[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 10, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1894-1901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-590]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 213

[Docket No. RST-90-1, Notice No. 9]
RIN 2130-AB32


Track Safety Standards

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: FRA amends the Track Safety Standards to provide procedures 
for track owners to use Gage Restraint Measuring Systems (GRMS) to 
assess the ability of their track to maintain proper gage. Under the 
current Track Safety Standards, track owners must evaluate a track's 
gage restraint capability through visual inspections conducted at 
frequencies and intervals specified in the standards. With this 
amendment, track owners may monitor gage restraint on a designated 
track segment using GRMS procedures. Individuals employed by the track 
owner to inspect track must be permitted to exercise their discretion 
in judging whether the track segment should also be visually inspected 
by a qualified track inspector.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective April 10, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison H. MacDowell, Office of Safety 
Enforcement, Federal Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6236), or Nancy 
Lummen Lewis, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 
1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590 
(telephone: 202-493-6047).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introductory Statement

    Historically, railroads assess a track's ability to maintain gage 
through visual inspections of crossties and rail fastening systems. The 
maintenance decisions which determine crosstie and rail fastener 
replacement within the

[[Page 1895]]

industry today rely heavily on those visual inspections made by 
maintenance personnel whose subjective knowledge is based on varying 
degrees of experience and training. The subjective nature of these 
inspections sometimes results in inconsistent determinations about the 
ability of individual crossties and rail fasteners to maintain adequate 
gage restraint.
    Crossties may not always exhibit strong indications of good or bad 
condition. If a crosstie in questionable condition is removed from 
track prematurely, its maximum service life is unnecessarily shortened 
resulting in added maintenance costs for the railroad. Yet, crossties 
of questionable condition left too long in track can cause a wide-gage 
derailment with its inherent risk of injury to railroad personnel and 
passengers and damage to property. In many instances of gage failure 
caused by defective crossties and/or rail fasteners, the static or 
unloaded gage is within the limits prescribed by the Federal Track 
Safety Standards contained in 49 CFR part 213. However, when a train 
applies an abnormally high lateral load to a section of track which 
contains marginal crosstie or rail fastener conditions, the result is 
often a wide-gage derailment.
    Statistics taken from the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA's) 
Annual Accident/Incident Bulletins indicate that wide gage resulting 
from defective crossties and rail fasteners has been, and continues to 
be, the largest single cause of reportable track-caused derailments. In 
response to this problem, a long-standing joint FRA/industry research 
project has developed a non-destructive performance-based technology to 
objectively measure the gage restraint capacity of crossties and rail 
fasteners. The GRMS applies known lateral and vertical loads to the 
track structure, measures the gage deflection under those loads, and 
then projects what the gage would become under severe track loading 
conditions of 24,000 pounds lateral and 33,000 pounds vertical. From 
this data, a gage widening ratio is calculated as a measure of overall 
track strength.
    In 1993, FRA granted CSX Transportation (CSXT) a waiver of 
compliance from portions of the Track Safety Standards so that it could 
conduct a test program to evaluate a GRMS performance-based standard. 
In lieu of implementing existing crosstie and rail fastener 
requirements, CSXT used FRA's research vehicle to judge track strength 
of nearly 500 miles of track in various segments. The experience gained 
from this test program has afforded FRA and the industry the 
opportunity to adjust the operational and conditional requirements of a 
GRMS program to make it a more consistent method of objectively 
determining crosstie and rail fastener effectiveness.
    During the past several years, CSXT contracted for the design and 
construction of two GRMS vehicles which are in use over its system, 
including the waiver territory. The former Consolidated Rail 
Corporation used a GRMS vehicle over its system, and several other 
Class I railroads have expressed a serious interest in obtaining GRMS 
vehicles. FRA believes that the GRMS technology has now advanced to the 
point where railroads can use it to reliably assist in determining 
compliance with crosstie and rail fastener requirements contained in 
the Track Safety Standards.

Proceedings To Date

A. Track Working Group

    On April 2, 1996, the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) 
agreed to provide advice and recommendations to FRA for revision of the 
Track Safety Standards. The RSAC then assigned that responsibility to a 
specialized working group comprised of approximately 30 representatives 
from labor, railroads, trade associations, state government groups, 
track equipment manufacturers, and FRA.
    The Track Working Group met monthly from May, 1996, through 
October, 1996, to provide to FRA advice on the development of a draft 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to recommend to the RSAC. Although 
the Track Working Group discussed extensively the subject of GRMS, it 
was unable to reach consensus about how GRMS technology should be 
addressed in the revised Track Safety Standards. Representatives of the 
railroads had anticipated that the revised track standards would 
include a provision allowing railroads to use GRMS technology in place 
of inspection requirements already outlined in Part 213. Labor 
representatives, however, expressed strong reluctance to agree to a 
change that could replace some of the discretion and judgment already 
allowed track inspectors. They expressed fear that the judgment of 
track inspectors would be overruled completely by GRMS technology.
    At a public meeting on October 31, 1996, the Track Working Group 
presented its proposed rule to the RSAC. The proposed rule did not 
include a provision for GRMS. The RSAC therefore appointed a small task 
group to evaluate the possibility of developing GRMS standards to be 
added to the revised Track Safety Standards at a later time.
    The proposed rule, based on recommendations received from the Track 
Working Group, was approved by a majority consensus of the RSAC, which 
in turn, recommended the proposal to FRA for adoption. On July 3, 1997, 
FRA issued an NPRM largely based upon that proposal. See 62 FR 36168. 
FRA conducted a public hearing and received mostly favorable comments 
from 12 respondents. On June 22, 1998, FRA issued a final rule, based 
upon its NPRM and the comments it received in response. See 63 FR 
33992. Both the NPRM and the final rule identified and discussed the 
relevant issues concerning GRMS.

B. GRMS Task Group

    A specialized Task Group met five times from June 1997, through 
February 1998, to advise FRA on regulatory language which addresses the 
use of GRMS technology for possible inclusion into the Track Safety 
Standards. The Task Group was comprised of approximately 12 
representatives from labor, railroads, trade associations, state 
government groups, the Department of Transportation's Research and 
Special Programs Administration, and FRA. A member of the National 
Transportation Safety Board also participated in an advisory capacity.
    The Task Group discussed at length whether GRMS technology should 
replace, or merely supplement, traditional inspection methods and the 
requirements for crossties and rail fasteners. Representatives of labor 
organizations argued that the technology should be used in conjunction 
with traditional inspection methods and existing requirements. 
Representatives of railroad management argued that GRMS technology 
should more than supplement existing standards because the use of GRMS 
technology produces an objective determination of whether crossties are 
able to continue effectively maintaining adequate gage restraint, or 
are approaching the end of their service lives and must be replaced. In 
some cases, the traditional method of crosstie evaluation would not 
necessarily agree with the GRMS evaluation.
    To resolve this disagreement, the Task Group agreed that a GRMS 
provision in the Track Safety Standards should provide for discretion 
of employees fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 to use Portable Track 
Loading Fixtures (PTLFs) between GRMS inspections to make individual 
judgements about a track's ability to maintain gage. A PTLF is a hand-
carried gage measuring device that

[[Page 1896]]

exerts a lateral force between rails to test a track's ability to 
maintain gage under that pressure. Although the PTLF does not exert 
vertical force, as does the GRMS vehicle, it nevertheless functions as 
a surrogate measurement of track strength between inspections with the 
full-sized GRMS vehicle.
    This amendment to the Track Safety Standards reflects the 
resolution reached by the Task Group. Under this amendment, railroads 
may designate track segments to be evaluated regularly by GRMS 
technology. Employees fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 will use the 
PTLF as an additional analytical tool to determine compliance with the 
crosstie and fastener requirements. If a location passes the PTLF 
criteria, but the employee is uncomfortable with the condition of the 
track at that location, the employee retains the discretion to take 
additional remedial actions, such as placing slow orders at that 
location. On lines designated by the railroads to be evaluated by GRMS, 
FRA inspectors will determine compliance with the crosstie and fastener 
requirements solely on the basis of a PTLF measurement.
    This amendment provides for two levels of compliance exceptions on 
track designated as GRMS track. This method closely follows the current 
procedures in effect on the CSXT waiver territory. First level 
exceptions are those locations which require the railroads to 
immediately place a 10 mph speed restriction, followed by verification 
and corrective action. Second level exceptions are those locations 
which do not appear to require immediate attention but must be 
monitored to ensure that they do not become defects before the next 
GRMS inspection.
    The amendment also requires track owners to implement a formal 
training program for employees who are fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 
and whose territories are subject to the operation of a GRMS vehicle. 
The training program should provide affected employees with the 
necessary information to locate and verify GRMS defects, prescribe and 
record the appropriate remedial action, and provide specific 
instructions on the use and calibration of the PTLF.
    In developing recommendations for inspection frequency requirements 
for GRMS, the Task Group considered such factors as class of track, 
amount of traffic, and whether or not the line is used for passenger 
transportation. In consideration of these varying factors, this 
amendment adopts a simplified but conservative approach by requiring 
annual GRMS inspections, not to exceed 14 months between inspections, 
on all line segments where the annual tonnage exceeds two million gross 
tons (MGTs) or where the maximum operating speed for passenger trains 
is more than 30 mph. On line segments where the traffic is two MGTs or 
less, and the maximum operating speed for passenger trains does not 
exceed 30 mph, the interval between inspections must not exceed 24 
months. This longer inspection interval makes the technology more 
accessible to short lines which may not have the same equipment or 
financial resources available to the larger railroads.

Section-By-Section Analysis of Sec. 213.110

Paragraph (a)

    Paragraph (a) provides for the implementation of a GRMS, 
supplemented by the use of a PTLF, to determine compliance with the 
crosstie and rail fastener requirements specified in Secs. 213.109 and 
213.127. Track owners electing to implement this technology must 
provide the appropriate FRA Regional Office with notification that 
specifically identifies the line segment(s) where GRMS will be used. 
The appropriate FRA office is the headquarters location for the FRA 
region in which the GRMS designated line segment is located.
    The notification must be provided to FRA at least 30 days prior to 
the designation of any line segment which will be subject to the 
requirements of this section. Track owners must also provide FRA with 
at least 10 days notice prior to the removal of a line segment from 
GRMS designation.

Paragraph (b)

    This paragraph specifies what information track owners should 
include in their notifications to FRA about line segments designated 
for GRMS inspection. The information must include, at a minimum, the 
segment's timetable designation, milepost limits, track class, million 
gross tons of traffic per year, and any other identifying 
characteristics of the segment.

Paragraph (c)

    This paragraph describes minimum design requirements for GRMS 
vehicles. Track owners must submit to FRA sufficient technical data so 
that the agency can establish whether or not the track owner is in 
compliance with these design requirements. The paragraph requires that 
gage must be measured between the heads of the rail at an interval not 
exceeding 16 inches. The paragraph provides for design flexibility by 
establishing acceptable ranges for the lateral/vertical load ratio and 
the resulting lateral load severity, both of which can be satisfied by 
various load configurations, provided that the applied vertical load is 
not less than 10,000 pounds per rail.

Paragraphs (d), (e), and (f)

    The mathematical formulas prescribed in these paragraphs are to be 
used in the calculation of the Gage Widening Ratio (GWR) and the 
Projected Loaded Gage 24 (PLG 24). The accurate measurements of 
unloaded gage, GRMS loaded gage, and the lateral load applied are of 
critical importance because these measurements are used in the 
calculation of PLG 24 values and the values for GWR, values which 
comprise a direct measure of track strength. Therefore, to avoid any 
influence from adjacent loads, design requirements specify that the 
unloaded track gage must be measured by the GRMS vehicle at a point no 
less than 10 feet from any lateral or vertical load application. Loaded 
track gage measured by the GRMS vehicle shall be measured at a point no 
more than 12 inches from the lateral load application point.
    The Task Group recommended that the loaded track gage measurement 
be taken at the point of application of the lateral load, as is the 
practice on existing in-service GRMS vehicles that use displacement 
transducers mounted on the instrumented wheelset. This final rule 
provides for the use of other gage measuring technologies, such as 
optical and laser gage measuring systems, by allowing the measurement 
of loaded gage to be taken no more than 12 inches from the lateral load 
application point.

Paragraphs (g), (h), and (i)

    GRMS vehicles must be also capable of producing strip chart traces 
of all the parameters specified in paragraph (l) of this section, as 
well as a printed exception report listing by magnitude and location 
all exceptions from these parameters. The exception report listing must 
be provided to the appropriate person designated as fully qualified 
under Sec. 213.7 prior to the next inspection required under 
Sec. 213.233 of this part.

Paragraph (j)

    The track owner is required to institute procedures that will 
ensure the integrity of data collected by the GRMS and PTLF systems. 
Track owners must maintain documented calibration procedures on each 
GRMS vehicle and make them available upon request from an FRA 
representative. FRA understands that common procedure is for GRMS 
systems to be calibrated at least once per day. Therefore, the rule 
requires that the procedures must

[[Page 1897]]

specify that calibration is done at least once per day. Track owners 
must also develop and implement the necessary PTLF inspection and 
maintenance procedures so that the 4,000-pound reading is accurate 
within plus/minus five percent.

Paragraph (k)

    This paragraph recognizes the need for all persons designated as 
fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 and whose territories are subject to 
the requirements of this section to receive training on the 
implementation of GRMS technology. The track owner, therefore is 
required to develop a formal GRMS training program which must be made 
available to FRA upon request.
    The training program must provide detailed instruction on the 
specific areas identified in this paragraph. In particular, the 
training must address basic GRMS operational procedures, interpretation 
and handling of exception reports, how to locate and verify GRMS 
defects in the field, remedial action requirements to be initiated when 
defects are verified, how to use and calibrate the PTLF, and the 
recordkeeping requirements associated with the implementation of GRMS 
technology.

Paragraph (l)

    This paragraph specifies the parameters and threshold levels to be 
reported as a record of lateral restraint following an inspection by a 
GRMS vehicle. The regulation requires that two levels of exceptions are 
reported during the GRMS inspection. Specific remedial actions are 
required for each level, as identified in the Remedial Action Table in 
this section. First Level exceptions are required to be immediately 
protected by a 10 mph speed restriction until verification and 
corrective action can be instituted. Second Level exceptions are to be 
monitored and maintained within the PTLF criteria outlined in paragraph 
(m) of this section.
    Footnote 2 in the Remedial Action Table of this section recognizes 
that typical good track will increase in total gage by as much as \1/4\ 
inch due to outward rail rotation under GRMS loading conditions. 
Accordingly, for Class 2 and Class 3 track, the GRMS loaded track gage 
values are also increased by \1/4\ inch to a maximum of 58 inches. GRMS 
loaded track gage values in excess of 58 inches must always be 
considered First Level exceptions. This \1/4\ inch allowance in gage 
applies only to GRMS loaded gage, and does not apply to PTLF gage 
measurements or to measurements made by more traditional methods.

Paragraph (m)

    Paragraph (m) describes the manner in which a PTLF must be used as 
an additional analytical tool, between GRMS inspections, to assist 
fully qualified Sec. 213.7 individuals in determining compliance with 
the crosstie and rail fastener requirements specified in Secs. 213.109 
and 213.127. At locations identified by a GRMS record of inspection, or 
at any other location along the track, compliance with the crosstie and 
rail fastener requirements will be demonstrated when a PTLF is applied 
and (1) the total gage widening at that location does not exceed \5/8\ 
inch when increasing the applied force from 0 to 4,000 pounds, and (2) 
the gage of the track measured under 4,000 pounds of applied force does 
not exceed the allowable gage prescribed in Sec. 213.53(b) of this 
section for the class of track involved. Gage widening in excess of the 
\5/8\ inch must constitute a deviation from Class 1 standards.
    At locations where compliance with the crosstie and rail fastener 
requirements have been demonstrated through the use of a PTLF, a fully 
qualified Sec. 213.7 individual retains the discretionary authority to 
prescribe additional remedial actions, such as the placement of speed 
restrictions, if the individual deems it necessary. FRA inspectors will 
determine compliance with the crosstie and fastener requirements solely 
on the basis of the PTLF measurements.
    When a functional PTLF is not available to a fully qualified 
Sec. 213.7 individual during a scheduled inspection under Sec. 213.233 
of this part, the track owner must repair or replace the PTLF prior to 
the next inspection required under Sec. 213.233, or crosstie and rail 
fastener compliance will be based solely on the requirements specified 
in Secs. 213.109 and 213.127.
    At locations where crosstie or rail fastening compliance is 
questioned and vertical loading of the track structure is necessary to 
restore contact with the lateral rail restraint components, the 
crossties must be raised until lateral restraint contact is restored 
and a PTLF measurement must then be made.

Paragraph (n)

    The track owner must maintain a record of the two most recent GRMS 
inspections at locations meeting the requirements specified in 
Sec. 213.241(b). The records must indicate the location and nature of 
each First Level exception and, the nature and date of initiated 
remedial action, if any, for each First Level exception. First Level 
exceptions are described in the Remedial Action Table in Paragraph (l).
    The track owner is not required to maintain records of Second Level 
exceptions. However, as required in paragraph (i), reports of all 
exceptions, including Second Level exceptions, must be provided to the 
appropriate fully qualified Sec. 213.7 individuals prior to the next 
inspection required under Sec. 213.233. Second Level exceptions are 
also described in the Remedial Action Table in Paragraph (l).

Paragraph (o)

    On line segments where the annual tonnage exceeds two million gross 
tons, or where the maximum operating speeds for passenger trains 
exceeds 30 mph, GRMS inspections must be performed annually, with no 
more than 14 months between inspections. The maximum interval of 14 
months is intended to provide some flexibility for scheduling when it 
may not be possible to schedule annual inspections within the same 
calendar month each year.
    On line segments where the annual tonnage is two million gross tons 
or less and the maximum operating speed for passenger trains does not 
exceed 30 mph, the interval between GRMS inspections cannot exceed 24 
months. This extended frequency is an attempt to make the technology 
more accessible to short line operators who may not have the financial 
or equipment resources available to larger railroads.

Paragraph (p)

    This list of definitions is offered to provide explanation of terms 
that are essential to the implementation of GRMS technology.

Regulatory Impact: Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures

    This final rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing 
policies and procedures. The final rule amending the Track Safety 
Standards is considered to be non-significant under both Executive 
Order 12866 and DOT policies and procedures (44 FR 11034, February, 26, 
1979). FRA has prepared and placed in the docket a regulatory analysis 
addressing the economic impact of the rule. Document inspection and 
copying facilities are available at 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Seventh 
Floor, Washington, D.C. Photocopies also may be obtained by submitting 
a written request to the FRA Docket Clerk, Office of Chief Counsel, 
Federal Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 
10, Washington, DC 20590.

[[Page 1898]]

    Ordinarily, in conducting an analysis of the costs and benefits of 
a proposed or final rule, FRA gathers more extensive economic data than 
was made available in this proceeding. However, in light of the 
consensus in the GRMS Task Group, the Track Working Group, and the 
majority vote of the RSAC members, FRA does not believe more data is 
necessary. FRA has relied principally on the recommendations and 
experience of the railroad industry and labor representatives who, 
through the RSAC process, helped develop this rule. The GRMS Task Group 
members provided valuable non-quantitative data on their preferences. 
Thus, their unanimous consensus on the contents of the rule allows FRA 
to conclude that the rule is cost beneficial.
    The main benefit of GRMS technology is that a railroad can improve 
safety by replacing ties that are not providing lateral restraint, and 
leave in service ties that may not look good but are providing adequate 
lateral restraint. The railroads using a GRMS will probably replace 
fewer ties initially, but by objectively determining through 
performance testing which ties need to be replaced, will be better able 
to ensure that existing ties will provide adequate lateral restraint. 
The primary reduction in costs to the railroad would result from a 
reduction in the number of ties replaced. In addition, the railroads 
would benefit from reduced accident costs and lower maintenance costs 
in attempting to maintain the geometry of track. The Association of 
American Railroads (AAR) estimates employment of a GRMS would reduce 
the requirement for new ties by 600,000 per year in the early years, 
although this benefit is likely to later shrink somewhat due to the 
finite life expectancy of crossties which a GRMS cannot extend. At $40 
per tie, the benefit to the industry would be about $24 million in the 
first year. The 20-year discounted net present value would be about 10 
times that amount, or $240 million, assuming some later shrinkage in 
the benefit and a seven percent discount rate. Assuming there are 
approximately 200,000 miles of track in the Nation, and each mile 
includes approximately 3,300 crossties, FRA believes this projection is 
reasonable.
    A GRMS also provides a safety benefit. Wide gage derailments cost 
the railroad industry about $60 million per year. If GRMS can reduce 
the number of wide gage derailments by half, the railroad industry will 
save $30 million per year. The 20-year discounted benefit would be 
approximately 10 times that amount, or $300 million, assuming 
systemwide adoption of a GRMS.
    This final rule provides the use of a GRMS as an option. It is not 
mandatory. Therefore, a railroad will not implement a GRMS unless the 
railroad believes that the benefit of the system will exceed its cost. 
A GRMS vehicle costs approximately $3 million. About 10 of them would 
be needed nationwide to test all of the railroads. Therefore, the cost 
of the vehicles to the railroad industry would be $30 million. The 
costs of operating a GRMS is approximately $300,000. The 20-year 
discounted cost therefore would be $3 million. In addition, the 
railroad industry would need approximately 1,000 PTLFs. At a cost of 
about $1,200 each, the total cost to the industry for PTLFs would be 
approximately $1.2 million.
    In addition to the equipment costs, railroads would expend about 
$800 each to train track inspectors on the use of PTLFs. Assuming one 
track inspector per PTLF, the cost to the railroad industry for 
training would be $800,000. The total initial investment by the 
railroad industry, including equipment and training, would be $32 
million.
    Assuming maintenance costs about 10 percent of the initial 
investment, and maintenance most likely would not be needed the first 
year, the 20-year discounted cost of maintenance would be about nine 
times 10 percent, or 90 percent of $32 million: $28.8 million. Thus the 
total 20-year discounted cost would be about $60.8 million.
    This non-mandatory provision for use of GRMS could return as much 
as $540 million in discounted benefits to the railroad industry, at a 
discounted cost of only $60.8 million, assuming GRMS procedures are 
adopted nationwide. The railroad industry will most likely gain 
financially while improving safety.

Federalism Implications

    This final rule has been analyzed according to the principles of 
Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''). The GRMS Task Group which 
developed this amendment to the Track Safety Standards included a 
representative of the American Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO). In addition, the task group included 
railroad and labor union representatives who operate in a number of 
different states. As far as FRA has been able to discern, there are no 
states which require, provide for, or otherwise regulate the use of 
GRMS procedures for inspecting and maintaining track gage. Therefore, 
this amendment to Part 213 does not have any federalism implications.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This amendment to the Track Safety Standards provides for an 
alternative option for railroads to use in evaluating gage restraint 
capabilities of track. The use of a GRMS is not mandatory. Therefore, 
FRA concludes that this amendment will have no measurable impact on 
small units of government, businesses, or other organizations. FRA 
certifies that this amendment does not impose a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, the 
preparation of a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required in 
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    Because an analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not 
required for this amendment to the Track Safety Standards, FRA is 
likewise not required to issue a Small Entity Compliance Guide to 
summarize the requirements of this rule, pursuant to section 212 of the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this amendment have been 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 
sections that contain the new information collection requirements of 
the new section, which will be added to those of the Track Safety 
Standards (49 CFR Part 213), and the estimated time to fulfill each 
requirement are as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Respondent                                                                      Total annual
              CFR section                   universe         Total annual  responses         Average time per response     burden hours    Total annual
                                           (railroads)                                                                        (hours)       burden cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
213.110--GRMS Technical Data 1--                    685  40 notifications...............  45 minutes....................              46          $1,140
 Compliance with Minimum Design
 Requirements.
--GRMS Vehicle Output Reports..........             685  150 reports....................  5 minutes.....................              13             494

[[Page 1899]]

 
--GRMS Vehicle Exception Reports.......             685  150 reports....................  5 minutes.....................              13             494
--GRMS Documented Calibration                       685  10 documents...................  2 hours.......................              20             760
 Procedures.
--GRMS Training Programs + Training                 685  10 programs + 25 sessions......  16 hours......................             560          21,280
 Sessions.
--GRMS Inspection Records..............             685  200 records....................  2 hours.......................             400          15,200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, 
searching existing data sources, gathering or maintaining the needed 
data, and reviewing the information. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 
3506(c)(2)(B), the FRA solicits comments concerning: whether these 
information collection requirements are necessary for the proper 
performance of the function of FRA, including whether the information 
has practical utility; the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of 
the information collection requirements; the quality, utility, and 
clarity of the information to be collected; and whether the burden of 
collection of information on those who are to respond, including 
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology, may be minimized. Information or a copy of the 
paperwork package submitted to OMB may be obtained by contacting Robert 
Brogan, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Safety Analysis, at 
202-493-6292.
    FRA believes that soliciting public comment will promote its 
efforts to reduce the administrative and paperwork burdens associated 
with the collection of information mandated by Federal regulations. In 
summary, FRA reasons that comments received will advance three 
objectives: (1) Reduce reporting burdens; (2) ensure that it organizes 
information collection requirements in a ``user friendly'' format to 
improve the use of such information; and (3) accurately assess the 
resources expended to retrieve and produce information requested. See 
44 U.S.C. 3501.
    Comments must be received no later than March 12, 2001. 
Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the 
collection of information requirements should direct them to Robert 
Brogan, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Safety Analysis, 
Mail Stop 17, 1120 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20590.
    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of 
information requirements contained in this proposed 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.
    FRA cannot impose a penalty for violating information collection 
requirements on persons who do not display a current OMB control 
number, if required. FRA intends to obtain current OMB control numbers 
for any new information collection requirements resulting from this 
rulemaking action prior to the effective date of a final rule. The OMB 
control number, when assigned, will be announced by separate notice in 
the Federal Register.

Environmental Impact

    FRA has evaluated this amendment to the Track Safety Standards in 
accordance with its procedures for ensuring full consideration of the 
potential environmental impacts of FRA actions, as required by the 
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and related 
directives. This amendment meets the criteria that establish it as a 
non-major action for environmental purposes.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 213

    Penalties, Railroad safety, Railroads, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

The Final Rule

    In consideration of the foregoing, FRA amends part 213, title 49, 
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 213 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102-20114 and 20142; 28 U.S.C. 2461; and 
49 CFR 1.49(m).

    2. Section 213.110 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 213.110  Gage restraint measurement systems.

    (a) A track owner may elect to implement a Gage Restraint 
Measurement System (GRMS), supplemented by the use of a Portable Track 
Loading Fixture (PTLF), to determine compliance with the crosstie and 
fastener requirements specified in Secs. 213.109 and 213.127 provided 
that--
    (1) The track owner notifies the appropriate FRA Regional office at 
least 30 days prior to the designation of any line segment on which 
GRMS technology will be implemented; and
    (2) The track owner notifies the appropriate FRA Regional office at 
least 10 days prior to the removal of any line segment from GRMS 
designation.
    (b) Initial notification under paragraph (a)(1) of this section 
shall include--
    (1) Identification of the line segment(s) by timetable designation, 
milepost limits, class of track, or other identifying criteria; and
    (2) The most recent record of million gross tons of traffic per 
year over the identified segment(s).
    (c) The track owner shall also provide to FRA sufficient technical 
data to establish compliance with the minimum design requirements of a 
GRMS vehicle which specify that--
    (1) Gage restraint shall be measured between the heads of rail --
    (A) At an interval not exceeding 16 inches;
    (B) Under an applied vertical load of no less than 10,000 pounds 
per rail; and
    (C) Under an applied lateral load which provides for a lateral/
vertical load ratio between 0.5 and 1.25, and a load severity greater 
than 3,000 pounds but less than 8,000 pounds.
    (d) Load severity is defined by the formula--S=L-cV

Where--

S=Load severity, defined as the lateral load applied to the fastener 
system (pounds).
L=Actual lateral load applied (pounds).
c=Coefficient of friction between rail/tie which is assigned a nominal 
value of (0.4).
V=Actual vertical load applied (pounds).

    (e) The measured gage values shall be converted to a Projected 
Loaded Gage 24 (PLG 24) as follows--


[[Page 1900]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JA01.000

Where--
UTG=Unloaded track gage measured by the GRMS vehicle at a point no less 
than 10 feet from any lateral or vertical load application.
LTG=Loaded track gage measured by the GRMS vehicle at a point no more 
than 12 inches from the lateral load application point.
A=The extrapolation factor used to convert the measured loaded gage to 
expected loaded gage under a 24,000 pound lateral load and a 33,000 
pound vertical load.
    For all track--

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JA01.001
    

    Note: The A factor shall not exceed (3.184) under any valid 
loading configuration.

where--
L=Actual lateral load applied (pounds).
V=Actual vertical load applied (pounds).
    (f) The measured gage value shall be converted to a Gage Widening 
Ratio (GWR) as follows --

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JA01.002

    (g) The GRMS vehicle shall be capable of producing output reports 
that provide a trace, on a constant-distance scale, of all parameters 
specified in paragraph (l) of this section.
    (h) The GRMS vehicle shall be capable of providing an exception 
report containing a systematic listing of all exceptions, by magnitude 
and location, to all the parameters specified in paragraph (l) of this 
section.
    (i) The exception reports required by this section shall be 
provided to the appropriate person designated as fully qualified under 
Sec. 213.7 prior to the next inspection required under Sec. 213.233.
    (j) The track owner shall institute the necessary procedures for 
maintaining the integrity of the data collected by the GRMS and PTLF 
systems. At a minimum, the track owner shall--
    (1) Maintain and make available to the Federal Railroad 
Administration documented calibration procedures on each GRMS vehicle 
which, at a minimum, shall specify a daily instrument verification 
procedure; and
    (2) Maintain each PTLF used for determining compliance with the 
requirements of this section such that the 4,000-pound reading is 
accurate to within five percent of that reading.
    (k) The track owner shall provide training in GRMS technology to 
all persons designated as fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 and whose 
territories are subject to the requirements of this section. The 
training program shall be made available to the Federal Railroad 
Administration upon request. At a minimum, the training program shall 
address--
    (1) Basic GRMS procedures;
    (2) Interpretation and handling of exception reports generated by 
the GRMS vehicle;
    (3) Locating and verifying defects in the field;
    (4) Remedial action requirements;
    (5) Use and calibration of the PTLF; and
    (6) Recordkeeping requirements.
    (l) The GRMS record of lateral restraint shall identify two 
exception levels. At a minimum, the track owner shall initiate the 
required remedial action at each exception level as defined in the 
following table--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       GRMS parameter \1\           If measurement value exceeds              Remedial action required
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              First Level Exception
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UTG.............................  58 inches......................  (1) Immediately protect the exception
                                                                    location with a 10 mph speed restriction;
                                                                    then verify location; and
                                                                   (2) Restore lateral restraint and maintain in
                                                                    compliance with PTLF criteria as described
                                                                    in paragraph (m) of this section; and
                                                                   (3) Maintain compliance with Sec.  213.53(b)
                                                                    of this part as measured with the PTLF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LTG.............................  58 inches......................
PLG24...........................  59 inches......................
GWR.............................  1.0 inches.....................
                                              Second Level Exception
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LTG.............................  57\3/4\ inches on Class 4 and 5  \2\ Limit operating speed to no more than the
                                   track \2\.                       maximum allowable under Sec.  213.9 for
                                                                    Class 3 track; then verify location; and
                                                                   (1) Maintain in compliance with PTLF criteria
                                                                    as described in paragraph (m) of this
                                                                    section; and
                                                                   (2) Maintain compliance with Sec.  213.53(b)
                                                                    of this part as measured with the PTLF.
PLG24...........................  58 inches......................
GWR.............................  0.75 inches....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 \1\ Definitions for the GRMS parameters referenced in this table are found in paragraph (p) of this section.

[[Page 1901]]

 
\2\ This note recognizes that typical good track will increase in total gage by as much as \1/4\ inch due to
  outward rail rotation under GRMS loading conditions. For Class 2 & 3 track, the GRMS LTG values are also
  increased by \1/4\ inch to a maximum of 58 inches. However, for any Class of track, GRMS LTG values in excess
  of 58 inches are considered First Level exceptions and the appropriate remedial actions must be taken by the
  track owner. This \1/4\-inch increase in allowable gage applies only to GRMS LTG. For gage measured by
  traditional methods, or with the use of the PTLF, the table in Sec.  213.53(b) will apply.

    (m) Between GRMS inspections, the PTLF shall be used as an 
additional analytical tool to assist fully qualified Sec. 213.7 
individuals in determining compliance with the crosstie and fastener 
requirements of Secs. 213.109 and 213.127 subject to the following 
criteria--
    (1) At any location along the track that the PTLF is applied, that 
location will be deemed in compliance with the crosstie and fastener 
requirements specified in Secs. 213.109 and 213.127 provided that--
    (i) The total gage widening at that location does not exceed \5/8\ 
inch when increasing the applied force from 0 to 4,000 pounds; and
    (ii) The gage of the track under 4,000 pounds of applied force does 
not exceed the allowable gage prescribed in Sec. 213.53(b) for the 
class of track.
    (2) Gage widening in excess of \5/8\ inch shall constitute a 
deviation from Class 1 standards.
    (3) A person designated as fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 retains 
the discretionary authority to prescribe additional remedial actions 
for those locations which comply with the requirements of paragraph 
(m)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (4) When a functional PTLF is not available to a fully qualified 
person designated under Sec. 213.7, the criteria for determining 
crosstie and fastener compliance shall be based solely on the 
requirements specified in Secs. 213.109 and 213.127.
    (5) If the PTLF becomes non-functional or is missing, the track 
owner will replace or repair it before the next inspection required 
under Sec. 213.233.
    (6) Where vertical loading of the track is necessary for contact 
with the lateral rail restraint components, a PTLF test will not be 
considered valid until contact with these components is restored under 
static loading conditions.
    (n) The track owner shall maintain a record of the two most recent 
GRMS inspections at locations which meet the requirements specified in 
Sec. 213.241(b). At a minimum, records shall indicate the following--
    (1) Location and nature of each First Level exception; and
    (2) Nature and date of remedial action, if any, for each exception 
identified in paragraph (n)(1) of this section.
    (o) The inspection interval for designated GRMS line segments shall 
be such that--
    (1) On line segments where the annual tonnage exceeds two million 
gross tons, or where the maximum operating speeds for passenger trains 
exceeds 30 mph, GRMS inspections must be performed annually at an 
interval not to exceed 14 months; or
    (2) On line segments where the annual tonnage is two million gross 
tons or less and the maximum operating speed for passenger trains does 
not exceed 30 mph, the interval between GRMS inspections must not 
exceed 24 months.
    (p) As used in this section--
    (1) Gage Restraint Measurement System (GRMS) means a track loading 
vehicle meeting the minimum design requirements specified in this 
section.
    (2) Gage Widening Ratio (GWR) means the measured difference between 
loaded and unloaded gage measurements, linearly normalized to 16,000 
pounds of applied lateral load.
    (3) L/V ratio means the numerical ratio of lateral load applied at 
a point on the rail to the vertical load applied at that same point. 
GRMS design requirements specify an L/V ratio of between 0.5 and 1.25. 
GRMS vehicles using load combinations developing L/V ratios which 
exceed 0.8 must be operated with caution to protect against the risk of 
wheel climb by the test wheelset.
    (4) Load severity means the amount of lateral load applied to the 
fastener system after friction between rail and tie is overcome by any 
applied gage-widening lateral load.
    (5) Loaded Track Gage (LTG) means the gage measured by the GRMS 
vehicle at a point no more than 12 inches from the lateral load 
application point.
    (6) Portable Track Loading Fixture (PTLF) means a portable track 
loading device capable of applying an increasing lateral force from 0 
to 4,000 pounds on the web/base fillet of each rail simultaneously.
    (7) Projected Loaded Gage (PLG) means an extrapolated value for 
loaded gage calculated from actual measured loads and deflections. PLG 
24 means the extrapolated value for loaded gage under a 24,000 pound 
lateral load and a 33,000 pound vertical load.
    (8) Unloaded Track Gage (UTG) means the gage measured by the GRMS 
vehicle at a point no less than 10 feet from any lateral or vertical 
load.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 4, 2001.
John V. Wells,
Acting Federal Railroad Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-590 Filed 1-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-U