Ten90 Solutions LLC

Really.  Because I received an email from FRA announcing that FRA would hold it's "first-ever positive train control (PTC) symposium," and nothing says excitement like a symposium.

Actually, I was excited because I thought the email was an invitation and I was being invited to attend the symposium.  No such luck.  FRA intends the symposium to "bring together FRA's PTC experts and all 41 railroads...mandated to implement PTC systems."  Shucks, and gosh-darn.  If I had feelings, they'd be hurt.  If I had a heart, it would be broken.

FRA, I think, is feeling a bit of pressure, particularly over the apparent lack of progress recorded by many of the country's commuter railroads in installing and operating the system. 

It's been ten years since the original legislation mandating PTC, and 3 years since the "one-time" extension, and the next 6 months are not going to bring forth any miracles.     

So FRA calls a symposium and FRA, in that call, lists all it has already done to guide, facilitate, encourage, propel laggard railroads to get on the stick, get with the program, start moving with a purpose, etc etc.  Good for FRA. 

Except, I have some questions regarding the list of actions FRA has already taken.  [Note: I'm sure the answers to my questions  are available through the FOIA request process, but I already have two of those pending, and for 5 months, with FRA, so I thought I'd post the questions here, giving FRA a perfect opportunity to ignore them, as part of my own personal paperwork reduction act.]  

Anyway, here are the actions FRA has taken, with my questions right alongside, a sort of call-and-response format, for your reading pleasure: 

Since January 2017, the FRA has taken the following actions to help railroads with implementation of PTC systems:

1) Sent letters in May 2017 to the 17 railroads that, as of December 31, 2016, FRA considered at risk of neither meeting the December 31, 2018, deadline nor meeting the statutory criteria required to qualify for an alternative schedule, specifically because self-reported data from 17 railroads indicated that each railroad had installed less than 50% of its PTC system hardware as of December 31, 2016; 

Q: In the 12 months since that letter, how many of those 17 are no longer considered at risk of not meeting the deadline or the requirements for alternative schedule?

2) Sent letters in June 2017 to governors and state departments of transportation regarding any commuter railroad in the state that had installed less than 50% of its PTC system hardware as of December 31, 2016.  FRA emphasized the importance of the state government ensuring these railroads have proper technical support and sufficient oversight of PTC system implementation;

Q: What has been the response from those governors and state DOTS? Has/have any, several, or all states so contacted provided FRA with concrete proposals for increasing technical support and supplying sufficient oversight of PTC implementation?

3) Initiated enforcement actions in June and July 2017 against 14 railroads that either failed to complete the end-of-2016 hardware installation milestones that the railroad established in its PTC Implementation Plan or failed to submit a timely Annual PTC Progress Report to FRA by the statutory March 31, 2017, deadline;

Q: How many of these 14 railroads are "back on schedule" and reaching their milestones as stated in their IPs?

4) Assisted the Federal Transit Administration in awarding over $197 million in grants to commuter railroads and state and local governments in fiscal year (FY) 2017 for the installation of PTC systems; 

Q: What provisions has FRA or FTA made for targeting that money to the areas of greatest need on railroads receiving the funds? Is funding really the make or break the date issue at this point?

5) Announced the $73 million Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for rail capital projects funded through the FY17 Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program;Announced the $250 million NOFO for PTC system implementation funded through the FY18 CRISI Program; 

Q: Same question as above

6) Participated in NOFO webinars hosted by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA);

Q: And what were the results webinars?

7) Hosted stakeholder webinars to explain FY17 and FY18 grant funding;

Q: Same question as above.

8) Held face-to-face meetings with the major PTC system vendors and suppliers and all 41 railroads subject to the statutory mandate to implement PTC systems;

Q: Same question as above

9) Sent letters in April 2018 to 15 railroads that FRA considered at risk of neither meeting the December 31, 2018, deadline nor meeting the statutory criteria required to qualify for an alternative schedule, specifically because self-reported data from 15 railroads indicated that each railroad had installed less than 80-percent of its PTC system hardware as of December 31, 2017; 

Q: Are these 15 railroads part of the original group of 17 railroads identified by FRA as at risk in May 2017?  If so, what was the response of these railroads after May 2017, and how did they explain the apparent repeated failure to establish and fulfill a schedule for timely implementation?

10) Presented at several industry PTC meetings and working groups held by AAR and APTA, as well as supported a PTC Seminar with over 250 attendees sponsored by the Railway Systems Suppliers, Inc. (RSSI);

Q: Same as earlier questions:  What were the results?  What problems were identified?  What solutions proposed?

11) Engaged with Class I railroads, intercity passenger and commuter railroads, and other railroads regarding compliance with the PTC regulations; 

Q: I could ask the same question as above, but that's become boring.  Better question: what does "engaged...regarding PTC regulations" mean?

12) Sent letters in June 2018 to the 12 railroads that remain at risk of neither meeting the December 31, 2018, deadline nor meeting the statutory criteria required to qualify for an alternative schedule, specifically because self-reported data from 12 railroads indicated that each railroad had installed less than 85-percent of its PTC system hardware as of March 31, 2018; 

Q: Are these 12 part of the earlier 15 and the original 17 identified as being at risk for non-compliance in the letters of May 2017 and April 2018? If so, what actions have been taken to accelerate the technical and operational support needed to meet the requirements for compliance?

13)  Sent letters in June 2018 to governors and state departments of transportation that have an at-risk commuter railroad in their states to encourage their direct involvement and support at this critical time. 

Q: Really?  Are these governors part of the group of governors contacted in June 2017?  Did any of these governors acknowledge that in the intervening 12 months insufficient efforts were made to reduce the risk of non-compliance?

I certainly don't mean to belittle FRA for making their efforts, but I do think it's a little bit weird to list all these efforts and not provide even a word on the results of those efforts. There's that rather crude, colorful, phrase about somebody doing something to your leg and telling you that it's raining out.  Remember that? Those of us who have worked on railroads are quite experienced with working in the rain, and keeping our legs dry at the same time. 

David Schanoes June 8, 2018

"Whatever you're gonna do, do it fast."--Vasquez, Aliens