[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13583-13586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06281]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2018-0027]


Automation in the Railroad Industry

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

ACTION: Request for Information (RFI).

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

SUMMARY: This request for information notice replaces the version 
published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2018 (83 FR 12646), to 
make technical corrections to the prior version. FRA requests 
information and comment on the future of automation in the railroad 
industry. FRA is interested in hearing from industry stakeholders, the 
public, local and State governments, and any other interested parties 
on the potential benefits, costs, risks, and challenges to

[[Page 13584]]

implementing automated railroad operations. FRA also seeks comment on 
how the agency can best support the railroad industry's development and 
implementation of new and emerging technologies in automation that 
could lead to safety improvements or increased efficiencies in railroad 
operations.

DATES: Comments and information responsive to this request should be 
received by May 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit information and comments identified by the 
docket number FRA-2018-0027 by any one of the following methods:
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251;
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590;
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays; or
     Electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, 
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for 
submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket 
name, and docket number for this RFI (FRA-2018-0027). Note that all 
comments and data received in response to this RFI will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act 
information related to any submitted comments or materials.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read comments received, go to 
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Cipriano, Special Assistant to 
the Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6017), 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview

    FRA seeks to understand the current stage and development of 
automated railroad operations and how the agency can best position 
itself to support the integration and implementation of new automation 
technologies to increase the safety, reliability, and the capacity of 
the nation's railroad system. As in other transportation modes, there 
are varying levels of automation that already are, or could potentially 
be, implemented in the railroad industry. Currently, U.S. passenger and 
freight railroads do not have a fully autonomous rail operation in 
revenue service, however, railroads commonly use automated systems for 
dispatching, meet and pass trip planning, locomotive fuel trip time 
optimization, and signaling and train control. Railroads conduct many 
switching and yard operations by remote control and automated equipment 
and track inspections technologies are used to augment manual 
inspection methods. Modern locomotive cabs are equipped with 
intelligent information systems designed to provide operating crews 
with up-to-date situational awareness as train sensor data and alarms 
are continuously updated and displayed in operator consoles within the 
cab. Railroads often now utilize energy management technology (the 
equivalent of automobile cruise-control) to optimize fuel consumption 
based on specific operational and equipment factors, as well as 
movement planner systems designed to optimize in real-time, train 
movements on the rail network. Railroads are implementing statutorily 
mandated positive train control technology (a processor-based/
communications-based train control system) to prevent train accidents 
by automatically controlling train speeds and movements if a train 
operator fails to take appropriate action in certain operational 
scenarios. These various systems of automation and technologies have 
transformed rail operations in recent years, improving railroad 
operational safety and efficiency.
    FRA has helped developed many of these technologies and 
enhancements to these technologies are currently underway to support 
more advanced train control schemes and fully autonomous operations. In 
the fall of 2017, the Association of American Railroads, the freight 
rail industry's primary industry organization that focuses on policy, 
research, standard setting and technology, formed a Technical Advisory 
Group on autonomous train operations (ATO TAG). The focus of the ATO 
TAG is to define industry standards for an interoperable system to 
support enhanced safety and efficiency of autonomous train operations. 
The ATO TAG intends to develop standardization to support common 
interfaces and functions, such that technology may be applied in an 
interoperable fashion, while also allowing some flexibility in the 
specific design, implementation and packaging of the technology.
    Internationally, the only known fully-autonomous freight railroad 
system is in Australia. The system is part of the Australia Rio Tinto 
mining company and began fully-autonomous train operations on an 
approximately 62-mile stretch of track in Western Australia. This Rio 
Tinto train is equipped with a variety of sensors (e.g., radar, 
cameras, kangaroo collisions sensors) and with a switch to toggle 
between autonomous operation or operation with an operator on board.
    FRA seeks to understand the rail industry's plans for future 
development and implementation of automated train systems and 
technologies and the industry's plans and expectations related to 
potential fully-automated rail operations. FRA is specifically 
interested in the anticipated benefits, costs, risks, and challenges to 
achieving the industry's desired level of automation. FRA also seeks to 
understand how the rail industry's plans for future automation may 
affect other stakeholders, including railroad employees, the traveling 
public and freight shipping industry, railroad industry suppliers and 
equipment manufacturers, communities through which railroads operate, 
local and state governments with roles in regulating highway-rail grade 
crossing safety, and any other interested parties.
    FRA also seeks comment on the appropriate taxonomy to use to 
provide a baseline framework for the continued development and 
implementation of automated technology in the railroad industry. For 
example, both SAE, for on-road vehicles, and the International 
Association of Public Transport's (UITP) for public transit fixed 
guideway (rail) have developed taxonomies for their respective modes of 
transportation.
    The SAE definitions divide vehicles into levels based on ``who does 
what, when.'' Generally:
     At SAE Level 0, the driver does everything.
     At SAE Level 1, an automated system on the vehicle can 
sometimes assist the driver conduct some parts of the driving task.
     At SAE Level 2, an automated system on the vehicle can 
actually conduct some parts of the driving task, while the driver 
continues to monitor the driving environment and performs the rest of 
the driving task.

[[Page 13585]]

     At SAE Level 3, an automated system can both actually 
conduct some parts of the driving task and monitor the driving 
environment in some instances, but the driver must be ready to take 
back control when the automated system requests.
     At SAE Level 4, an automated system can conduct the 
driving task and monitor the driving environment, and the driver need 
not take back control, but the automated system can operate only in 
certain environments and under certain conditions.
     At SAE Level 5, the automated system can perform all 
driving tasks, under all conditions that a driver could perform them.
    Using the SAE levels described above, the Department has drawn a 
distinction for non-road vehicles between Levels 0-2 and 3-5 based on 
whether the human driver or the automated system is primarily 
responsible for monitoring the driving environment.
    Automatic Train Operation of public transit fixed guideway (rail) 
systems is an operational safety enhancement to automate operations of 
trains. It is mainly used on fixed guideway rail systems which are 
easier to ensure safety of agency staff and passengers. Basically, each 
grade defines distinct functions of train operation that are the 
responsibility of agency staff and those that are the responsibility of 
the rail system itself.
    Similar to SAE, UITP defines grades of automation (GoA) for fixed 
guideway (rail) systems. Generally:
     At UITP Grade 0, on-sight train operation, similar to a 
streetcar running in mixed traffic.
     At UITP Grade 1, manual train operation where a train 
operator controls starting and stopping, operation of doors and 
handling of emergencies or sudden diversions.
     At UITP Grade 2, semi-automatic train operation where 
starting and stopping is automated, but the train operator or conductor 
controls the doors, drives the train if needed and handles emergencies 
(many ATO systems worldwide are Grade 2),
     At UITP Grade 3, driverless train operation where starting 
and stopping are automated but a train attendant or conductor controls 
the doors and drives the train in case of emergencies.
     At UITP Grade 4, unattended train operation where starting 
and stopping, operation of doors and handling of emergencies are fully 
automated without any on-train staff.
    FRA requests comment on whether these or other taxonomies for 
automation should be applied to railroads.

II. Questions Posed

    Although FRA seeks comments and relevant information and data on 
all issues related to the development and continued implementation of 
automated train systems and technologies and potentially fully 
autonomous train operations, FRA specifically requests comment and data 
in response to the following questions:

General Questions

    1. To what extent do railroads plan to automate operations? Do 
railroads plan to implement fully autonomous rail vehicles (i.e., 
vehicles capable of sensing their environments and operating without 
human input)? If so, for what types of operations?
    2. How do commenters envision the path to wide-scale development 
and implementation of autonomous rail operations (or operations 
increasingly reliant on automated train systems or technologies)? What 
is the potential timeframe for technology prototype availability for 
testing and for deployment of such technologies?
    3. As discussed above, the railroad industry is currently taking 
steps in developing standards for automation. How does the railroad 
industry currently define ``autonomous operations''? Would it be 
helpful to develop automated rail taxonomy; a system of standards to 
clarify and define different levels of automation in trains, as 
currently exists for on-road vehicles and rail transit? What, if any, 
efforts are already under way to develop such rail automation taxonomy? 
Should FRA embrace any existing and defined levels of automation in the 
railroad industry or other transportation modes such as highways or 
public transit? For example, should FRA consider SAE Standard 
J3016_201609 (see http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/), which 
provides for six GoA for on-road vehicles, or the four GoA for public 
transit fixed guideway vehicles?
    4. What limitations and/or risks (e.g., practical, economic, 
safety, or other) are already known or anticipated in implementing 
these types of technologies? How should the railroad industry 
anticipate addressing these limitations and/or risks, and what efforts 
are currently underway to address them? Are any mitigating efforts 
expected in the future and what is the timeline for such efforts?
    5. What benefits and efficiencies (e.g., practical, economic, 
safety, or other) do commenters anticipate that railroads will be able 
to achieve by implementing these technologies?
    6. What societal benefits if any, could be expected to result from 
the adoption of these technologies (e.g., environmental, or noise 
reduction)? What societal disadvantages could occur?
    7. What, if anything, is needed from other railroad industry 
participants (e.g., rail equipment and infrastructure suppliers, 
manufacturers, maintainers) to support railroads' automation efforts?
    8. How does the state of automation of U.S. railroad operations 
compare to that of railroads in other countries? What can be learned 
from automation employed or under development in other countries? What 
are the unique characteristics of U.S. railroad operations and/or 
infrastructure as compared to railroads in other countries that may 
affect the wide-scale automation of railroad operations in this 
country?

Safety and/or Security Issues

    9. How do commenters believe these technologies could increase rail 
safety?
    10. What processes do railroads have in place to identify potential 
safety and/or security, including cybersecurity, risks arising during 
the adoption of these technologies and that may result from the 
adoption of such technologies?
    11. How should railroads plan to ensure identified safety and/or 
security risks are adequately addressed during the development and 
implementation of these new technologies? What is an acceptable level 
of risk in this context?
    12. How should railroads plan to ensure the integration of these 
technologies will not adversely affect, and will instead improve, the 
safety and/or security of railroad operations?
    13. What are the safety and security issues raised by automation in 
railroad operations at public and private at-grade highway-rail 
crossings? To what extent should DOT coordinate with state or local 
governmental entities on certain safety or security issues? How might 
automation improve the safety of the general public at highway-rail 
grade crossings or along the railroad rights-of way?
    14. How do railroads plan to ensure safety and security from cyber 
risks?
    15. How do the safety and/or security, including cyber risks, faced 
by U.S. railroads implementing these technologies compare to the risks 
faced by railroads operating in other countries? How have railroads in 
other countries addressed or mitigated these risks? Are there 
opportunities for cross-border collaboration to address such risks?

Infrastructure

    16. What are the infrastructure needs for effectively, safely, and 
securely

[[Page 13586]]

implementing these technologies? FRA is particularly interested in 
wayside, communication, onboard, operating personnel, testing, 
maintenance, certification, and data infrastructure needs, as well as 
any other expected or anticipated infrastructure needs.
    17. How can the nation's existing rail infrastructure be leveraged 
to support the implementation of new infrastructure, necessary for the 
adoption of automated and autonomous operations?

Workforce Viability

    18. What is the potential impact of the adoption of these 
technologies on the existing railroad industry workforce?
    19. Would the continued implementation of these technologies, 
including fully autonomous rail vehicles, create new jobs and/or 
eliminate the need for existing jobs in the railroad industry?
    20. What railroad employee training needs would likely result from 
the adoption of these technologies? For example, if the technology 
fails en route, will an onboard employee be trained to take over 
operation of the vehicle manually or be required to repair the 
technology en route?

Legal/Regulatory Issues

    21. What potential legal issues are raised by the development and 
implementation of autonomous train systems and technologies within the 
industry?
    22. What are the regulatory challenges (rail-specific or DOT-wide) 
that must be addressed before autonomous rail vehicles can be made a 
part of railroad operations in the United States?
    23. Are there current safety standards and/or regulations that 
impede the development and/or implementation of automated train systems 
or technologies in the railroad industry, including the development 
and/or implementation of autonomous rail vehicles? If so, what are they 
and how should they be addressed?

Opportunities for Joint Government/Industry Cooperation

    24. Are there current or anticipated railroad industry, private, 
international, or State or local government pilot projects or research 
initiatives involving automated train systems or technologies 
potentially in need of FRA support? If so, what are the needs (e.g., 
regulatory, technical)?
    25. What data relevant to the development and integration of 
automated train systems and technologies currently exists that could be 
leveraged to address future government/industry research needs?

III. Public Participation

    FRA invites all interested parties to submit comments, data, and 
information related to the specific questions listed in Section II 
above and any other comments, data, or information relevant to issues 
related to the development and implementation in the railroad industry 
of new automated train systems or technologies.

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments should be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are filed in the correct docket, please include docket number 
FRA-2018-0027 in your comments.
    Please submit your comments to the docket following the instruction 
given above under ADDRESSES. If you are submitting comments 
electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that the document 
submitted be scanned using an Optical Character Recognition process, 
thus allowing FRA to search your comments.

How do I request confidential treatment of my submission?

    Although FRA encourages the submission of information that can be 
freely and publicly shared, if you wish to submit any information under 
a claim of confidentiality, you must follow the procedures in 49 CFR 
209.11.

Will FRA consider late comments?

    FRA will consider all comments received before the close of 
business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To 
the extent possible, FRA will also consider comments after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received at the address given above under 
Comments. The hours of the docket are indicated above in the same 
location. You may also read the comments on the internet, filed in the 
docket number at the heading of this notice, at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Please note that, even after the comment closing date, FRA will 
continue to file any relevant information it receives in the docket as 
it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late comments. 
Accordingly, FRA recommends that you periodically check the docket for 
new material.

IV. Privacy Act Statement

    FRA notes that anyone is able to search (at www.regulations.gov) 
the electronic form of all filings received into any of DOT's dockets 
by the name of the individual submitting the filing (or signing the 
filing, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor 
union, or other organization). You may review DOT's complete Privacy 
Act Statement published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 
(Volume 65, Number 70, Pages 19477-78), or you may view the privacy 
notice of regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20101 et seq.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 23, 2018.
Brett A. Jortland,
Acting Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2018-06281 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P