[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42154-42155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20514]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Petitions for Waivers of Compliance
In accordance with part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) received requests for waivers of compliance with certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petitions are
described below, including the parties seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioners' arguments in favor of relief.
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Waiver Petition Docket Number
PB-94-3)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) seeks a waiver
of compliance from certain sections of the Railroad Power Brakes and
Drawbars regulations, 49 CFR part 232. In 1995, FRA granted a waiver
(Waiver Petition Docket Number PB-94-3) to Amtrak to extend the
frequency for the cleaning, oiling, testing, and stenciling (COT&S) of
passenger cars equipped with 26-C brake equipment from the required 36
months to 48 months. Amtrak requests that commuter rail passenger cars
owned by the following commuter agencies, but operated and maintained
by Amtrak under individual contract agreements, be under the
maintenance conditions set forth in Waiver Docket Number PB-94-3:
Connecticut Department of Transportation--31 coaches
[[Page 42155]]
Maryland Rail Commuter--110 coaches
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority--358 coaches
North Carolina Department of Transportation--14 coaches
Virginia Railway Express--59 coaches
Please note that some of the commuter agencies' coaches are cab
control cars. 49 CFR 229.14 requires that components added to the
passenger car that enable it to serve as a lead locomotive, control the
locomotive actually providing tractive power, and otherwise control the
movement of the train, are subject to the requirements of 49 CFR part
229. Therefore, only the brake system components not subject to the
requirements of 49 CFR 229.14 are to be considered in this petition for
any cab control car.
Amtrak declares that the commuter rail equipment is maintained in
accordance to all applicable FRA requirements, Association of American
Railroad's maintenance practices, and Amtrak's standard maintenance
procedures. Amtrak also contends that the service conditions on the
commuter car fleets are considered to be consistent with those
conditions under which Amtrak's four year test for COT&S was conducted.
Norfolk Southern Corporation (Waiver Petition Docket Number RST-96-3)
The Norfolk Southern Corporation (NS) seeks a waiver from the
requirements of 49 CFR Part 213.241 to allow it to submit and maintain
track inspection records via an electronic system.
In its petition, NS refers to the provisions of Sec. 213.241 which
require that each record of an inspection be prepared on the day the
inspection is made and signed by the person making the inspection. NS
believes that these provisions do not specifically mandate a paper-
based recordkeeping system, and states that to the extent that this
part implies such a requirement, it be granted a waiver to substitute
electronic records for paper ones. NS further requests that it be
permitted to input the records of inspection within one day's time of
the date on which the inspection is made.
NS states that the use of the electronic system would allow the
railroad to significantly reduce the volume of paper reports (estimated
to average approximately 600 reports each week) and the associated
handling costs. NS also states that the electronic reporting system
could be effected without cost to any party and without disrupting or
destroying the integrity of the present record system.
Under the proposed reporting procedure, track inspectors would
continue to make their inspections and gather information on
handwritten notes or, potentially, laptop computers. The proposed
filing system would merely alter the way in which the inspection report
is submitted, stored, and retrieved. Each track inspector would have
his/her own personal electronic identity. The track inspector would
call up a form on NS's e-mail network, insert the pertinent information
on the form, and send it electronically to the regional offices. Upon
receipt via e-mail in the regional offices, hard copy reports would be
placed into files along the same lines as are currently used. In the
future, NS states that it will develop a separate database to store all
track inspection reports.
NS declares that its policy prohibits the sharing and duplication
of passwords, thus preserving the uniqueness of each user's identity.
Once the inspection report is completed by the inspector, the computer
system would not accept subsequent alterations or modifications of the
report. The computer system would allow subsequent access to such
reports, or compilations of information generated therefrom, but would
limit this access to a read-only basis.
NS anticipates that, in virtually all instances, the record of
inspection will be prepared and entered into the electronic system on
the inspection date. However, NS states that it is possible for the
input process to be delayed in rare instances, such as when the system
mainframe computer is taken off-line for periodic software maintenance,
when the reporting inspector is called out to respond to an emergency
situation, or when the inspector is located at a site where he/she does
not have access to a terminal. NS asks that it be granted the one-day
grace period for these rare circumstances.
NS believes that the granting of the petition would provide
positive benefits for all parties involved and an immediate increase in
efficiency while reducing costs.
Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number PB-94-3)
and must be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Clerk, Office of
Chief Counsel, FRA, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Mail Stop
25, Washington, DC 20590. Communications received within 30 days of the
date of this notice will be considered by FRA before final action is
taken. Comments received after that date will be considered as far as
practicable. All written communications concerning these proceedings
are available for examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5
p.m.) at FRA's temporary docket room located at 1120 Vermont Avenue,
NW., Room 7051, Washington, DC 20005.
Issued in Washington, D.C. on July 29, 1997.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. 97-20514 Filed 8-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P