UTU Local 426 Archived News.
5/02/07
BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF UTU 0426
BRIAN PARR, WHO WAS RAN OVER LAST WEEK BY AN SUV, COULD USE SOME FINANCIAL HELP TO PAY BILLS, MEDICAL AND OTHER WISE. THE WOMEN WHO HIT HIM DOES HAVE INSURANCE BUT THAT MONEY COULD BE LONG TO COME BY. BRIAN IS THE SON OF SWITCHMAN AND MEMBER OF UTU 0426 PETER TROTTA. PLEASE STOP BY THE NUMERICA CU ON HAVANA AND MENTION BRIANS NAME, AN ACCOUNT IS SET UP FOR HIM, AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR A YOUNG MAN, AND HIS FAMILY IN NEED. ANY AMOUNT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
YOUR UTU OFFICERS AND LC THANK YOU FOR YOUR GENEROSITY.
5/02/07
This is a letter sent in reply to UTU 426 questions about assisting another train/crew with EOT devices from the FRA. Please read and view the linked files with this letter.
[Blue Signal Protection Letter][BNSF GCOR 5.13 (need power point to view this)]
I’m sorry I didn’t
get back to you sooner; I was off part of last week and in a
training class.
The short answer is
No; a Conductor/Engineer can not perform
work to the EOT of a train they are not called to
operate without establishing proper blue signal protection, unless
the work with their train is completed and they are not
going to return to their train. At this point they could
become a utility employee. If you want to work on the EOT of the
train you were called to operate, that fits into the exception and
you can do it without blue signal protection, but only on your
train.
Please read below
and also see the attachments.
According to title 49 CFR 218.25:
§218.25 Workers on a
main track.
When workers are on,
under, or between rolling equipment on a main track:
(a) A blue signal
must be displayed at each end of the rolling equipment; and
(b) If the rolling
equipment to be protected includes one or more locomotives, a blue
signal must be attached to the controlling locomotive at a location
where it is readily visible to the engineman or operator at the
controls of that locomotive.
(c) When emergency
repair work is to be done on, under, or between a locomotive or one
or more cars coupled to a locomotive, and blue signals are not
available, the engineman or operator must be notified and effective
measures must be taken to protect the workers making the repairs.
Title 49 CFR 218
definitions states:
Worker means
any railroad employee
assigned to inspect, test, repair, or service railroad rolling
equipment, or their components, including brake systems.
Members of train and yard crews are excluded except when assigned
such work on railroad rolling equipment that is not part of the
train or yard movement they have been called to operate (or been
assigned to as "utility employees''). Utility employees
assigned to and functioning as temporary members of a specific train
or yard crew (subject to the conditions set forth in § 218.22 of
this chapter), are excluded only when so assigned and functioning.
Note: Servicing does
not include supplying cabooses, locomotives, or passenger cars with
items such as ice, drinking water, tools, sanitary supplies,
stationery, or flagging equipment.
Testing does not
include (i) visual observations made by an employee positioned on or
alongside a caboose, locomotive, or passenger car; or (ii) marker
inspections made in accordance with the provisions of § 221.16(b) of
this chapter.
221.16 Inspection
procedure, states:
(a) Prior to
operating the activation switch or covering the photoelectric cell
when conducting this test, a non-train crew person shall determine
that he is being protected against the unexpected movement of the
train either under the procedures established in part 218 of this
chapter or under the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section.
221.16(b)
(b) In order to
establish the alternative means of protection under this section,
(1) the train to be inspected shall be standing on a main track;
(2) the inspection task shall be limited to ascertaining that the
marker is in proper operating condition; and (3) prior to
performing the inspection procedure, the inspector shall personally
contact the locomotive engineer or hostler and be advised by that
person that they are occupying the cab of the controlling locomotive
and that the train is and will remain secure against movement until
the inspection has been completed.
According to a
section of a memo sent out last year, (attached in its entirety)
The following
answers the question concerning whether blue signal protection is
required in this case:
Q1. At locations
other than crew change points: Crew member(s) of train A
instructed to assist crew member(s) of train B for any purpose which
would require crew member(s) of train A to go on, under, or between
the rolling equipment of train B.
Note:
Including working on ETD -- replacing, arming, and/or battery
change.
Answer: At any location, a
crew member from train A may attach him/herself to assist the crew
of train B as a utility employee provided his/her work with
train A is completed. The scope of the utility
employee’s work is limited to the following “six holy things”:
setting or releasing hand brakes; coupling or uncoupling air hoses
and other electrical or mechanical connections; preparing rail cars
for coupling; setting wheel blocks or wheel chains; conducting air
brake tests to include cutting air brake components in or out and
positioning retaining valves; and inspecting, testing, installing,
removing or replacing a rear end marking device or end of train
device. (See 49 CFR Part 218.22 for additional utility
employee conditions regarding communication, position of engineer,
etc.)
Concerning ETD battery changeouts,
regularly assigned crewmembers may replace the ETD battery but only
on equipment they are called to operate.
A utility employee, however, may not replace a
battery, since this is not one of the “six holy things” permitted
under Part 218.22. Exception: BNSF, CP, and UP
have a waiver to permit properly attached utility employees to
replace a battery on an ETD, but only if these employees are from
the T&E ranks.
Also Note: Regarding
the crewmember’s duties with Train A being completed, it
means just that. The crewmember from Train A is finished with
his duties as a member of the regularly-assigned crew of Train A,
and he may not return to Train A as a regular member
of that crew for the duration of his duty tour, which now allows
that crewmember to become a Utility Employee for whatever time he
has remaining in his duty tour.
Also see page 2,
question 4 of the BNSF GCOR Rule 5.13 Presentation (also attached),
which states:
4. Crew member off train A wants to replace battery on ETD of train B. Crew A is not handling or will handle the cars in train B. In this situation blue signal protection would be required due to the fact FRA does not consider this an emergency repair and the members of train A do not fit the train or yard crew exception under definition of workmen.
I hope this helps.
Regarding the
question of the Engineer securing hand brakes on the locomotives,
please see the CFR paragraph below. But the short answer is, if the
Engineer, (a qualified person) is in position to readily control the
brake system, then the equipment is not unattended. Therefore,
no handbrakes would be required.
This is what the CFR
says:
(n) Securement of
unattended equipment. A train's air brake shall not be
depended upon to hold equipment standing unattended on a grade
(including a locomotive, a car, or a train whether or not locomotive
is attached). For purposes of this section, "unattended equipment"
means equipment left standing and unmanned in such a manner that the
brake system of the equipment cannot be readily controlled by a
qualified person. Unattended equipment shall be secured in
accordance with the following requirements:
(1) A sufficient
number of hand brakes shall be applied to hold the equipment.
Railroads shall develop and implement a process or procedure to
verify that the applied hand brakes will sufficiently hold the
equipment with the air brakes released.
(2) Except for
equipment connected to a source of compressed air (e.g., locomotive
or ground air source), prior to leaving equipment unattended, the
brake pipe shall be reduced to zero at a rate that is no less than a
service rate reduction, and the brake pipe vented to atmosphere by
leaving the angle cock in the open position on the first unit of the
equipment left unattended.
(3) Except for
distributed power units, the following requirements apply to
unattended locomotives:
(i) All hand brakes
shall be fully applied on all locomotives in the lead consist of an
unattended train.
(ii) All hand
brakes shall be fully applied on all locomotives in an unattended
locomotive consist outside of yard limits.
(iii) At a
minimum, the hand brake shall be fully applied on the lead
locomotive in an unattended locomotive consist within yard limits.
(iv) A
railroad shall develop, adopt, and comply with procedures for
securing any unattended locomotive required to have a hand brake
applied pursuant to paragraph (n)(3)(i) through (n)(3)(iii) when the
locomotive is not equipped with an operative hand brake.
(4) A railroad shall
adopt and comply with a process or procedures to verify that the
applied hand brakes will sufficiently hold an unattended locomotive
consist. A railroad shall also adopt and comply with instructions to
address throttle position, status of the reverse lever, position of
the generator field switch, status of the independent brakes,
position of the isolation switch, and position of the automatic
brake valve on all unattended locomotives. The procedures and
instruction required in this paragraph shall take into account
winter weather conditions as they relate to throttle position and
reverser handle.
(5) Any hand brakes
applied to hold unattended equipment shall not be released until it
is known that the air brake system is properly charged.
Again, I hope this helps.
Matt Brewer FRA/OP
Spokane WA
509-928-3717
5/10/07
BNSF continues track laying in Nebraska,
Wyoming
May 8, 2007
FORT WORTH, Texas - BNSF is continuing track-laying programs this
construction season in Nebraska and Wyoming to increase capacity for
coal trains. Most track construction has been completed, and crews
are hand-laying the final 1,000 feet of track on a second seven-mile
segment of 14 miles of second main track between Angora and
Northport, Neb. The first seven-mile segment went into service
earlier this year, and the second segment is scheduled to go into
service in July. Crews have also begun work on ten miles of second
main track between Mason and Berwyn, Neb. This additional double
track is scheduled to go into service in the second quarter of this
year.
Track laying is also continuing on 15 miles of new third main track
from Donkey Creek, Wyo., south to the north end of track joint with
Union Pacific at Caballo, Wyo. There also will be an additional 24
miles of third main track on the joint line from Caballo south to
Reno Junction. Completion of that trackage later this year will
provide three main tracks for the entire length of the Joint Line
and north to Donkey Creek Yard near Gillette, Wyo. Average daily
Powder River Basin coal train loadings for BNSF, including Wyoming
and Montana mines, totaled 49 trains per day for the month of April
2007, compared with an average of 49.3 trains per day for April
2006.
5/12/07
Dangerous Washington crossings get attention
SPOKANE, Wash. -- A farmer discovered the two men, dead in their
truck, according to this report by Hope Brumbach published by The
Spokesman-Review.
The force of the train crossing Hayden Avenue in September knocked
the 1989 Mazda pickup 100 feet into the farmer's field west of
Highway 41.
Then in March, a train slammed a truck and horse trailer near Boekel
Road in Rathdrum. The driver escaped with a bump on the head, and
the horses sustained minor injuries.
And just last month, Spirit Lake City Councilman Steve Gaddum was
killed at Meyer Road on the Rathdrum Prairie, when his 1996 Land
Rover collided with a Union Pacific engine.
The recent spate of accidents highlight the need for a regional
project, called Bridging the Valley, that intends to eliminate about
75 at-grade railroad crossings in the 42-mile corridor between
Spokane and Athol in the next half-dozen years or more, officials
say.
"I think they're going to have to do something," Spirit Lake Mayor
Roxy Martin said. "I don't think people have to be killed to get
something done."
Finding funding for the $320 million project, though, has been slow,
said project manager Glenn Miles, the executive director of the
Kootenai Metropolitan Planning Organization.
"It takes a lot of time for a program of projects like this to
occur," said Miles, who also serves as manager of the Spokane County
Regional Transportation Council. "If the community believes it's
something it wants to do, there has to be tenacity to see it
through."
The plan aims to separate vehicles from train traffic by building
overpasses or underpasses and closing nearby at-grade crossings. The
BNSF Railway line also will be expanded to accommodate Union Pacific
traffic, so most Union Pacific at-grade crossings can be closed.
The project has secured $26 million so far, Miles said, but full
federal funding has not been dedicated. Officials hope the federal
government will fund a new transportation program that would provide
up to $20 million a year per state for rail relocation, with 90
percent federal funding and 10 percent state or local matching
funds, Miles said.
Without sure funding, a specific construction timeline is difficult
to pin down, Miles said.
"It's not going as fast as we'd like it to," he said. The project
now has finished preliminary engineering plans to consolidate the
Union Pacific and BNSF railroad tracks, secured environmental
clearance and received permits from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, he said._Local projects
Bridging the Valley's first scheduled project is the Havana Street
crossing in Spokane, which may go out for bid this fall, Miles said.
On the Idaho side, the first project likely will be an underpass in
Rathdrum at Main Street or an overpass and highway interchange on
Pleasant View Road and Highway 53, he said.
Both Idaho projects will cost more than $12 million apiece, Miles
said.
In Rathdrum, the Main Street crossing is considered one of the most
dangerous in Kootenai County, as rated by the Federal Railroad
Administration.
The plan would close Rathdrum's second crossing at Mill Street, the
site of a 19-year-old woman's death in late 2004, when her car was
struck by a train.
"The consensus here in City Hall was 'Yay, one of our major problems
will be solved,'" Rathdrum Mayor Brian Steele said of when the
project was proposed.
But Rathdrum is struggling to come up with more than $246,000 in
matching funds for the project -- which city officials say took them
off-guard.
"I had always been under the assumption that this Bridging the
Valley wasn't going to cost us anything," Steele said. "We're going
to get our crossings. It goes back to that there's no such thing as
a free lunch."
Miles said the situation amounts to miscommunication about
preliminary engineering, which was fully funded.
Bridging the Valley plans also call for construction of an underpass
at the Highway 54 crossing in Athol, considered by the FRA as one of
the most dangerous in the county.
Two pedestrians have died at the Highway 54 crossing in the time he
took office 12 years ago, said Athol Mayor Lanny Spurlock.
Residents are ready for the project to begin, especially to reduce
the piercing whistles from passing trains, Spurlock said._Driving
responsibly
Despite the region's plans to reduce the danger at railroad
crossings, drivers ultimately are responsible for paying attention,
Idaho State Police Capt. Wayne Longo said.
"It's pretty frustrating for us," Longo said of drivers'
inattention.
Longo said he has watched drivers skirt crossing arms to avoid
waiting for a train to pass.
"If someone's hell-bent to beat the train, they're going to beat the
train," Longo said. "Is it worth four minutes of your time to wait
for a train?"
(The preceding report by Hope Brumbach was published by The
Spokesman-Review on Thursday, May 10, 2007.)
5/22/07
BNSF ran an experimental 10,000-foot Intermodal
train from Los Angeles to Chicago this week. (BNSF Railway)
FORT WORTH, Texas - BNSF ran what is believed to be the U.S. rail
industry's first 10,000-foot intermodal train from Los Angeles to
Logistics Park in Chicago earlier this week. The 10,009-foot
(including power) international intermodal stack train departed Los
Angeles on Sunday, May 13, and arrived at the Chicago intermodal
terminal Tuesday, May 15.
The train ran on BNSF's Transcon, on which BNSF has been steadily
increasing the amount of double track in recent years. Because
almost the entire 2,200-mile route has now been double tracked,
siding length was not an issue. The train used distributed power:
Four locomotives in the front and two in the back.
BNSF is studying the use of longer trains to maximize the amount of
containers that it can carry while minimizing the number of trains
it takes to move the containers, which increases efficiency and
takes advantage of the aggressive program of double tracking BNSF
has been conducting on the Los Angeles to Chicago route for several
years.
5/23/07
RAILROAD CUSTOMERS SUPPORT PROPOSED FEDERAL LEGISLATION
North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan and
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar wrote in the April 15 Forum about their
legislation to protect railroad customers from excessive railroad
power. Two weeks later BNSF Railway Company objected to the
senators’ proposal. Many rail customer groups think the senators are
on the right track. In fact this bipartisan federal legislation is
supported by agricultural groups, coal and electricity generation
interests, the chemical industry, forest products and others. This
broad support indicates there truly are problems needing resolution.
In the past 25 years, we’ve gone from
dozens of Class I railroads to four huge companies controlling more
than 90 percent of U.S. railroad traffic. That’s great economic
power for those four. The federal agency assigned to balance
interests is not even-handed. It focuses on railroad profitability
through a yearly “revenue adequacy” proceeding. Railroads have been
reporting record revenues and earnings year after year. Rail
customers want railroads to be profitable. But there is a limit.
One part of the Dorgan-Klobuchar
legislation changes national rail transportation policy to promote
effective competition among railroads, or to ensure reasonable rates
where there is no competition. Another part says railroads shall
provide “reliable and efficient” service. How could anyone find
fault with those points?
The senators seek to limit fees for
filing formal complaints. Recently, the Surface Transportation Board
raised the filing fee in one rate complaint process from $140,000 to
$178,000. That’s just the filing fee. Legal costs run millions more.
The legislation includes an
arbitration option to settle disputes between railroads and certain
rail customers. This can take the place of lengthy expensive formal
complaint cases where the party with the most lawyers and deepest
pockets has an advantage.
The legislation says if a railroad is
market dominant the monkey will be on its back to prove its rates
are reasonable. This is similar to what’s done with electric and
natural gas rates. A state can be designated an “area of inadequate
rail competition,” making additional remedies available. But only if
most of the railroad rates are nearly twice the variable cost of
providing the service.
The BNSF letter spoke of rate
reductions, which are always welcome. But keep in mind that rail
customers have provided railroads with cost savings by, among other
things, spending millions on the construction and operation of
facilities to load and unload larger trains. There is also a public
cost through increased road maintenance around fewer but larger
gathering points. By a government measurement of profitability
called the revenue to variable cost ratio, North Dakota wheat rates
remain higher than those offered where greater rail competition
exists.
Other legislation in Congress seeks
to put railroads under the same antitrust laws that other businesses
are subject to. President Theodore Roosevelt was mentioned in the
BNSF letter to the editor. TR was known as “the trust buster.” He
would not have approved of a few large companies controlling an
industry and also having antitrust immunity.
While railroads oppose these kinds of
legislation, they support a bill to give them a 25 percent tax
credit from the government for investment in infrastructure.
Railroads like government intervention when it comes to their
“revenue adequacy,” but reject most curbs on their immense economic
power. It’s time for that to change. We believe the legislation
Dorgan and Klobuchar are sponsoring is good for rail customers,
railroads and the general public. - Commentary, Eric Aasmundstad,
Robert Carlson, Steve Strege, Dan Wogsland and Neal Fisher, The
Fargo Forum (Aasmundstad is president of the ND Farm Bureau;
Carlson is president of the ND Farmers Union; Strege is executive
vice president of the ND Grain Dealers Assn.; Wogsland is executive
director of the ND Grain Growers Assn.; Fisher is administrator of
the ND Wheat Commission.)
GE unveils first
hybrid road locomotive
Demonstration unit will debut at GE's Ecomagination event in
California
LOS ANGELES -
General Electric today announced the debut of its one-of-a-kind
hybrid road locomotive at its Ecomagination event in Los Angeles.
GE's Evolution Hybrid locomotive will be unveiled May 24 at Union
Station to demonstrate the progress that GE's Transportation
business is making in developing a freight hybrid locomotive that is
capable of recycling thermal energy as stored power in on-board
batteries.
This demonstration hybrid unit will be one of many technologies
featured at the Ecomagination event that are developed and used in
the rail industry to reduce smog-causing emissions, including
Nitrous Oxide emissions, and particulate matter. Ecomagination is
GE's initiative to bring to market new technologies that will help
customers meet their most pressing environmental challenges.
"This hybrid demonstration unit is another example of our commitment
to invest in technology and bring new, innovative concepts to life,"
said John M. Dineen, President and CEO of GE- Transportation. "We
will continue to support Ecomagination by engineering product
offerings that help customers improve fuel efficiency, reduce
emissions and sustain a long life of reliable service."
Bearing road number 2010, the 4,400 horsepower Evolution® Hybrid
diesel-electric prototype will feature a series of innovative
batteries that will capture and store energy dissipated during
dynamic braking. The energy stored in the batteries will reduce fuel
consumption and emissions by as much as 10 percent compared to most
of the freight locomotives in use today. (In addition to reduced
emissions, a hybrid will operate more efficiently in higher
altitudes and up steep inclines.)
Several GE customers including BNSF are helping to serve on GE's
advisory board for the development of hybrid technology.
"BNSF is committed to helping develop new technologies that benefit
our operations as well as the environment," said Matthew K. Rose,
chairman, president and chief executive officer, BNSF Railway
Company. "We are proud to be partners with GE on the development of
the hybrid locomotive, alternative-fuel research and the testing of
other technologies that optimize the performance of our locomotive
fleets."
This past week, the Evolution Hybrid demo unit traveled along Union
Pacific's network on its trek to California for its unveiling. Union
Pacific also serves on GE's advisory board.
"Union Pacific is developing and investing in new technologies that
provide for cleaner air, including a locomotive fleet that's the
greenest in the industry," said Jim Young, Chairman and CEO, Union
Pacific. "We congratulate GE on working toward developing a hybrid
locomotive and applaud innovation from suppliers that can support
our leadership in caring for the environment while delivering the
goods that America needs."
Before the GE hybrid locomotive is offered commercially, the
engineering team will continue work and analysis on the innovative
lead-free rechargeable batteries and corresponding control systems
on-board the locomotive. Following lab testing, GE will produce
pre-production units for customer field validation purposes.
"This locomotive will reduce emissions while providing operating
benefits to our customers that transport consumer goods and other
raw materials by recapturing the energy wasted during train
braking," said Steve Gray, GE - Transportation's Engineering Leader.
"As we work toward bringing the Evolution® Hybrid locomotive to
commercial production, our engineers will use this locomotive as a
living lab working with our customers to test, study, and refine our
hybrid locomotive technology."
The energy dissipated in dynamically braking a 207-ton locomotive
during the course of one year is enough to power 160 households for
that year.