83_FR_12702 83 FR 12646 - Automation in the Railroad Industry

83 FR 12646 - Automation in the Railroad Industry

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 56 (March 22, 2018)

Page Range12646-12649
FR Document2018-05786

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 extent to which they believe railroad operations can (and should) be automated, and the potential benefits, costs, risks, and challenges to achieving such automation. 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 will lead to continuous safety improvements and increased efficiencies in railroad operations.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 56 (Thursday, March 22, 2018) 
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 56 (Thursday, March 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12646-12649]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05786]


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

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: 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 extent to which they believe railroad 
operations can (and should) be automated, and the potential benefits, 
costs, risks, and challenges to achieving such automation. 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 will lead to continuous safety 
improvements and 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

[[Page 12647]]

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, 
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.
     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 the applicability of 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

[[Page 12648]]

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. How do railroads plan to ensure safety and security from cyber 
risks?
    14. 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

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

    17. What is the potential impact of the adoption of these 
technologies on the existing railroad industry workforce?
    18. 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?
    19. 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

    20. What potential legal issues are raised by the development and 
implementation of autonomous train systems and technologies within the 
industry?
    21. 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?
    22. 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

    23. 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)?
    24. 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.

[[Page 12649]]

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 16, 2018.
Juan D. Reyes, III,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-05786 Filed 3-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P

12646 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 56 / Thursday, March 22, 2018 / Notices discussed in the January 16, 2018 Anthony J. Kornuszko, Jr. (PA) • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Federal Register notice (83 FR 2298) Jeffrey W. Mills (NC) Transportation, Docket Operations, and will not be repeated in this notice. Jaime D. Paggen (MN) West Building Ground Floor, Room These four applicants have been In accordance with 49 U.S.C. W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, seizure-free over a range of 17 years 31315(b)(1), each exemption will be Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. while taking anti-seizure medication valid for two years from the effective and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, and maintained a stable medication date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. except Federal holidays; or treatment regimen for the last two years. The exemption will be revoked if the • Electronically through the Federal In each case, the applicant’s treating following occurs: (1) The person fails to eRulemaking Portal, http:// physician verified his or her seizure comply with the terms and conditions www.regulations.gov. Follow the online history and supports the ability to drive of the exemption; (2) the exemption has instructions for submitting comments. commercially. resulted in a lower level of safety than Instructions: All submissions must The Agency acknowledges the was maintained prior to being granted; include the agency name, docket name, potential consequences of a driver or (3) continuation of the exemption and docket number for this RFI (FRA– experiencing a seizure while operating a would not be consistent with the goals 2018–0027). Note that all comments and CMV. However, the Agency believes the and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and data received in response to this RFI drivers granted this exemption have 31315. will be posted without change to http:// demonstrated that they are unlikely to www.regulations.gov, including any have a seizure and their medical Issued on: March 16, 2018. personal information provided. Please condition does not pose a risk to public Larry W. Minor, see the Privacy Act heading in the safety. Associate Administrator for Policy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Consequently, FMCSA finds that in [FR Doc. 2018–05863 Filed 3–21–18; 8:45 am] this document for Privacy Act each case exempting these applicants BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P information related to any submitted from the epilepsy and seizure disorder comments or materials. prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) is Docket: For access to the docket to likely to achieve a level of safety equal DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION read comments received, go to http:// to that existing without the exemption. www.regulations.gov at any time or to Federal Railroad Administration U.S. Department of Transportation, V. Conditions and Requirements Docket Operations, M–30, West The terms and conditions of the [Docket No. FRA–2018–0027] Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, exemption are provided to the Automation in the Railroad Industry 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, applicants in the exemption document Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 and includes the following: (1) Each AGENCY: Federal Railroad p.m., Monday through Friday, except driver must remain seizure-free and Administration (FRA), Department of Federal holidays. maintain a stable treatment during the Transportation (DOT). two-year exemption period; (2) each FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Request for Information (RFI). Peter Cipriano, Special Assistant to the driver must submit annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the Administrator, Federal Railroad SUMMARY: FRA requests information and Administration, 1200 New Jersey stability of treatment and that the driver comment on the future of automation in has remained seizure-free; (3) each Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 the railroad industry. FRA is interested (telephone: 202–493–6017), driver must undergo an annual medical in hearing from industry stakeholders, examination by a certified Medical peter.cipriano@dot.gov. the public, local and State governments, Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and any other interested parties on the and (4) each driver must provide a copy extent to which they believe railroad I. Overview of the annual medical certification to operations can (and should) be the employer for retention in the FRA seeks to understand the current automated, and the potential benefits, stage and development of automated driver’s qualification file, or keep a copy costs, risks, and challenges to achieving of his/her driver’s qualification file if railroad operations and how the agency such automation. FRA also seeks can best position itself to support the he/she is self-employed. The driver comment on how the agency can best must also have a copy of the exemption integration and implementation of new support the railroad industry’s automation technologies to increase the when driving, for presentation to a duly development and implementation of authorized Federal, State, or local safety, reliability, and the capacity of new and emerging technologies in the nation’s railroad system. As in other enforcement official. automation that will lead to continuous transportation modes, there are varying VI. Preemption safety improvements and increased levels of automation that already are, or efficiencies in railroad operations. could potentially be, implemented in During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or DATES: Comments and information the railroad industry. Currently, U.S. regulation that conflicts with this responsive to this request should be passenger and freight railroads do not exemption with respect to a person received by May 7, 2018. have a fully autonomous rail operation operating under the exemption. ADDRESSES: You may submit in revenue service; however, railroads information and comments identified by commonly use automated systems for VII. Conclusion the docket number FRA–2018–0027 by dispatching, meet and pass trip daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Based upon its evaluation of the four any one of the following methods: planning, locomotive fuel trip time exemption applications, FMCSA • Fax: 1–202–493–2251; optimization, and signaling and train exempts the following drivers from the • Mail: U.S. Department of control. Railroads conduct many epilepsy and seizure disorder Transportation, Docket Operations, M– switching and yard operations by prohibition, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), subject 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room remote control and automated to the requirements cited above: W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, equipment and track inspections Anthony Anello, III (NJ) Washington, DC 20590; technologies are used to augment VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Mar 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 56 / Thursday, March 22, 2018 / Notices 12647 manual inspection methods. Modern and implementation of automated train Automatic Train Operation of public locomotive cabs are equipped with systems and technologies and the transit fixed guideway (rail) systems is intelligent information systems industry’s plans and expectations an operational safety enhancement to designed to provide operating crews related to potential fully-automated rail automate operations of trains. It is with up-to-date situational awareness as operations. FRA is specifically mainly used on fixed guideway rail train sensor data and alarms are interested in the anticipated benefits, systems which are easier to ensure continuously updated and displayed in costs, risks, and challenges to achieving safety of agency staff and passengers. operator consoles within the cab. the industry’s desired level of Basically, each grade defines distinct Railroads often now utilize energy automation. FRA also seeks to functions of train operation that are the management technology (the equivalent understand how the rail industry’s responsibility of agency staff and those of automobile cruise-control) to plans for future automation may affect that are the responsibility of the rail optimize fuel consumption based on other stakeholders, including railroad system itself. specific operational and equipment employees, the traveling public and Similar to SAE, UITP defines grades factors, as well as movement planner freight shipping industry, railroad of automation (GoA) for fixed guideway systems designed to optimize in real- industry suppliers and equipment (rail) systems. Generally: time, train movements on the rail manufacturers, communities through • At UITP Grade 0, on-sight train network. Railroads are implementing which railroads operate, and any other operation, similar to a streetcar running statutorily mandated positive train interested parties. in mixed traffic. control technology (a processor-based/ FRA also seeks comment on the • At UITP Grade 1, manual train communications-based train control appropriate taxonomy to use to provide operation where a train operator system) to prevent train accidents by a baseline framework for the continued controls starting and stopping, operation automatically controlling train speeds development and implementation of of doors and handling of emergencies or and movements if a train operator fails automated technology in the railroad sudden diversions. to take appropriate action in certain industry. For example, both SAE, for on- • At UITP Grade 2, semi-automatic operational scenarios. These various road vehicles, and the International train operation where starting and systems of automation and technologies Association of Public Transport’s (UITP) stopping is automated, but the train have transformed rail operations in for public transit fixed guideway (rail) operator or conductor controls the recent years, improving railroad have developed taxonomies for their doors, drives the train if needed and operational safety and efficiency. respective modes of transportation. handles emergencies (many ATO FRA has helped developed many of The SAE definitions divide vehicles systems worldwide are Grade 2). these technologies and enhancements to into levels based on ‘‘who does what, • At UITP Grade 3, driverless train these technologies are currently when.’’ Generally: operation where starting and stopping underway to support more advanced • At SAE Level 0, the driver does are automated but a train attendant or train control schemes and fully everything. conductor controls the doors and drives autonomous operations. In the fall of • At SAE Level 1, an automated the train in case of emergencies. 2017, the Association of American system on the vehicle can sometimes • At UITP Grade 4, unattended train Railroads, the freight rail industry’s assist the driver conduct some parts of operation where starting and stopping, primary industry organization that the driving task. operation of doors and handling of focuses on policy, research, standard • At SAE Level 2, an automated emergencies are fully automated setting and technology, formed a system on the vehicle can actually without any on-train staff. Technical Advisory Group on conduct some parts of the driving task, FRA requests comment on the autonomous train operations (ATO while the driver continues to monitor applicability of these or other TAG). The focus of the ATO TAG is to the driving environment and performs taxonomies for automation should be define industry standards for an the rest of the driving task. applied to railroads. interoperable system to support • At SAE Level 3, an automated enhanced safety and efficiency of system can both actually conduct some II. Questions Posed autonomous train operations. The ATO parts of the driving task and monitor the Although FRA seeks comments and TAG intends to develop standardization driving environment in some instances, relevant information and data on all to support common interfaces and but the driver must be ready to take issues related to the development and functions, such that technology may be back control when the automated continued implementation of automated applied in an interoperable fashion, system requests. train systems and technologies and while also allowing some flexibility in • At SAE Level 4, an automated potentially fully autonomous train the specific design, implementation and system can conduct the driving task and operations, FRA specifically requests packaging of the technology. monitor the driving environment, and comment and data in response to the Internationally, the only known fully- the driver need not take back control, following questions: autonomous freight railroad system is in but the automated system can operate Australia. The system is part of the only in certain environments and under General Questions Australia Rio Tinto mining company certain conditions. 1. To what extent do railroads plan to and began fully-autonomous train • At SAE Level 5, the automated automate operations? Do railroads plan operations on an approximately 62-mile system can perform all driving tasks, to implement fully autonomous rail stretch of track in Western Australia. under all conditions that a driver could vehicles (i.e., vehicles capable of This Rio Tinto train is equipped with a perform them. sensing their environments and daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES variety of sensors (e.g., radar, cameras, Using the SAE levels described above, operating without human input)? If so, kangaroo collisions sensors) and with a the Department has drawn a distinction for what types of operations? switch to toggle between autonomous for non-road vehicles between Levels 0– 2. How do commenters envision the operation or operation with an operator 2 and 3–5 based on whether the human path to wide-scale development and on board. driver or the automated system is implementation of autonomous rail FRA seeks to understand the rail primarily responsible for monitoring the operations (or operations increasingly industry’s plans for future development driving environment. reliant on automated train systems or VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Mar 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

12648 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 56 / Thursday, March 22, 2018 / Notices technologies)? What is the potential Safety and/or Security Issues Legal/Regulatory Issues timeframe for technology prototype 9. How do commenters believe these availability for testing and for 20. What potential legal issues are technologies could increase rail safety? raised by the development and deployment of such technologies? 10. What processes do railroads have implementation of autonomous train 3. As discussed above, the railroad in place to identify potential safety and/ systems and technologies within the industry is currently taking steps in or security, including cybersecurity, industry? developing standards for automation. risks arising during the adoption of How does the railroad industry these technologies and that may result 21. What are the regulatory challenges currently define ‘‘autonomous from the adoption of such technologies? (rail-specific or DOT-wide) that must be operations’’? Would it be helpful to 11. How should railroads plan to addressed before autonomous rail develop automated rail taxonomy; a ensure identified safety and/or security vehicles can be made a part of railroad system of standards to clarify and define risks are adequately addressed during operations in the United States? different levels of automation in trains, the development and implementation of 22. Are there current safety standards as currently exists for on-road vehicles these new technologies? What is an and/or regulations that impede the and rail transit? What, if any, efforts are acceptable level of risk in this context? development and/or implementation of already under way to develop such rail 12. How should railroads plan to automated train systems or technologies automation taxonomy? Should FRA ensure the integration of these in the railroad industry, including the embrace any existing and defined levels technologies will not adversely affect, development and/or implementation of of automation in the railroad industry or and will instead improve, the safety autonomous rail vehicles? If so, what other transportation modes such as and/or security of railroad operations? are they and how should they be highways or public transit? For 13. How do railroads plan to ensure addressed? example, should FRA consider SAE safety and security from cyber risks? Standard J3016_201609 (see http:// 14. How do the safety and/or security, Opportunities for Joint Government/ standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/), including cyber risks, faced by U.S. Industry Cooperation which provides for six GoA for on-road railroads implementing these 23. Are there current or anticipated vehicles, or the four GoA for public technologies compare to the risks faced railroad industry, private, international, transit fixed guideway vehicles? by railroads operating in other or State or local government pilot countries? How have railroads in other 4. What limitations and/or risks (e.g., projects or research initiatives involving countries addressed or mitigated these practical, economic, safety, or other) are automated train systems or technologies risks? Are there opportunities for cross- already known or anticipated in potentially in need of FRA support? If border collaboration to address such implementing these types of so, what are the needs (e.g., regulatory, risks? technologies? How should the railroad technical)? industry anticipate addressing these Infrastructure 24. What data relevant to the limitations and/or risks, and what 15. What are the infrastructure needs development and integration of efforts are currently underway to for effectively, safely, and securely automated train systems and address them? Are any mitigating efforts implementing these technologies? FRA technologies currently exists that could expected in the future and what is the is particularly interested in wayside, be leveraged to address future timeline for such efforts? communication, onboard, operating government/industry research needs? 5. What benefits and efficiencies (e.g., personnel, testing, maintenance, practical, economic, safety, or other) do III. Public Participation certification, and data infrastructure commenters anticipate that railroads needs, as well as any other expected or FRA invites all interested parties to will be able to achieve by implementing anticipated infrastructure needs. submit comments, data, and information these technologies? 16. How can the nation’s existing rail related to the specific questions listed in 6. What societal benefits if any, could infrastructure be leveraged to support Section II above and any other be expected to result from the adoption the implementation of new comments, data, or information relevant of these technologies (e.g., infrastructure, necessary for the to issues related to the development and environmental, or noise reduction)? adoption of automated and autonomous implementation in the railroad industry What societal disadvantages could operations? of new automated train systems or occur? Workforce Viability technologies. 7. What, if anything, is needed from 17. What is the potential impact of the How do I prepare and submit other railroad industry participants (e.g., adoption of these technologies on the comments? rail equipment and infrastructure existing railroad industry workforce? suppliers, manufacturers, maintainers) 18. Would the continued Your comments should be written and to support railroads’ automation efforts? implementation of these technologies, in English. To ensure that your 8. How does the state of automation including fully autonomous rail comments are filed in the correct of U.S. railroad operations compare to vehicles, create new jobs and/or docket, please include docket number that of railroads in other countries? eliminate the need for existing jobs in FRA–2018–0027 in your comments. What can be learned from automation the railroad industry? Please submit your comments to the employed or under development in 19. What railroad employee training docket following the instruction given daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES other countries? What are the unique needs would likely result from the above under ADDRESSES. If you are characteristics of U.S. railroad adoption of these technologies? For submitting comments electronically as a operations and/or infrastructure as example, if the technology fails en PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that the compared to railroads in other countries route, will an onboard employee be document submitted be scanned using that may affect the wide-scale trained to take over operation of the an Optical Character Recognition automation of railroad operations in this vehicle manually or be required to process, thus allowing FRA to search country? repair the technology en route? your comments. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Mar 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 56 / Thursday, March 22, 2018 / Notices 12649 How do I request confidential treatment DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Historic Preservation Act [16 U.S.C. of my submission? 470f], and the Clean Air Act [42 U.S.C. Federal Transit Administration 7401–7671q]. This notice does not, Although FRA encourages the however, alter or extend the limitation submission of information that can be Limitation on Claims Against Proposed period for challenges of project freely and publicly shared, if you wish Public Transportation Projects decisions subject to previous notices to submit any information under a claim AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration published in the Federal Register. The of confidentiality, you must follow the (FTA), DOT. project and action that is the subject of procedures in 49 CFR 209.11. ACTION: Notice. this notice follow: Project name and location: West Lake Will FRA consider late comments? SUMMARY: This notice announces final Corridor Project, Dyer and Hammond, FRA will consider all comments environmental actions taken by the Indiana. Project Sponsor: Northern Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Indiana Commuter Transportation received before the close of business on for a project between the Town of Dyer District (NICTD). Project description: the comment closing date indicated and the City of Hammond, both located The project is an approximately 9-mile above under DATES. To the extent southern extension of the existing in Lake County, Indiana. The purpose of possible, FRA will also consider this notice is to announce publicly the NICTD South Shore Line (SSL) comments after that date. environmental decisions by FTA on the commuter rail service between the How can I read the comments submitted subject project and to activate the Town of Dyer and the City of by other people? limitation on any claims that may Hammond, in Lake County, Indiana. challenge this final environmental The project would end just east of the You may read the comments received action. Indiana-Illinois state line, where trains at the address given above under DATES: By this notice, FTA is advising would connect with the SSL to travel Comments. The hours of the docket are the public of final agency actions north to Chicago. The West Lake indicated above in the same location. subject to Section 139(l) of Title 23, Corridor Project includes four commuter You may also read the comments on the United States Code (U.S.C.). A claim rail stations and a maintenance facility/ internet, filed in the docket number at seeking judicial review of FTA actions layover yard. Final agency actions: the heading of this notice, at http:// announced herein for the listed public Section 4(f) determination, dated March www.regulations.gov. transportation projects will be barred 1, 2018; Section 106 finding of adverse unless the claim is filed on or before effect dated September 6, 2017; A Please note that, even after the Section 106 Memorandum of comment closing date, FRA will August 20, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agreement, dated December 12, 2017; continue to file any relevant information project-level air quality conformity, and it receives in the docket as it becomes Nancy-Ellen Zusman, Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, (312) a Record of Decision, dated March 1, available. Further, some people may 2018. Supporting documentation: submit late comments. Accordingly, 353–2577 or Alan Tabachnick, Environmental Protection Specialist, Combined Final Environmental Impact FRA recommends that you periodically Statement/Record of Decision/Section Office of Environmental Programs, (202) check the docket for new material. 4(f) Evaluation, dated March 1, 2018. 366–8541. FTA is located at 1200 New IV. Privacy Act Statement Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC Elizabeth S. Riklin, 20590. Office hours are from 9:00 a.m. Deputy Associate Administrator for Planning FRA notes that anyone is able to to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and Environment. search (at www.regulations.gov) the except Federal holidays. [FR Doc. 2018–05763 Filed 3–21–18; 8:45 am] electronic form of all filings received SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is BILLING CODE P into any of DOT’s dockets by the name hereby given that FTA has taken final of the individual submitting the filing agency action by issuing a certain (or signing the filing, if submitted on approval for the public transportation DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION behalf of an association, business, labor project listed below. The actions on the union, or other organization). You may project, as well as the laws under which Federal Transit Administration review DOT’s complete Privacy Act such actions were taken, are described Limitation on Claims Against Proposed Statement published in the Federal in the documentation issued in Public Transportation Projects Register on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, connection with the project to comply Number 70, Pages 19477–78), or you with the National Environmental Policy AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration may view the privacy notice of Act (NEPA) and in other documents in (FTA), DOT. regulations.gov at http:// the FTA administrative record for the ACTION: Notice. www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice. project. Interested parties may contact either the project sponsor or the FTA SUMMARY: This notice announces final Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20101 et seq. Regional Office for more information. environmental actions taken by the Issued in Washington, DC, on March 16, Contact information for FTA’s Regional Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2018. Offices may be found at https:// for a project in Miami-Dade County, Juan D. Reyes, III, www.fta.dot.gov. Florida. The purpose of this notice is to This notice applies to all FTA announce publicly the environmental daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Acting Deputy Administrator. decisions on the listed project as of the decisions by FTA on the subject project [FR Doc. 2018–05786 Filed 3–21–18; 8:45 am] and to activate the limitation on any issuance date of this notice and all laws BILLING CODE 4910–06–P under which such actions were taken, claims that may challenge this final including, but not limited to, NEPA [42 environmental action. U.S.C. 4321–4375], Section 4(f) DATES: By this notice, FTA is advising requirements [23 U.S.C. 138, 49 U.S.C. the public of final agency actions 303], Section 106 of the National subject to Section 139(l) of Title 23, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Mar 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1


Document Created: 2018-03-22 01:25:24
Document Modified: 2018-03-22 01:25:24
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionRequest for Information (RFI).
DatesComments and information responsive to this request should be received by May 7, 2018.
ContactPeter Cipriano, Special Assistant to the Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6017), [email protected]
FR Citation83 FR 12646 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR