[73 FR 8504, Feb. 13, 2008]