Notice2025-02252
Program Approval: Georgia Central Railway, L.P. and Heart of Georgia Railroad, Inc.
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 5, 2025
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentFederal Railroad Administration
Abstract
FRA is issuing this notice to approve a petition from Georgia Central Railway, L.P. (GC) and Heart of Georgia Railroad, Inc. (HOG) (collectively, Petitioners), subsidiaries of Genesee and Wyoming (G&W), for a Test Program designed to test self-propelled, zero-emission, battery-electric rail vehicles and their associated computer and telemetry technology systems, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the system and new operational approaches to rail vehicle technology in the short-haul movement of containers. The approval grants limited, temporary suspension of certain FRA rules necessary to facilitate the conduct of the Test Program, including an exemption for certain safety appliance laws (collectively, Impacted FRA Safety Standards).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 23 (Wednesday, February 5, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 5, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9053-9055]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-02252]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA-2023-0066]
Program Approval: Georgia Central Railway, L.P. and Heart of
Georgia Railroad, Inc.
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of approval.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to approve a petition from Georgia
Central Railway, L.P. (GC) and Heart of Georgia Railroad, Inc. (HOG)
(collectively, Petitioners), subsidiaries of Genesee and Wyoming (G&W),
for a Test Program designed to test self-propelled, zero-emission,
battery-electric rail vehicles and their associated computer and
telemetry technology systems, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the
system and new operational approaches to rail vehicle technology in the
short-haul movement of containers. The approval grants limited,
temporary suspension of certain FRA rules necessary to facilitate the
conduct of the Test Program, including an exemption for certain safety
appliance laws (collectively, Impacted FRA Safety Standards).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Brewer, Staff Director, FRA
Engineering and Technology Division, Office of Railroad Safety at (509)
994-1978 or email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9af7fbeeeef2ffedb4f8e8ffedffe8dafef5eeb4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91fcf0e5e5f9f4e6bff3e3f4e6f4e3d1f5fee5bff6fee7">[email protected]</span></a>; or Michael Masci, Senior
Attorney Adviser, Office of the Chief Counsel, telephone: (202) 302-
7117 or email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0865616b60696d642665697b6b61486c677c266f677e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="127f7b717a73777e3c7f7361717b52767d663c757d64">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Petitioners' submission (available in docket FRA-2023-0066 at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>) explains that the proposed Test Program involves a
system of novel, self-propelled, zero-emission, battery-electric rail
vehicles and their associated computer and telemetry technology
systems, manufactured by Parallel Systems, Inc. The vehicle concept
consists of a single intermodal container carried by two autonomous
rail vehicles (AVs). Each rail AV is propelled by a battery and
traction motor and has the necessary sensors, radios, and computers to
be independent. Through hand-held controls or via the dispatch center,
the AVs receive instructions to move either individually (e.g., 2 AVs
with one container) or with a group of AVs to operate in a platoon.\1\
Petitioners note that following testing of the AVs' braking system and
other components at a test site owned by MxV Rail, the Program, if
approved, would take place in seven phases on a 160-mile segment of
track in central Georgia,\2\ to progressively test and aim to prove the
technology and collect data to support the safety case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The AVs do not couple but rather receive commands to move
together.
\2\ See Petition Exhibit C, ``Testing will take place between
mileposts 503 and 577.8 on the [GC] and mileposts 577.8 and 663 on
the [HOG], which are two Class III freight railroads that connect
directly in Vidalia, GA.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioners state that the goal of the technology is to provide
smaller freight railroads an opportunity to meaningfully compete in the
short-haul transportation of containers, and the technology would
provide public benefits for the environment, the economy, the national
highway system, and communities disproportionately impacted by highway
movement of containers. Petitioners contend that ``safety is an
overriding focus of the proposed Program,'' and Petitioners have
developed, and will adhere to, a Pilot Test Safety Plan (Safety Plan),
Exhibit C of the submission, to ensure safety during testing.
Petitioners explain the ``Safety Plan includes protocols for hazard
analysis, control, and verification of controls which will be reviewed
by six technical working groups who will consider the risks associated
with each phase and the necessary actions to mitigate each risk.''
Petitioners provide that the Program, detailed in Exhibit B of the
submission, ``is based on seven phases of tightly structured and
closely monitored field testing.'' The Program would use the ``results
of testing performed during each phase'' ``to evaluate the safety of
the proceeding phase.'' The Program would collect ``data and service
history'' and then ``evaluate changes in the design of the System, its
components, and the relevant operating procedures in support of further
testing before any proposed use of the System outside of the Program.''
The Program includes a structured sequence of test phases to ``allow
collection and evaluation of the operating data in progressively more
complex operating conditions.'' Petitioners emphasize that the priority
``of each phase of the Program is to assure safety of railroad
employees, other persons and property, and the general public along the
railroad lines that will be used for the Program.''
Petitioners state that the Program is ``designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of the system and new operational approaches to rail
vehicle technology in the short-haul movement of containers.'' As
described in Exhibit B of the submission, the Program will gather
``quantitative and qualitative data'' in each phase and evaluate the
reliability, compatibility, and cost of operation, along with a safety
analysis. Additionally, phase-specific testing objectives are
identified in the submission (e.g., to determine if conditions at the
test track affect controllability of the vehicle, as well as identify
any sources of variation between phases).
The testing is planned in seven phases, with defined success
criteria that must be achieved prior to FRA approval to move to the
next test phase:
<bullet> Phase 1--Verification of Vehicle Communications, Traction
and Braking: Criteria to move to the next phase include successful
validation of all vehicle controls and validation of all field test
procedures, communication, and safety protocols.
<bullet> Phase 2--Testing Over a Longer Distance and More Diverse
Territory: Criteria to move to the next phase include successful
validation of all vehicle controls throughout the longer distances and
more diverse territory, control of the vehicle is fully validated, and
confirmation of shunting at a grade crossing.
<bullet> Phase 3--Validation of Remote Capability of Vehicle With
Direct Supervision: Criteria to move to the next phase include
successful validation of all vehicle controls over the broader
environment, validation of remote monitoring and video links, including
back-up when communications fail, and shunting validation over the
territory.
<bullet> Phase 4--Testing and Data Gathering With Extended Remote
Operations: Criteria to move to the next phase include final validation
of all vehicle controls, validation of remote monitoring and video
links, including back-up when there is a communications failure, and
shunting validation over the territory.
<bullet> Phase 5--Vehicle Upgrades To Enhance Reliability and
Performance (Based on Previous Phases): Criteria to move to the next
phase include re-validation of all vehicle controls, re-validation of
remote monitoring and video links, including back-up when
[[Page 9054]]
communications fail, and shunting re-validation over the territory with
the upgraded vehicle.
<bullet> Phase 6--Concurrent Operations of Vehicle With
Conventional Train Service: Criteria to move to the next phase include
all vehicle controls and functionality are reliable, intermixed
operations are validated, remote monitoring and video links are
reliable, and shunting is validated.
<bullet> Phase 7--Traverse Entire Route WithMultiple Vehicles
(Platooning): At the completion of Phase 7, the vehicle controls and
functionality will be reliable, intermixed operations validated,
platooning operations validated, remote monitoring and video links
reliable, and shunting validated.
FRA conducted a public hearing on March 12, 2024, to provide the
public an opportunity to provide oral comment on the petition.
Additionally, as explained in Petitioners' submission, Petitioners have
performed outreach to local, State, and federal government
representatives, and local authorities in Georgia.
Evaluation of Petition
After review and analysis of Petitioners' submission and public
comments, FRA approves temporary, limited suspension of compliance with
Impacted FRA Safety Standards <SUP>3 4</SUP> in connection with the
Test Program, subject to certain conditions designed to ensure
safety.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 49 CFR part 218, Operating Practices: Sec. Sec. 218.55
through 59.
49 CFR part 229, Locomotive Safety Standards: Sec. Sec.
229.9(a)(3), 229.13, 229.15(a)(10), 229.29, 229.47, 229.53,
229.55(b), 229.71, 229.115(a) and (c), 229.117, 229.119, 229.127,
229.131(a), 229.137, 229.139, 229.141, 229.201 through 206, 229.301
through 319.
49 CFR part 231, Railroad Safety Appliance Standards: Sec. Sec.
231.6(a), 231.6(d), 231.6(e).
49 CFR part 232, Brake System Safety Standards for Freight and
Other Non-Passenger Trains and Equipment: Sec. Sec. 232.103(f),
(g), (j), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), 232.205-212, 232.215, 232.303,
232.305, 232.503, 232.505.
49 CFR part 236--Rules, Standards, and Instructions Governing
the Installation, Inspection, Maintenance and Repair of Signal and
Train Control Systems, Devices, and Appliances, Sec. 236.913.
49 CFR parts 240 and 242--Qualification and Certification of
Engineers and Conductors: Sec. Sec. 240.103 and 242.103.
49 U.S.C. 20302.
\4\ In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 20306, FRA may exempt
Petitioners from the statutory requirements in 49 U.S.C. 20302 based
on evidence received and findings developed at a hearing
demonstrating that the statutory requirements ``preclude the
development or implementation of more efficient railroad
transportation equipment or other transportation innovations under
existing law'' or an ``agreement between national railroad labor
representatives and the developer of the new equipment or
technology.'' See 49 U.S.C. 20306(a), (b)(2).
\5\ Per 49 CFR 211.51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA finds that the temporary, limited suspension of Impacted FRA
Safety Standards is necessary to the conduct of the approved Test
Program, which is specifically designed to test self-propelled, zero-
emission, battery-electric rail vehicles and their associated computer
and telemetry technology systems and evaluate the effectiveness of the
system and new operational approaches to rail vehicle technology in the
short-haul movement of containers. Many of the suspensions are
necessary because the newly designed equipment does not have certain
conventional mechanical elements to which the regulations apply. For
example, the vehicle does not have a cab and does not couple to other
equipment. Similarly, there is no need for hand holds, ladders, or
other safety appliances, because the vehicle is autonomous. FRA
acknowledges the Petitioners have installed some safety appliances for
use during maintenance and in the event of failure recovery of the
vehicle. Suspension of the prohibition against tampering with safety
devices is also necessary to perform the testing. For these tests,
other safety mitigations are in place to ensure the safety of the
employees and public.
Furthermore, FRA also finds that the scope and application of the
suspensions, as applied to the Test Program, are limited to that
necessary to conduct the Test Program. Each of the seven phases would
take place in a limited, clearly defined area as described in the Test
Program. Ultimately, the entire Test Program is limited to a 160-mile
segment of track in central Georgia.
Finally, FRA's temporary, limited suspension of compliance with
Impacted FRA Safety Standards is conditioned on the observance of the
following conditions (incorporated here, as listed in FRA's decision
letter dated January 15, 2025) \6\ to ensure safety:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Conditions 1 through 23 are incorporated from FRA's decision
letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Petitioners must provide to FRA the projected scheduled testing
for each phase outlined in their submission. FRA subject matter experts
(SMEs) will use this information to plan and conduct site visits to
monitor testing for compliance with the conditions outlined in this
notice and for observation.
2. During each pilot phase readiness review, a multi-disciplinary
team consisting of GC and HOG representatives (including operating and
maintenance staff), Parallel Systems, and FRA, will review the results
of each phase of testing and evaluate the readiness and safety of
transitioning to the next test phase. Documentation must be provided at
the completion of each phase to verify and validate that the criteria
and metrics are met. Prior to Phase 1, GC and HOG representatives
(including operating and maintenance staff), Parallel Systems, and FRA
will hold a safety design review to discuss in detail the specific
safety features that are designed into the system to ensure safety,
including brake system design, electrical storage/regenerative braking,
and emergency stop procedures. Only upon FRA's written approval will
Petitioners be able to continue with the next phase of testing.
3. The testing must be restricted to the territory and mileposts
documented in the Petitioners' submission, in dark territory under
track warrant control.
4. Only railroad or designated representatives trained and
qualified on Federal safety rules \7\ and railroad safety rules will
operate the equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 49 CFR parts 214, 218, 240, 242, and 243.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. All mechanical inspections must be performed by a qualified
inspector.
6. All grade crossings must be flagged for all phases where
crossings are present.
7. Equipment must be inspected daily prior to use and each control
console must be equipped with a digital banner indicating the equipment
is safe to operate, or if there is a defective component, the banner
must indicate the defect and prevent operation until the defect is
repaired. Each control console must also have an accurate speed
display.
8. Each vehicle must have an appropriate direction of movement
indicator light on the end of the vehicle that faces the direction of
travel. The trailing end of the vehicle must have a rear end marker
identifying the rear of the vehicle.
9. Each vehicle must be equipped with an operable audible warning
device (bells/whistle/alarm) that sounds at the required decibel level
(see 49 CFR 229.129(a)) prior to vehicle movement or over grade
crossings.
10. Each vehicle must be equipped with a manual safety bus cut out
switch located in a safe accessible position not on the ends of the
vehicle, as well as having electronic remote safety stop capability on
each control device as a first option to ensure personnel are out of
harm's way when initiating an emergency stop.
11. Documentation must include clear instructions on how to test,
inspect, maintain, and operate the brake system
[[Page 9055]]
and what to do in the event of a brake failure.
12. Documentation must clearly define procedures to ensure the
vehicle does not move (roll back or forward) when initiating a
movement, including performing a standing braking test.
13. Brake calibration/inspection/maintenance processes must be
clearly outlined and adhered to for the duration of the test.
14. Communications loss criteria between the vehicle and operator
must be documented on the FRA Form 6180.49A (blue card). Length of
communications loss before an automatic brake application must be
documented prior to operation.
15. Test Program must address electronic safety features during the
handoff between traction and braking. The Program must identify
failsafe stop/emergency procedures in the event of a failure, outlining
the electronics logic on how to enforce an emergency stop when there is
a fault.
16. Test Program must provide a complete description of the braking
technology process, including how energy stored in the batteries is
managed to prevent overcharge from regenerative braking.
17. Petitioners must provide emergency response training for all
emergency responders who might be called to respond in the event of an
emergency.
18. Although these vehicles do not couple, there must be a
provision for a rescue coupler or alternate process to provide a safe
way to move the vehicle in the event of a system failure or emergency.
19. Petitioners must produce and provide FRA with a monthly test
report in a common electronic format reviewable by FRA (such as in an
Excel file). The report will contain information pertaining to the test
area to include vehicle identification, date of each test, geographic
(milepost) limits of the test, issues identified, anomalies and
proposed solutions.
20. Prior to advancing beyond Phase 2 and in accordance with
Condition 2, petitioners must provide FRA with specific documentation
explaining how safety-critical products were developed, how the
equipment is inspected, a concept of operations, maintenance schedule
and a thorough testing plan indicating what constitutes a pass or fail.
Petitioners must also describe how personnel working with safety-
critical products will be trained to perform functions of the Program
safely. Petitioners must provide FRA with an updated Railroad Safety
Program Plan and Product Safety Plan and obtain FRA approval before any
Phase 3 testing begins.
21. All personnel involved in the process outlined in this approval
must be informed of the content and be aware of the conditions prior to
participation in the process. Petitioners must make readily available
at every test segment location a copy of the waiver decision letter and
the test program and any amendments prior to participation in the test.
22. As this technology and operating approach does not involve a
locomotive cab where facilities would normally be located, the
Petitioners must make available lavatory facilities for operating and
test crews.
23. End handholds and uncoupling levers are not applicable to this
equipment because it does not couple. Based on evidence during the
March 2024 hearing, FRA exempts Petitioners from the requirements of 49
U.S.C. 20302 for purposes of testing this new technology. The purpose
of the statute is to protect employees who are between traditional rail
equipment lacing air hoses and coupling equipment, but, because this
novel equipment being tested does not couple or have air hoses, the
risk has been engineered out.
Conclusion
This test program is approved. Based on the consideration and
analysis of data gathered during the Program, or upon Petitioners'
written request, FRA may modify or rescind the approval.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Kyle David Fields,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2025-02252 Filed 2-4-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 5, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.