http://www.progressiverailroading.com/p ... p?id=31326

Howard P.

Since HP's message was a bit cryptic, here's more info:



I'm curious as to what the new part of the regulation is? Is it that the number now has to be Toll Free?

I know that here in Washington State crossings have had this info on them for years. Maybe it was a state regulation rather than federal, I'm not certain.

Does a 10-mile railroad with three grade crossings and 3-day-a-week operation really need a toll-free number? "Toll-free" still costs someone some money.

Howard P.

Well, in the case stated that railroad is most likely all in the very same area code as all the crossings, so the local number they already have (hopefully they do have a phone) would be toll free. Not long distance, anyway.

But in this day of cell phones, nobody I know has charges against their phone no matter where they call from or to in the contigious states.

It seems like a regulation that needed a bit more thought before being implemented.
Or, that regulation was first hatched in 1964 and with the speed of government, has just now been published? :-)

Even with my landline I don't pay toll charges for long distance. Maybe it only applies to those who don't have a "package" service (i.e., voice + ISP, or voice + TV, or all three bundled services).

A consultant we have on board right now mentioned this new rule to us yesterday: The FRA rule implements Section 205 of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), Public Law 110–432, Division A, which was signed into law on October 16, 2008.

We're a weekend trolley operation with public crossings, so we're trying to determine to what degree the rule applies to us.

Reading this again, I just noticed that it doesn't say anything about "Signals", simply "Crossings".

Does that mean the signs have to be installed at all public grade crossing? I notice it even mentions "pathways", which I take to mean pedestrian crossing. Those are rarely signalized.

Toll free numbers are not expensive to obtain. Besides, how many call minutes do you expect? Hopefully, you will count the number of calls per year on your hand.

Not much to complain about. Somebody's car stalls on your track. Perhaps you would like them to telephone you before the big crash?

Maybe toll-free is not an impediment for most callers, but this is like arguing over which bandages to include in a first aid kit.

This rule was in the works for quite a while. As I recall, the Association of Railway Museum filed comments with the FRA during the rule making process. They pushed for some limited exemptions for museums and tourist railroads based on maximum operating speed and limited schedules. So here is the result:



So this doesn't sound quite as bad now, huh?

Here in the northwest we are using a telephone service based in Riverside, CA that we set up for the already mandated crossing defect notification. It is answered by a live operator 24 hours per day. They receive the call and then contact officials at the museum, unfortunately for me even at 3 AM. It costs about $70 per month but it has given us some return on investment with timely reporting of crossing problems (including vandalism) and other emergencies. For instance, it was used a couple of weeks ago during some sort of police raid so that the train didn't get between potential bullets and their targets. All we have to do to comply with the new law is add some signage at all the other crossings, and there is a state grant program that should help pay for that.

If you are concerned about regulatory burden, get involved with ARM/TRAIN. The world is changing and more regulations are inevitable. So we can complain about it, but why not also try to find some ways to mitigate the impact, or even find some hidden benefits?

--Richard

Tyburn Railroad Co. used ACC Business (now owned by American Telephone & Telegraph) for its Long Distance Provider. With taxes, calls were about 1 cent every 6 seconds or fraction thereof. A toll-free inbound phone number was provided free of any base charge, any inbound calls were at the same rates as outbound calls, plus a surcharge if a public coin or pay phone was used. Some other Long Distance carriers had higher rates, or monthly or minimum charges. The bottom line is "shop around and compare".
Once you have the phone service, can it also be advertised as the number to use for all dangers, including washouts or downed trees?

and the same toll free number could be used for sales ! The only problem with them is you do get some junk calls....

There was a case in the Detroit area about a year ago where a fire engine was answering a call and stopped on the tracks ---

Keep a long story short, the city of Detroit wound up buying a new engine (and it wasn't a locomotive).

Had there been a number they could have called and had they made the call....

Bob H

This reg (Part 234 subpart E) >>DOES<< apply to tourist railroads which are "not insular, but not part of the general system of transportation." (234.3).

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rcc/downloads/EN ... gister.pdf


Yeah, but it isn't you... if the toll free number is 9-1-1.

I argue this regulation is inapplicable by nature to 10-mph operations. The entire purpose of the number is to allow the public to sound warnings to trains that CANNOT stop. That is not the world of the tourist railway.


I emphatically disagree. The burden this places on a small railroad museum is NOT TRIVIAL. You are talking about a whole emergency-response infrastructure with chains of responsibility.

A sign which says "REPORT EMERGENCY OR PROBLEM CALL 1-800-DINNER-TRAIN" doesn't say "report only certain railroad crossing blockages or malfunctions", it says "report emergency". This places a reasonable expectation in the mind of the consumer that he will reach a real live emergency dispatcher, and the crossing ID is needed for location.* Time matters in emergencies, and when he wastes it calling you instead of 9-1-1, that creates liability for you.

* Actually, all post-2004 cell phones have GPS in them, and they automatically provide your GPS location to 9-1-1 during a call. They do not provide it to 800 numbers for privacy reasons, so you're behind the curve already.

Now isn't the state going to have regulations on running emergency notification systems? If they don't contradict Federal law, they too apply to you. Who oversees that and what will their standards be? Are they going to let you wing-ding it on an iPhone? Or will your system need to be able to interchange reports electronically with 9-1-1's systems? Will you need special security clearance for that?

Getting expensive yet?

The reg allows an answering machine when you're closed, but will your volunteers check it everytime? When the last 200 times there have been 9 calls for ink cartridge refills and some fax tones? The number must be answered during operations AND train crews are barred from carrying telephones. If your crew is all on the train, you need +1 volunteer.

And what if someone does call? This is the first situation where the station must be able to reach the crew wherever they are. No cell phones!!! So now you need railroad radios, and big enough radios to get up your whole line, so we're talking repeater on mountaintop for some of us.

Expensive enough for ya, yet?

Oh, it'll also need to be POSSIBLE for your base to copy you an order relating to that crossing. Now if you're "FRA-lite" you won't need a full-on formal train order or track warrant system, but you'll need something, and you'll have to train it. And you'll have to find a pretense to use it often enough that people remember how.

And the benefit is WHAT? The rule allows for reports of
234.303(b)(1) crossing warning system malfunction
2) disabled vehicle obstructing
3) obstruction of view: tall weeds or truck carelessly parked
4) any other unsafe condition

For your 10 mph operation where you come up ready to stop anyway... How does any of this fit, say, the Cass Scenic?

What if you can't get a volunteer for the lovely job of phone-sitting all day? What? You don't operate?? Can't be that. It would be illegal (49 USC 20103) for FRA to make a regulation which burdens tourist railways this much for so little practical gain. It would also be unconstitutional (4th, regulatory taking.)

"That can't be right."

Noting that the proposed reg hinges on the "dispatching railroad", which provides for the authority for movements, one option might be dispense with a dispatcher altogether and simply make your entire line yard limits. Now everybody has to be on the lookout for obstructions all the time. Add a rule that says "especially watch for them in crossings, also inoperative flashers" -- and that would moot the risks that FRA is trying to address with this regulation. Hey, it's what we already do.

I suppose we could ask for waivers...

I don't have current prices because to get them I must submit my name and contact info and I do not want all the sales calls that generates.

However, twelve years ago I had a small business, and I contracted for 24 hour operator answering with multiple services, and I had my own 800 number. On a per call basis it was not expensive. Volume minimums varied from service to service. Google it. There are many services available with all sorts of specialties.

Consider the alternative base case. You are running a rail line without these contact services. Either a) no serious problems are occurring, in which case if you add a phone contact you will receive very few, if any, calls, or b) problems are occurring, no one is contacting you, and you are blissfully ignorant of safety problems on your line.

Dearborn.

Actually there have been several incidents where citizens HAVE called 9-1-1 or the number on the box... and there was a communication snafu and the train didn't get word. 9-1-1 says "We talked to somebody at the railroad" and the railroad says "Well, you didn't talk to the right guys." I think that's why the FRA wants to see in-house solutions: at least they know which corporation to fine if there's an INTERNAL snafu.

I agree that "cutting out the middleman" is a wise step; I remember all too well the awful days when I, living alongside a busy main line, had to all but perform an exorcism to get an emergency-contact phone number out of employees for the railroad's nearest yard/dispatcher, and several times I actually did prevent catastrophe by ringing the yard from a pay phone (remember those?) about a car stuck on the crossing on a blind curve, waiting for a tow truck to pull it back to the pavement, or dragging brake gear on a train.

However, this "Tea Party" type asks in all sincerity: Does the FRA seek to improve safety, or seek to fine people who don't dot all the i's and cross all the t's? This gets to be like red-light/speed cameras: if they do their job, nobody will be running lights/speeding, but municipalities get addicted like illicit drugs to the "revenue" they produce, and.... well, we know the rest.