Quiet Zone Experiences

1. Quiet Zone Experiences Grapevine, TZ May 20, 2008

2. Overview • Final Rule issued on 4/27/05 and effective on 6/24/05. • Amendments published – August 17, 2006 • Talk about some of the lessons learned – both good and bad. • FRA has not seen an increase in collisions in QZs.

3. Number of QZs - 308 • New QZs – 108 (20) • New Partial QZs – 9 (2) • Pre-Rule QZs – 175 (195) • Pre-Rule Partial QZs – 16 (16) • Notices of Intent – 123 (27) • FRA not required to receive a NOI Note: Numbers in parenthesis reflect numbers from 2006 conference

4. Number of QZs • 308 QZs • 35 States • States with the most QZs (new & pre-rule) • WI - 64 • MN – 38 • MA – 28 • VA – 25 • MO – 20

5. Number of New QZs • 108 New QZs have been established • 30 states • States with the most New QZs • TX – 18 • IL – 13 • MN – 13 • CA – 12

6. How are New QZs Established • SSMs at every crossing – 56 • QZRI <= NSRT – no improvements – 17 • QZRI <= NSRT – w/ improvements – 1 • QZRI <= RIWH - w/ improvements - 33

7. Observations

8. Notices • Great deal of variety in the quality. • Ranges from: • Multi-page, bound notices – very complete • One page notice – not compliant with rule • NOI - Provide a brief explanation of plans • Railroads have done a good job reviewing the content for compliance. • Be sure to use the checklists on FRA’s website.

9. Notice of EstablishmentUse the Correct Report • Some notices are submitted with a copy of the QZC page and not the report from the QZC. • Report provides the needed information and helps to ensure proper submission. • Railroads are apt to not honor an incomplete NOE.

10. Calculator Page

18. Realize that Horn May Still Sound • Horn may still be used for: • Emergencies • Roadway worker protection • Malfunctioning warning devices (Part 234) • Operating rules – e.g., approaching stations • Bleed-over from non-QZ crossings • Crossings outside of QZ • Adjacent crossings on other tracks not in QZ

20. RRs - Prepare Engineers for QZ • Provide training & instruction early on, not at the last moment. • Issue operating bulletins, general notices, etc., well in advance. • Suggest that QZ efficiency tests be performed. • Realize that horn sounding is a well engrained behavior that will need to be changed. • Consider wayside signs to identify QZs

23. Application Method • Used only when using ASMs for risk reduction. • Be sure to include an effectiveness rating for the ASM. • Work with FRA early in the process. • RRs & State agencies must get a copy of application and have 60 days to provide comments to FRA.

24. Safety Can Be Enhanced • Some cities are going well beyond the requirements of the rule. • Fargo-Moorhead is an example. • Every crossing is being treated. • Safety measures taken for pedestrian traffic. • Crossing closures. • Discovering problems.

25. 8th Street – Fargo, ND

26. Roberts Street-Fargo

27. Roberts Street - Fargo

28. 6th Street Closure - Moorhead

29. Broadway Avenue - Fargo

30. Corridor Fencing

31. Pedestrian Maze/Refuge

32. SSMs Must Be Maintained

33. Private Crossings

34. Why do we care? Majority of incidents involve vehicles larger than a pickup.

35. Why do we care? Accidents at public and private grade crossings 1985-2005

36. All Kinds of Crossings

37. Incidents by Type of Development

38. Private Crossing Findings(Tentative) • Safety not improving as rapidly as at public crossings • Public funding helps improve safety • Public funding generally not available at private crossings • Proportionately fewer active crossings • Essentially no enforcement component at private crossings

39. Private Crossing Findings • Accident, incident, and casualty rates may have dropped • Inventory data lacks traffic counts • Accident, incident, and casualty counts remain stagnant despite— • Public education • Improvements in vehicle design • Alerting lights • Railroad efforts to close crossings

40. Private Crossing Findings • Opportunities for accidents may rise • Population increases • Changes in land use • Growth in highway and rail traffic, including • New commuter rail starts • Development of high speed corridors

41. Private Crossing Findings • No cohesive policy, regulatory structure • Redundant crossings • Inadequately designed crossings • Poorly maintained crossings • Numerous populations at risk • Motorists • Train occupants • Others in crossing vicinity

42. Private Crossing Findings • States, local authorities generally lack jurisdiction • Crossings created without considering public safety, necessity • No Standards (in most States) • Signage • Roadway design

43. Private crossing Findings • Most crossings lack agreements • Public use a key safety concern • Local planning departments not involved

44. Private Crossing Findings • Railroad authority limited • Efforts to make improvements hampered • Education programs may help • Law enforcement programs likely ineffective

45. Private Crossing Findings • Effective solutions require collaboration • Private crossing holders • Railroads • Local planning approval authorities • State agencies • Standard-developing organizations • U.S. DOT

46. Private Crossing Findings • FRA has relevant authority • Other DOT modes should also participate

47. Private Crossing Findings • Options presented for discussion and comment • One approach would use policy or guidance approach • Another approach would rely on legislation, regulation • Could mix and match as necessary

48. Electronic Docket • U.S. DOT Docket Management System • http://dms.dot.gov/ • http://www.regulations.gov/ • Docket number FRA-2005-23281 • Note: DMS system now shut down; archive only.

49. Next Steps • Volpe draft report of the inquiry undergoing FRA review. • FRA preparing policy paper for discussion within U.S. DOT.

50. Questions???? Ron Ries 202-493-6285 Ron.Ries@DOT.GOV