Railway Age August 2023

AILWAY G E

SERVING THE RAILWAY INDUSTRY SINCE 1856

ANTI-FREEZE

COMBATTING COLD-CLIMATE CHALLENGES

JURISDICTIONAL JUMBLE

Deciphering Metrorail’s Complex Structure

DERAILMENT PREVENTION

Following the “Five I” Model

AILWAY GE

SUBSCRIPTIONS: 847-559-7372

Getting the Next Volume Rebound Right

icking up where I left off with last month’s column, which was based on Loop Capital Managing Director Rick Paterson’s conversation with CSX Executive Vice President Operations Jamie Boychuk on crew management, there is solid evidence that our freight railroads are emerging from the dark, dank tunnel atmosphere that permeated the first half of this year, on good track with clean ballast. The pain we’ve been experiencing is gradually draining away.

“We’re now in that unfortunately rare situation where U.S. and Canadian Class I railroads are running decently well at the same time,” Paterson pointed out in a recent analysis, with the numbers to back him up. “That’s a good thing, and attention now turns to what has historically been a difficult balancing act for the railroads, which is to manage costs and headcount in the context of quarterly earnings pressures, while at the same time preparing network capacity for the inevitable rebound in volumes, whenever that may occur.”

It could come sooner than later. Are we ready? Here’s an encouraging development:

“In the past, the knee-jerk response to soft volumes was to furlough crews,” Paterson noted. “But we’re seeing more restraint now, given the scars from 2021 and 2022, when crew shortages triggered service meltdowns.”

Refraining from knee-jerk responses is mostly about satisfying basic human needs. Employees who feel valued, respected and secure in their jobs—not cut off at the knees— will in the long term produce “shareholder value,” putting substance behind the corporate-speak pronouncements.

“It’s always important that the railroads get

this balancing act right, but this time around is arguably the most critical time in memory,” Paterson said. “One by one, the U.S. railroads have restored service and began making the argument to customers that good service is here to stay and they are once again dependable supply chain partners. This might be good for some incremental volume recovery, but customers aren’t going to divert meaningful volumes from truck to rail until the railroads prove that service can remain above a satisfactory floor in the face of higher loadings.

“It’s natural and OK for the networks to slow during a volume rebound, but customers need to be confident of a service floor rather than be worried about a service collapse. It won’t be until then that the spigots can be properly turned on and more meaningful market share opportunities present themselves. More than ever, the U.S. railroads need to get the next rebound right.”

Based upon the progress I’ve observed in service quality improvement and better relations with the people in the field doing the grueling work of running trains, I’m putting my money on the railroads “getting it right.” Perhaps that will get the politicians and pundits to cease their uninformed attacks, shut down the circus and relegate the pointless legislation to Capitol Hill’s dustbin? Call me an optimist.

I’ve been accused by some who are probabilmente dipendente dalla miseria, happy with painting a dystopian nightmare picture, of “not doing my homework.” With all due respect, vai a pestare il sale. Bear in mind that when you point a finger, there are four fingers pointing right back at you.

EDITORIAL AND EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Simmons-Boardman Publishing Corp. 1809 Capitol Avenue Omaha, NE 68102 (212) 620-7200 www.railwayage.com

ARTHUR J. McGINNIS, Jr. President and Chairman

JONATHAN CHALON Publisher jchalon@sbpub.com

WILLIAM C. VANTUONO Editor-in-Chief wvantuono@sbpub.com

MARYBETH LUCZAK Executive Editor mluczak@sbpub.com

CAROLINA WORRELL Senior Editor cworrell@sbpub.com

DAVID C. LESTER Engineering Editor/Railway Track & Structures Editor-in-Chief dlester@sbpub.com

JENNIFER McLAWHORN Managing Editor, RT&S jmclawhorn@sbpub.com

HEATHER ERVIN

Ports and Intermodal Editor/Marine Log Editor-in-Chief hervin@sbpub.com

Contributing Editors

David Peter Alan, Jim Blaze, Nick Blenkey, Sonia Bot, Bob Cantwell, Peter Diekmeyer, Alfred E. Fazio, Michael Iden, Don Itzkoff, Bruce Kelly, Ron Lindsey, David Nahass, Jason Seidl, Ron Sucik, David Thomas, John Thompson, Frank N. Wilner, Tony Zenga

Art Director: Nicole D’antona

Graphic Designer: Hillary Coleman

Corporate Production Director: Mary Conyers

Production Director: Eduardo Castaner

Marketing Director: Erica Hayes

Conference Director: Michelle Zolkos

Circulation Director: Joann Binz

INTERNATIONAL OFFICES

46 Killigrew Street, Falmouth, Cornwall TR11 3PP, United Kingdom 011-44-1326-313945

International Editors

Kevin Smith ks@railjournal.co.uk

David Burroughs dburroughs@railjournal.co.uk

David Briginshaw db@railjournal.co.uk

Robert Preston rp@railjournal.co.uk

for the

of

copy of each

Payment should be sent directly to CCC.

other than personal or internal reference use without the express permission of Simmons-Boardman Publishing Corp. is prohibited. Address requests for permission on bulk orders to the Circulation Director. Railway Age welcomes the submission of unsolicited manuscripts and photographs. However, the publishers will not be responsible for safekeeping or return of such material.

Member of:

Simon Artymiuk sa@railjournal.com

CUSTOMER SERVICE: RAILWAYAGE@OMEDA.COM , OR CALL 847-559-7372

Reprints: PARS International Corp. 253 West 35th Street 7th Floor New York, NY 10001 212-221-9595; fax 212-221-9195 curt.ciesinski@parsintl.com

Industry Indicators

‘COAL, GRAIN AND CHEMICALS—MORE THAN HALF OF U.S. NON-INTERMODAL VOLUME—WERE ALL DOWN’

“Total originated carloads on U.S. railroads were down 0.2% in June 2023 from June 2022, their first decline in three months,” the Association of American Railroads reported last month. “Total carloads in 2023 through June (5.84 million) were up 0.6% over the same period in 2022 and the highest since 2019. In June, 11 of 20 carload categories had gains on U.S. railroads, led by motor vehicles and parts (up 21.1%, their 15th straight increase); metallic ores (the most in 27 months); and crushed stone and sand (the most in 46 months). Coal, grain and chemicals account for more than half of U.S. non-intermodal rail volume, and all three were down in June. Grain carloads averaged 15,670 per week, down 24.0% from last year. Since 1988, when our data begin, only three 2013 months had lower weekly average grain carloads. Year-to-date grain carloads were down 10.4%. U.S. coal carloads fell 1.5% in June, while year-to-date coal carloads were up 0.9%. Low natural gas prices are adding to the competitive pressure on coal volumes. U.S. chemicals carloads were down 2.9%, their tenth straight decline. Year-to-date chemicals carloads were down 4.5% from last year but were still the second-highest January-June total ever. U.S. intermodal volumes fell again, their 7.0% decline from June 2022 was their 16th straight. That said, U.S. railroads originated an average of 247,192 containers and trailers per week in June 2023, the most since October 2022.”

Railroad employment, Class I linehaul carriers, june 2023

(% change from june 2022)

TRAFFIC ORIGINATED

TOTAL EMPLOYEES: 122,864 % CHANGE FROM JUNE 2022: +5.69%

Transportation (train and engine)

52,214 (+8.60%)

Executives, Officials and Staff Assistants

8,211 (+5.77%)

Professional and Administrative

10,340 (+4.88%)

Maintenance-of-Way and Structures

28,912 (+1.47%)

Maintenance of Equipment and Stores

18,294 (+5.25%)

Transportation (other than train & engine)

4,893 (+4.66%)

Source: Surface Transportation Board

Intermodal

FOUR WEEKS ENDING JULY 1, 2023

Source: Rail Time Indicators, Association of American Railroads

TOTAL North American CARLOADS, june 2023 VS. june 2022

1,320,5781,316,562

Short Line And Regional Traffic Index

TOTAL U.S. Carloads and intermodal units, 2014-2023 (in millions, year-to-date through june 2023, SIX-WEEK MOVING AVERAGE)

UP: Vena, Whited, McCarthy Share C-Suite

EFFECTIVE AUG. 14, 2023, UNION PACIFIC CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT AND CEO LANCE FRITZ’S RESPONSIBILITIES WILL BE SPLIT THREE WAYS: Jim Vena returns to UP as Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board. Executive Vice President, Sustainability and Strategy and Chief Human Resources Officer Beth Whited becomes President, reporting to Vena. Mike McCarthy, UP’s lead independent director, becomes Chairman of the Board.

As new CEO and Board member, Vena will oversee operations, finance, marketing and sales, supply chain, and technology. He returns to UP after serving as its Chief Operating Officer from 2019 to 2020 and as a Senior Advisor to the Chairman in 2021. Prior to that, Vena spent four decades at CN, starting his career as a brakeman and rising through the ranks to senior management positions across operations, marketing and sales. He served there most recently as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from 2013 to 2016. (Vena decided not to pursue returning to CN as President and CEO to replace the retiring JJ Ruest in 2021.)

Beth Whited, who has served as Executive Vice President, Sustainability and Strategy and Chief Human Resources Officer since February 2022 and was named one of Railway Age’s 2021 Women in Rail honorees, will be responsible for the strategy, workforce resources, sustainability, law, corporate relations and government affairs functions in her new role as President, reporting to Vena. She will be UP’s first woman president in the railroad’s history, and the third to have such a role at a Class I, following BNSF’s Katie Farmer and CN’s Tracy Robinson.

Since joining UP in 1987, Whited has held a variety of executive roles in Strategic Planning, Investor Relations, Finance, and Marketing and Sales, including President of subsidiary Union Pacific Distribution Services. In her most recent role, she helped lead the development and implementation of UP’s strategic vision and oversaw its sustainability initiatives, guiding the railroad’s efforts to reach net zero by 2050. She served previously as Chief Human Resource

Officer, Executive Vice President and Chief Human Resource Officer, and Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer. She also led the Chemicals business for four years and was Vice President of the railroad’s National Customer Service Center.

Vena’s appointment follows months of speculation. UP had announced on Feb. 26 that an “active leadership succession planning process” was under way, countering New York City-based hedge fund Soroban Capital Partners, which in a 43-page presentation to UP’s Board said Jim Vena should replace Lance Fritz “immediately.”

“Following discussions between the Board and Mr. Fritz regarding the path for identifying Union Pacific’s next CEO, in March 2022 the Board engaged a leading outside consultant and subsequently formed a task force of directors composed of each of the Board committee chairs in November 2022,” the railroad reported at the time. “The Board is seeking a CEO with a strong track record of success and expertise across safety, operational excellence, enhancing and driving customer service, innovation, employee culture and sustainability. The Board is focusing the process on highly qualified candidates both within the industry and adjacent industries to identify a CEO capable of leading the company for a long-term tenure. The Board expects to name a successor who will assume the position in 2023.”

Fritz, 60, departs UP following 23 years at the railroad, which he joined as Vice President and General Manager-Energy in the Marketing and Sales Department in 2000. “The Board is grateful to Lance for his leadership over the past eight years,” McCarthy said. “Lance successfully positioned Union Pacific for long-term success, and we wish him the very best in his next chapter.”

“I’d like to express my deep appreciation to the stakeholders of Union Pacific for giving me the privilege of leading this historic company for the past eight years,” Fritz commented. “I am pleased by the progress we’ve made together to enhance value for our stakeholders and chart a strong path forward. I welcome Jim back to Union Pacific and am confident that we have the right leaders to advance the hard work under way.”

Jim Vena, CEO

Mike McCarthy, Chairman

Beth Whited, President

WORLDWIDE

Rolling stock leasing company RAILPOOL has signed a €260 million contract with ALSTOM for the supply of 50 Traxx Universal multi-system electric locomotives. Alstom said the locomotives “will be suitable for both freight and passenger duties, offering high reliability and flexibility as well as optimized power consumption. Extended maintenance intervals are expected to ease operational planning, reduce costs and increase availability.” All locomotives will be equipped with Atlas onboard ETCS (European Train Control System) equipment developed by Alstom, which will enable them to operate on a wide range of routes under both ETCS and legacy signaling systems in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, Italy, Belgium, Luxemburg and Poland.

CPKC Ramping Up HFC Power

Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) has ordered 18 additional 200-kilowatt hydrogen fuel cell (HFC) power plants from Ballard Power Systems to support the expansion of its Hydrogen Locomotive Program. The fuel cell units are slated for delivery this year, Ballard reported last month. The company has supplied CPKC with 20 over the past two years. They are being used in three locomotives, with a combined fuel cell power of 4 megawatts. CPKC’s Hydrogen Locomotive Program began in December 2020 with the retrofit of an existing diesel-electric linehaul locomotive. The diesel prime-mover and traction alternator were replaced with HFC and battery technology to power the unit’s electric traction motors. In November 2021, the Class I received a $15 million 50% matching grant from Emissions Reduction Alberta (ERA) to expand the initiative to three locomotives (for a total of two linehaul units and one switcher), install hydrogen production facilities at two locations, and create a “global center of excellence in hydrogen and freight rail systems” in Alberta.

NORTH AMERICA

CN last month placed an order with WABTEC to upgrade an additional 60 locomotives in its existing fleet through Wabtec’s modernization program. The modernizations, the railroad said, will help to “improve locomotive fuel efficiency, where CN remains a leader in the North American rail industry, consuming approximately 15% less locomotive fuel per GTM (gross ton-mile) than the industry average.” The program, CN added, supports the railroad’s science-based target to reduce its Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 43% per GTM by 2030 from a 2019 base year, and with CN’s commitment to setting a net-zero 2050 carbon emission target aligned to a 1.5-degree scenario. Wabtec’s Services team will modernize CN’s 60 certified pre-owned Dash-9 locomotives to bring the total modernized fleet to 110 units. The company will transform the locomotives from DC to AC traction and will feature enhancements such as the FDL Advantage engine upgrade and a suite of digital solutions, including Trip Optimizer and LOCOTROL Distributed Power. These upgrades, Wabtec said, are expected to extend the life of the locomotives and

provide benefits including targeted fuel efficiency improvements of up to 18% through a combination of engine and digital technology enhancements, a more than 40% increase in reliability, and up to a 55% increase in pulling power. According to CN, the total program is expected to enable the railroad to realize up to approximately 50,000 metric tons in annual GHG (greenhouse gas emission) reductions. Additionally, the modernization order will reuse or recycle approximately 11,000 metric tons of steel.

Following a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), Canada’s High Frequency Rail (HFR) project in Ontario and Quebec has advanced three consortiums to the Request for Proposals (RFP) stage: CADENCE (CDPQ Infra, SNC-Lavalin, Systra Canada, Keolis Canada); INTERCITY RAIL DEVELOPERS (Intercity Development Partners, EllisDon Capital, Kilmer Transportation, First Rail Holdings, Jacobs, Hatch, CIMA+, First Group, RATP Dev Canada, Renfe Operadora); and QCONNEXION RAIL PARTNERS

(Fengate, John Laing, Bechtel, WSP Canada, Deutsche Bahn). Request for proposal evaluation is slated to begin in summer 2024.

Will Supreme Court Defang STB, FRA?

What t he Supreme Court giveth, the Supreme Court taketh—its reach and grasp primed to terminate or limit four decades of judicial permissiveness that grants federal regulatory agencies, such as the independent Surface Transportation Board (STB) and Executive Branch Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), license to interpret what is ambiguous or unclear in statutes they administer.

Simply, regulatory agencies such as STB and FRA could soon lose ability to exercise quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers to ll in statutory gaps with details (rulemakings) when statutes they administer lack direct language on speci c points.

Several pending STB and FRA rulemakings sought by shippers and labor unions could be at risk if the Court, during its 2024 term beginning in October, terminates or limits that judicial permissiveness, which defenders consider a exibility allowing adaptation to changing circumstances.

It was in 1984 that the Supreme Court a orded federal regulatory agencies so-called Chevron deference—named for the underlying case, Chevron USA v. Natural Resources Defense Council.

Should the Supreme Court dispatch Chevron deference to the dustbin of overruled precedents, lower courts—now compelled to grant deference to rational and fact-driven regulatory agency interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions— would gain free rein to substitute their own interpretations. Railroads would aggressively challenge agency decisions no longer a orded Chevron deference.

e statute administered by the STB, for example, is vague as to “the public interest” and the “common carrier obligation,” and lacks clarity on what are “reasonable” railroad rates and practices. e FRA’s statutory instruction to promote “railroad safety” similarly lacks clarity as to whether minimum crew size should be mandated and what validated scienti c evidence is rst required.

Politically conservative opinion leaders argue Chevron deference is inconsistent

with the Constitution’s separation of powers. Scholars at the conservative Heritage Foundation argue that Chevron deference “turns on its head” the Court’s 1803 Marbury v. Madison decision that the province and duty of courts is to interpret the law. A conservative legal scholar at the Hoover Institution termed Chevron deference a “thumb-on-the-scales” by unelected bureaucrats.

Chief Justice William Howard Ta , however, justi ed the role of expert regulatory agencies, writing in 1921 of “the inevitable progress and exigencies of government.”

In 1989, the Court, citing the growing complexity of modern nation states, again defended the role of expert regulatory agencies, saying Congress “simply cannot do its job absent an ability to delegate power under broad general directives.”

Four of the nine current Supreme Court justices have written or spoken in opposition to Chevron deference, whose fate likely will be determined in upcoming months when the Court decides Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

Justice Clarence omas wrote in 2015 of “serious questions about the constitutionality” of Chevron deference. In 2016, appellate judge Justice Neil M. Gorsuch wrote that Chevron deference permits bureaucrats “to swallow huge amounts of core judicial and legislative power” and “maybe the time has come to face the behemoth.” In 2017, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, then an appellate judge, wrote of Chevron deference, “Under the guise of ambiguity, agencies can interpret statutes to accommodate their preferred policy outcomes.” And in a 2017, Justice Samuel Alito spoke of Chevron’s “massive shi ” of lawmaking from Congress to the Administrative State populated by the federal bureaucracy.

Assuming these four conservative justices vote to terminate or limit Chevron deference, only one other Court conservative must become a fellow traveler to provide a five-vote majority. Judicial pundits identify Chief Justice John Roberts as a Chevron “skeptic,” but less so Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

e most recognizable application of

Chevron deference occurred in 2000 when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 not to interfere with the STB’s unprecedented imposition of a 15-month moratorium on railroad mergers to allow for writing of more stringent merger rules.

e conundrum, should the Supreme Court terminate or limit Chevron deference, is how the judiciary will substitute its less-than-expert understanding of rail regulatory issues for the specialized knowledge housed within the STB and FRA. Appellate courts may initially focus on regulatory agency deviations from the status quo, but the possibility exists they could upset longaccepted regulatory doctrine, leaving the STB and FRA as paper tigers.

(Frank N. Wilner’s new book, Railroads & Economic Regulation, is available from Simmons-Boardman Books at www.transalert.com, 800-228-9670.)

FRANK N. WILNER Contributing Editor

Railroads would aggressively challenge agency decisions no longer afforded Chevron deference.”

A CARB-Free Diet Will Require Magic Beans

of NOx. ese are signi cant totals, but as the saying goes, context matters. When looking at the total picture of carbonbased emissions in California (as of 2020), the largest polluter is passenger automobiles (25.5%; more on that momentarily) followed by power generation (11.1%) and trucks (8.8%). Where does rail fall in that spectrum? 0.3%! It is the lowest registered total in the summary issued by the state.

While you’re picking your chin up o the oor, unsurprisingly, AAR and ASLRRA did what they had to do under the circumstances: ey led a lawsuit against California in June.

locomotive built prior to 2007 cannot t into the ZE puzzle is a xable problem within the California policy. But the real problem is this: Unless someone has a pocket full of magic beans that they can use to come up with a universal solution, the California policy will force action. at action may or may not be the best or most cost-e ective solution.

ere are 278 million automobiles in the U.S. with an average age of 12.5 years.

The new locomotive market has languished since 2016, the year prior to implementation of Tier IV emissions standards. In 2015 and 2016, according to David Humphrey, Senior Data Scientist at Railinc and perennial Rail Equipment Finance speaker, roughly 1,600 new locomotives were manufactured. In the following six years (ending in 2022), 900 new locomotives were built. Halfway through 2023, that number will not signi cantly increase.

Leave it to California to come to the rescue.

On April 27, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released a lengthy policy directive aimed at North American rail, speci cally at railroad and industrial companies operating locomotives in California. e net takeaway? Starting in 2024, the Golden State (or the Eureka State if you prefer) is looking to begin a movement to a zero emissions (ZE) standard for locomotive operations. is would include a 2024 implementation of a ZE savings account to be used once 2030 arrives and the standards aren’t met. ink of it as a carbon tax.

e justi cations for this new policy are estimates that in 2022, locomotives emitted more than 640 tons per year of PM (particulate matter) and almost 30,000 tons per year

Sound familiar? is movie is a rerun of the California decision to ban the sale of combustion engine automobiles by 2035 following a phased in implementation of ZE (at the tailpipe) automobiles. (CARB has not projected or at least not made it easy to nd projections on how decreased tailpipe emissions will increase statewide power generation emissions.) e automotive industry began and subsequently terminated a lawsuit against California. Following the CARB rules, 17 other states passed similar requirements.

AAR and ASLRRA may be suing more for modi cation than for repeal when all is said and done. e likely reality is that other states will pile onto the California locomotive emissions rules just as they did for automobiles.

e victims of this California carbon tax would seem to be the railroads. But, as Don Graab points out in his excellent summary about the alternative fuel landscape published in July’s Railway Age, railroad executives are already thinking about the next generation of locomotives and the possibility of ZE. e problem is the technology and ZE goals (including emissions reduction goals set by the railroads themselves) are not o ering seamless execution. Canadian Paci c Kansas City has the most aggressive hydrogen-based net zero emissions project, and CSX has (smartly) aligned itself with CPKC on this front. Everything else feels rudderless right now.

As Graab notes, locomotives built before 2007 can be out tted to burn hydrogen as a primary fuel, so the idea that every

ere are 37,700 locomotives in North America with an average age of 26.5 years (thank you again, Dr. Humphrey). Cars and trucks built in factories, haul people and modest amounts of freight. Locomotives pull prodigious quantities of freight over long distances. Similarities end with wheels and consumption of re ned fuel. More so, churning the automotive eet from combustion to electric is consumer-based and “easier” than wholesale changes to the locomotive eet. Without a clear alternative fuel strategy in place, don’t expect a robust build year in 2024 or 2025 just yet.

Forced change may not be the best change. e interchange system requires a more thoughtful approach to address the economic impacts of CARB’s policy initiative.

But let’s be honest. CARB’s ready, re and aim strategy here underscores a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the railroad business with critical implications. As a result of CARB’s success in staring down big auto, it is no wonder they are leading with edict rather than inviting AAR and ASLRRA to engage in feasibility studies and to develop a workable plan. What other choice was le other than to pursue remedy through litigation, even given a low likelihood of success?

Steak a la carte, please.

Got questions? Set them free at dnahass@ rail n.com.

DAVID NAHASS President Railroad Financial Corp.

The Amsted Digital Solutions Bogie IQ™ takes onboard health monitoring to a new level.

BY WILLIAM C. VANTUONO, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

SOPHISTICATED SIMPLICITY

Described by Amsted Digital Solutions (ADS) as “a rst-of-its-kind telematics system integrated directly into the bogie (three-piece truck),” Bogie IQ™ technology monitors wheelset conditions and brake system performance without wireless sensors. One device per bolster provides real-time onboard health monitoring with GPS-derived, machine learning-enhanced telematics data such as Dynamic ETA, rst- and last-mile validation and “accurate mileage.” ADS’s Supply Chain Visibility™ so ware “provides a quick and easy means to manage by exception and review actionable information immediately.” is device, ADS notes, is “quickly and easily installed on any Amsted Rail® bogie” with specialty tools or hardware. Con guration can be done remotely. Built-in Object Character Recognition (OCR) and barcode scanning enables device association.

Bogie IQ™ has gradually evolved from concept to test to revenue service. “We started with a variant in late 2017,” says ADS Executive Vice President and COO Brad Myers. “ e rst application was limited to 10 railcars of varying types, one of which

was a test car. ey operated for about 18 months. Each car was equipped with a wireless sensor in every bearing adapter, two braking force sensors and a gateway.”

Today, the design is greatly simplied. “Our target was to take that type of sophistication down to a simple package form,” notes Myers. “We now have a single gateway mounted on the bolster on opposite sides of the car, similar to AEI tags, for directional orientation. ose devices have been in revenue service almost two years now on two car types on two di erent eets. One operates between the East Coast and West Coast, the other with a utility company running out of the Powder River Basin. It has been very satisfying to see the performance so far. Fast-forward to where we are today, packaging and selling the platform.”

“We’ve signed multiple contracts in the past couple of months, both domestic and in Europe,” adds Myers. “One common misconception is that the device has to be mounted underneath. It doesn’t. e IQ Series is a platform, like an iPhone, in that you can mount it on the carbody. For clients that want to monitor wheelset and brake health, if they mount the Bogie IQ™ on the

bogie, we perform a con guration change over the air to the device to turn on those features, and start monitoring for wheelset and brake defects. Adding a second device to the other bogie provides visibility across all four wheelsets. On the other hand, if a customer wants to install a single device on the B end of the car to primarily monitor the brakes, we can do that, too.”

One advantage of Bogie IQ™ is that it is upgradable, and does not require frequent hardware changeouts. Roller bearing health monitoring capability is next. “As we add new features like acoustic bearing detection, we’ll be able to push a con guration change over the air to activate them,” says Myers. “Our customers will not have to worry about sunsetting. We’ve built a platform with a hybrid solar battery design that o ers prolonged life. We’ve got a robust microprocessor with plenty of onboard memory, so as we add features, we’ve got the required processing capability and memory. Our strategy is to provide customers 7-10 years at minimum to realize a return on investment. Adding new features will involve just a simple upgrade fee. We send the con guration over the air, and o they go.”

The global rail industry’s single-most important communications and signaling event since 1995.

TOP

REASONS TO ATTEND

•Network with fellow signaling and train control professionals.

• Learn innovative approaches to implementing advanced technologies.

• Discover new methods for procurement and contracting.

• Become better-informed on current R&D initiatives.

•Acquire in-depth knowledge on planned and ongoing projects.

• Discover upcoming regulations and how they impact your business.

OCTOBER 26 & 27, 2023

The Bellevue Hotel Philadelphia, PA

Supporting Organizations

Sponsorships: Contact Jonathan Chalon to discover marketing opportunities, (212) 620-7224, jchalon@sbpub.com.

www.railwayage.com/nextgen

ARE YOU READY?

Railroads and suppliers share strategies and the latest tech for combatting cold climate challenges.

BY MARYBETH LUCZAK, EXECUTIVE EDITOR

To reduce risk and keep tra c and riders moving safely this winter, it’s never too early to start planning, railroads and suppliers tell Railway Age. Below, BNSF and Patriot Rail outline how they approach the cold weather season— from preparing personnel and equipment to having the right resources in place—and 10 top suppliers review their newest technologies plus o er maintenance tips.

“BNSF remains committed to operating a reliable network despite the challenges that come with winter operations, such as extreme cold, blizzard conditions and ice storms,” says Kendall Kirkham Sloan, Director of External Communications for the Class I railroad that spans 32,500 route-miles in 28 states and three Canadian provinces. “Every year, BNSF starts working on its winter action plans long before the rst freeze.”

In the spring, it covers what went well and what could be improved, and all 10 operating divisions re ne their winter action plans. Patriot Rail operates similarly.

“A er every winter we have a debrief/ re-evaluation of how well we did and adjust accordingly,” says Jerry Hall, Chief Operating O cer of the holding company that runs 31 short line and regional railroads nationwide. Adjustments have included integrating winter preparedness into new operatingemployee training, ordering winter supplies early, and establishing a more formal notication process of approaching winter storms and resource mobilization.

“Having an adequate inventory ensures our sites are fully prepared, so we order supplies like ice melt months in advance,” Patriot Rail AVP Safety, Regulatory and Sustainability Harrison Roughton tells Railway Age. “We also designate back-up locations at nearby properties so

we can quickly shi additional supplies and resources in case of unexpected storms.”

Employees are top-of-mind. Patriot Rail supplies PPE, such as pullover spike boots to boost traction, and holds multiple safety calls and performs safety contacts with eld personnel related to walking conditions, proper winter attire, and “taking the safe course of action,” he adds.

Another important component of the holding company’s winter planning is equipment readiness. According to VP Engineering Scott Bannwart, all equipment is fueled adequately, snow tires are installed on highway-drivable vehicles, and proper tire pressure is set across the rubber-tire eet. Patriot Rail also conducts a full inventory of chains, slings, chainsaws and other critical equipment so it’s ready to go.

“We use antifreeze in our locomotive eet during winter, and stock extra wiper

motors, blades, bulbs and other equipment,” adds Patriot Rail AVP Mechanical Tom Tozzer. “Last year, we installed plug-ins for our locomotive eet at a critical location on our Butte, Anaconda & Paci c Railway in Montana to avoid a 36-mile round trip during freezing weather.”

BNSF’s engineering and mechanical departments invest in a variety of technologies to keep freight moving. is year, engineering will deploy a new rail-bound plow from Midwest America, as well as additional ermon Hellre Switch Heaters. e department will also continue pre-positioning snow removal equipment at strategic locations in advance of predicted signi cant weather events.

Mechanical continues to invest in locomotive winterization, which Kirkham Sloan says is primarily focused on air reliability (valves, horns, heat tape and air dryers), and in preparing the car network to maintain air ow during

extreme cold temperatures.

“We maintain strong relationships with all our vendors to brainstorm better ways to keep trains moving during the most severe winter weather,” she says.

BNSF also partners with the National Park Service and coordinates with local, state and federal agencies to improve avalanche prediction and when necessary, risk mitigation. And to help provide the most up-to-date weather information to the operations department and employees in the eld, it teams with AccuWeather Enterprise Solutions.

Kirkham Sloan tells Railway Age that BNSF will set up “command-type centers” when weather events warrant it to oversee the deployment of additional personnel and resources. Additionally, the railroad has teams of Mechanical Rapid Responders, who are trained to resolve car and locomotive issues 24/7 no matter the season. Engineering Rapid Responders are available to perform roundthe-clock snow removal and track inspections to ensure the network’s safety.

At Patriot Rail, the safety department “continuously monitors weather patterns and communicates with the eld to assist in planning,” Harrison Roughton reports. “In the event of severe weather, it is a ‘all hands-on deck’ call with local managers and operators to prepare. Storms and trajectories are monitored weeks ahead and properties that in the path are brought in early and o en to discuss mitigation strategies. As storm trajectories become clearer, those properties no longer in the path are shi ed to standby status to help sites in the trajectory, if needed.”

“Employee safety is our number one priority,” Jerry Hall stresses. “When we start planning for impending bad weather on our operation calls, our decision to operate comes down to whether it is safe for employees to not only arrive to work but also return home safely.”

BNSF and Patriot Rail also work with interchange partners and shippers to avoid congestion during the winter season.

“Historically, signi cant weather issues resulting in bunching or delayed freight is discussed well in advance and a temporary operating plan is enacted to avoid or lessen customer impact,” Patriot Rail VP Operations David Bevins says. “Being nimble and having open, early and frequent communication are the keys to avoid congestion.”

At BNSF, dispatchers work daily with other

Winter Preparedness

railroads to coordinate the interchange of freight from network to network. “When we know a front is moving in during overnight hours, we move as much volume as possible during the day,” Kirkham Sloan notes.

“Operating in severe winter weather requires collaboration and teamwork,” Kirkham Sloan sums up. “All our employees, contractors, the local community, and state snow removal crews work closely together to help each other during major events. At times, we have helped our employees get to and from their homes and have o ered meals/lodging close to terminals for those who live too far away to get home safely. We will continue to nd ways to keep our people safe and move our customers’ freight.”

FRAUSCHER SENSOR TECHNOLOGY USA INC.

Frauscher o ers wheel sensors that are rated for operation in a wide range of temperatures, and are not reliant on shunting to function. “In addition to increasing the safety of signaling and grade crossings systems with consistent reliability, use of Frauscher wheel sensors for triggering trackside equipment, such as AEI readers, hot bearing detectors and vision monitoring systems, keeps these crucial pieces of equipment functioning throughout the di cult winter months,” Executive Director Michael Parzer tells Railway Age.

Two transit agencies in Alberta, Canada recently integrated Frauscher’s wheel sensors and axle counters into their networks. One is using the axle counters for primary signaling, with an emphasis on train detection at grade crossings. e other worked with the supplier to target the negative e ects of road salt on the performance of grade crossing island circuits, according to Parzer. “Both transits have experienced improved performance, including increased availability and uptime,” he says.

e company also provides train detection solutions for vital and failsafe operation, as well as for non-vital applications. Based on customer requests, the Frauscher Track Vacancy System (FTVS) was recently developed for yard applications. Testing at Class I’s over the past six months has yielded excellent results, according to Parzer.

HOTSTART

Hotstart o ers a variety of products for locomotive idle reduction. e APU5 line runs o the onboard locomotive fuel supply to provide

Every year, BNSF starts working on its winter action plans long before the first freeze.

Winter Preparedness

coolant and oil heat, battery charging, and cab heat without the need for shore power, according to Michael Mustradi, Market ManagerRailroad. e company also supplies shore power systems and battery chargers.

Hotstart products help to not only save fuel, Mustradi tells Railway Age, but also decrease the number of restarts on locomotives equipped with AESS (Automatic Engine Start/Stop), limiting engine wear and tear.

Hotstart encourages customers to plan well before cold weather arrives. “[W]e recommend customers ensure new equipment installations are done properly, perform any needed maintenance on existing equipment, replenish common replacement parts, and train appropriate personnel,” Mustradi says. For nancial preparedness, he adds, “it is important to research available federal and/or state funding opportunities. Most of the available funds today are allocated for infrastructure needs, however there are funds set aside for reducing emissions.”

He reports that a number of customers have secured local/state/federal grants to install EPA “SmartWay”-veri ed Hotstart equipment. Government funding, through the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, also helps railroads procure idle reduction technologies, he adds.

NEW YORK AIR BRAKE (NYAB)

NYAB subsidiary Snyder Equipment o ers the PistonSupply Eco VV1000-T® Oil Free Compressor and the DrySupply Smart Max LD-1000® Air Dryer with three-stage ltration system to ensure freight train brakes perform reliably in all weather conditions. “In the wintertime, there may be less water to compress out of the air, but there’s still enough to do damage if you don’t remove it properly,” says Michael Stroder, Product Line Manager for Snyder. “And the stakes are higher because of freeze ups. So, it’s important that all the systems along the line that remove water are operating properly. at includes the water separator in the VV1000-T compressor, all the elements of the main reservoir including spitters and drain valves, and also the [LD-1000] air dryer itself.”

NYAB recently updated the diagnostics for its CCB locomotive brake control-system product line “to identify a failed component faster, get it replaced and get the unit back into service,” reports Vince Moore, Senior Product Line Manager. Similar diagnostics for the

VV1000-T and LD-1000 are in development and expected to launch in the near future.

NYAB also o ers the DB-60 II Control Valve with Brake Cylinder Maintaining (BCM), which in December 2022 earned unconditional approval from the AAR. If there is a leakage in the brake cylinder, the BCM feature will allow for continued air supply. Moore says NYAB is continually improving the valve’s internal components, including the reliability of the rubber seal at lower temperatures, when it can contract and become less pliable.

On the R&D side, NYAB has teamed with Nexxiot on the “digitalization” of brakes. With Nexxiot’s battery-powered sensors installed on railcars, remote access to NYAB products will be possible for real-time status and health monitoring.

Additionally, the manufacturer is developing the MaxControl Classic CCBIIe®, an enhanced version of its CCBII® locomotive electronic air brake system, for the North American market. No longer will a railroad or NYAB service tech have to hook up a laptop to a locomotive to diagnose an issue; troubleshooting will be performed remotely. According to NYAB, CCBIIe will extend the COT&S

(Clean, Oil, Test, & Stencil) through predictive analytics. It will also include “automated maintenance,” featuring Auto Flow Calibration and Automated Leakage System Testing to help the locomotive engineer “ensure the integrity of the entire locomotive brake system” and prevent revenue service interruptions, the company reports.

POWER DRIVES INC. (PDI)

e PowerHouse™ idle reduction system from PDI helps railroads and rebuilders shut down locomotives to reduce fuel usage, emissions, maintenance and noise pollution even during the winter months. e company tells Railway Age that the system “heats engine oil and circulates heated coolant through the locomotive engine block and cooling system to maintain uid temperatures above 100°F, via a diesel- red heating unit.”

e PowerHouse™ Hybrid heats uids without an additional engine or APU—eliminating the engine as part of the heating unit. It powers itself directly from the locomotive battery bank for up to seven days without starting the engine, according to PDI. When plugged into an external 120 VAC power source, the Hybrid heats the uids while

“Plan early, stock early and communicate as frequently as possible. No potential weather condition is too small to escalate. The goal is to provide safe and superior service in all weather conditions.”

—Matt Mavrinac, Patriot Rail Operations Manager, Butte, Anaconda & Pacific Railway (Montana)

Winter Preparedness

charging the locomotive batteries; it does not require access to three-phase power. Additionally, the Hybrid requires, on average, less than 5 amps to power a diesel- red burner to keep coolant and oil warm while the locomotive is shut down. It also monitors locomotive coolant system and battery health, sending warnings via text message to railroad personnel. PDI reports that a rail customer in 2022 installed 50 units, recording fuel savings of more than $1.5 million between October 2022 and April 2023.

PDI recently developed a compressed air water separator, a drop-in solution that works with standard locomotive air dryers to remove water for proper locomotive function. e company’s Diesel Dehydrator™ also removes water, and it lters particulates from diesel fuel. A er a locomotive rebuilder installed the system for a railroad customer that was experiencing issues due to high-water content in fuel, the Diesel Dehydrator removed 99.5% of that water, increased the fuel injector lifespan by four, and boosted overall locomotive performance, according to PDI.

PROGRESS RAIL, A CATERPILLAR COMPANY

Progress Rail o ers a range of products to help keep customers productive during the winter months.

e Kershaw® Model 60 is a multipurpose platform that can be used as a heavyduty snow ghter or as a ballast regulator or brush cutter. e company tells Railway Age that it is redesigning all its machines to eliminate pneumatic systems where possible, which in turn, eliminates the frustration and downtime associated with frozen air systems.

Progress Rail’s EMD® AESS™ for locomotives is a “fully integrated so ware solution that monitors critical operating parameters during locomotive idle operation—safely and e ectively shutting down the engine when all factors are satis ed,” the company says. A rail conditioner system called the Rail Blaster uses compressed air to blow snow o the rails to improve tractive e ort in winter weather conditions.

Customers continue to demand more value for their money, increased productivity and reliability, and fuel savings, the company

reports. Additionally, they are “eager to embrace more sustainable and advanced rail technology solutions, connecting their assets to back-o ce solutions.” Progress Rail’s Uptime™ suite of products is an example. It serves as a “next-generation” analytics platform to monitor locomotives and eets.

“ e cloud-based portal monitors locomotive faults and operating parameters in realtime, providing diagnostics, prognostics and repair recommendations to prevent faults from destabilizing operations,” Progress Rail says. It explains that Uptime Cloud pulls and consolidates data into categories, such as asset vitals, model and type, individual and eet history, weather, and geography. e use of Uptime Analytics “helps shops x locomotives the rst time they enter, leading to fewer repeat shoppings and fewer unnecessary shoppings,” according to Progress Rail. “ e target repair and troubleshooting guides from Uptime Analytics focus the repair work to the source of the problem, decreasing shop cycle times. User feedback and repair closeouts facilitate machine learning, allowing Uptime

August 2023

Analytics to continuously improve. All of this leads to improved availability of locomotives.”

RAILWAY EQUIPMENT COMPANY (RECO)

RECo o ers a variety of winter protection products, including its popular Gas Hot Air Blowers. Units range from 400,000 BTU to 900,000 BTU with air ow rates up to 3,600 CFH. e use of sensors allows them to run only when all parameters set by the railroad have been satis ed, i.e., ambient temperature and moisture, according to the company. All units include a control module, which has LED indications that illuminate when a fault is detected. With remote monitoring, railroad personnel can determine the fault prior to arriving on site.

RECo also o ers 922 cal-rod switch heaters with controllers, as well as cold air blowers.

e company tells Railway Age it has ocially introduced the GHAB/EHAB Combo Unit. Classi ed as a redundant switch clearing device, the heater runs as an electric melter to maintain the switch and the gas kicks on

once the ambient air temperature dips below a set point, RECo says. Also new are Hot Box Detector Winter Protection Packages to ensure scanners are kept clear of ice and snow during the winter months.

RECo’s energy-e cient induction heating solution is o cially in the testing phase. It will be installed at pilot locations this fall, with an anticipated production date of spring 2024.

As winter approaches, the company recommends that railroads inspect all switch heaters, particularly all duct work to ensure there is no debris and there is a clear path for air ow.

“Although we are seeing improvements within the supply chain, lead times are still longer than usual,” the company reports. “We recommend that our customers start looking at their spare parts inventory to ensure that they have everything they will require for this upcoming season as soon as possible.”

SPECTRUM INC., A DIVISION OF ASPEQ HEATING GROUP

Customers today seek more energy-e cient, economical and low-maintenance products,

Winter Preparedness

according to Glen Baker, Director of Sales, Railroad Division. at’s why the company o ers electric heating products for the railroad market. ese include track heaters, crib heaters and hot air blowers. “We not only o er the most rugged at electric track heaters and crib heaters, but also manufacture two sizes of our electric hot air blower units, using 3 hp and 5 hp,” he says. e manufacturer’s at track heaters and crib heaters, he adds, are available for immediate delivery.

Spectrum continues to improve its manufacturing process “to keep costs in line and guarantee a quality product that will last in the most rugged applications,” Baker tells Railway Age. He points out that the company’s products must meet stringent testing standards prior to shipping. Flat jacket and crib heaters, for example, must pass electrical tests, including meg check; dielectric tests (Hy-pot); wattage checks; hydro tests (the at jacket heater and all leads are fully submerged in a pressurized water tank at 60 psi for 60 minutes); hot and cold spot checks in heaters; and dimensional Feature continues on page 33.

THERMON: Heating Solutions For The Transit Industry

THERMON is recognized as the premier provider of process heating products and services for freight and transit applications. From snow and ice melting solutions for track switches, defect detectors, and other critical wayside assets to comfort heating for passenger vehicles, Thermon’s products can be found throughout North America helping railroads maintain operations through the most adverse winter conditions.

EXPANSION

The freight rail and transit markets are a focus for Thermon as we continue to grow. We have identified Rail & Transit as one of three Long Term Strategic Initiatives toward market diversification. To support the growth expected in these markets Thermon has recently brought on additional capacity and capabilities in San Marcos, Texas. With manufacturing locations throughout

North America, Thermon has the capacity and capabilities to help our customers maintain operations in the most adverse winter conditions.

QUALITY

As an IRIS certified facility our customers can be assured that products Thermon supplies are held to the highest Rail & Transit standards.

ESG

Thermon recognizes that as an industry leading heating solutions provider we have the responsibility of contributing to the success of the communities our products and our facilities operate in. Thermon’s initiatives to date have resulted in being recognized as a Bronze Level company by Ecovadis. Thermon’s products lead the industry in terms of energy efficiency. Our Hellfire 905 Blizzard Duty has been designed to minimize emissions

and fuel consumption while maximizing performance. Fastrax SwitchBlade heating elements lead the industry in their ability to transfer heat to rail resulting in less electricity needed and faster response times to pending winter events.

LATEST PRODUCT INNOVATION

By working with its customers, Thermon has found a multitude of ways to increase the uptime of wayside scanners during winter conditions. Solutions range from heated covers, cold air blowers, to hot air blowers specifically designed for these devices. With this broad product range Thermon can work with its customers to ensure the right solution for the right application.

Thermon has served the Rail & Transit industry for many decades and the entire team at Thermon looks forward to continuing to provide process heating technologies that ensure our customers are best prepared to battle Old Man Winter.

JURISDICTIONAL JUMBLE

Fi y years ago, the streets of Washington, D.C. were torn up for construction of the Metrorail system. Today, that system consists of six color-coded lines, the original ve plus the new Silver Line that includes a stop for Dulles Airport and extends further into northern Virginia. It serves three jurisdictions: the District of Columbia itself, nearby parts of Maryland, and northern Virginia. On top of that, the federal government acts as a fourth jurisdiction to which the agency must answer.

While transit everywhere in the nation is embroiled in politics, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA, commonly known as “Metro”), which includes Metrorail, operates under a structure that intertwines it with politics more than other transit providers. e District of Columbia Home Rule Act, which established an elected city-style government for the District, went into e ect at the end of 1973, in the middle of Metrorail construction. WMATA was established by an interstate compact that had been approved by the legislatures in Maryland in 1965 and Virginia in 1966. Under the Compacts Clause of the Constitution, Congress must also approve all

interstate compacts, and they did so later in 1966. WMATA was founded on Feb. 20, 1967.

e new authority succeeded the National Capital Transportation Agency, which was founded in 1960. at agency had proposed an 89-mile rail system, but highway advocates got the proposal reduced to only 23 route-miles.

en came the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which promised federal funding for building transit projects and founded the Urban Mass Transit Administration, the predecessor to today’s Federal Transit Administration (FTA). e Act also served as the impetus for forming WMATA.

Construction began in 1969, and the rst segment opened for service on March 27, 1976. It consisted of ve stations on the Red Line, from Farragut North to Rhode Island Avenue.

at segment included Union Station, the home of Amtrak and local commuter trains, of which there were few at the time. Over the years, the Red Line was completed, and the Blue, Orange and Yellow Lines were built. e Green Line, which serves the Southeast quadrant of the city, came later, and was completed on Jan. 13, 2001. at event also marked the completion of the original 103-mile, 83-station system. ere have been a few in ll stations added since that time, as well as the Silver Line

in northern Virginia, which opened in two segments: to East Falls Church in 2004, and to its current terminal at Ashburn with a stop at Dulles Airport in 2022. e newest station is Potomac Yard in Alexandria on the Blue/ Yellow line (sidebar, p. 22).

e original interstate compact that formed WMATA was only concerned with rail. Although we are concerned with the rail system in this article, other transit in the nation’s capital is subject to the same political pressures as Metrorail. e compact was amended in 1971 to allow the authority to operate buses, and today it operates an extensive bus system, as well as paratransit. e D.C. city government operates the 2.4-mile streetcar line on H Street and Benning Road, which opened for service in 2016 and was the rst streetcar in the District since 1962.

POLITICS IN PLAY

As a general premise, it is impossible to write about passenger trains or transit in the U.S. or Canada without considering politics. Rail transit is part of the public sector wherever it runs. It depends on government, especially for funding, which means politics. All transit agencies must deal with the governments, including the elected o cials in the states

where they run, but WMATA is di erent. It is situated under the direct control of the District, as well as Maryland and Virginia, and overlaid with the authority of federal instrumentalities like Congress and the Department of Transportation (DOT) with its sub-agencies like the FTA.

at level of political control is embedded in the agency’s structure. Its Board of Directors consists of two voting members and two alternates each from the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and the federal government, the latter appointed by the Secretary of Transportation. D.C. government or state authorities appoint the other members and alternates. e chair rotates among the three non-federal jurisdictions, and the Board appoints Metro’s General Manager, but only the Board as a whole can give any instructions or supervise the General Manager or any of the agency’s other employees.

In theory, this looks like a sensible and equitable system, because many of the region’s residents and employees move freely on Metrorail between the three jurisdictions. In a sense, the District is a city whose suburbs happen to be located in di erent states. e situation would be analogous to what is now New York City being a separate city-state, with New Jersey

By David Peter Alan, Contributing Editor

and the rest of New York State containing all the city-state’s suburbs and smaller cities within their borders. Below the surface, partisan politics rears its head, and a look at current politics in the region would be instructive.

e District of Columbia (the actual capital city) is a stronghold for Democrats. Even when only one other state voted for that party in the 1972 and 1984 elections, so did the District. at won’t change anytime soon.

Democrats have also dominated Maryland politics for the past 150 years, except for a few brief periods. It appears that Marylanders’ political views have changed with the party’s platforms. e state has had only two Republican governors since Spiro Agnew (1967-68), one of whom was Larry Hogan (2015-22). Hogan had pushed the Purple Line, a light rail line in the D.C. suburbs, which would connect with Metrorail and add extra transit links on the Maryland side of the region. Democrats held most of the other o ces in the state, especially in Baltimore. Some local advocates in that city accused Hogan of favoring suburban areas over their city, especially since he did not support the proposed east-west Red Line rail project there. e current governor, Wes Moore, is a Democrat and a Baltimorean. He supports the Red Line

project, has called for other transit in the state and, according to a report in Maryland Matters, mentioned when he was campaigning that he and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg were classmates at Oxford.

Virginia has gone in the other political direction lately. Republican Glenn Youngkin was elected governor in 2021, and his party captured the House by a slim margin. Ralph Northam, who preceded him, is a Democrat whose party had carried the House and Senate in 2018 and still holds a slim lead in the Senate.

e state had been dominated by Democrats until the 1960s, when it turned Republican as part of Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” in response to desegregation in the South. Current Democrats, whose policies are di erent from those of the pre-1960s party, have made gains in Virginia since 2000, establishing it as a “purple” state.

Northern Virginia, where Metrorail operates, is a stronghold for the Democrats, as are cities like Richmond, Norfolk, Charlottesville and Roanoke. Republicans dominate in the more-rural southern and western parts of the state. e only rail transit in Virginia, except for Metrorail, is e Tide, a light rail line in Norfolk. ere are also “peak-hour” trains for commuters

WMATA operates under an overly complicated structure that intertwines it with politics far more than other transit providers.

living along lines from Washington, D.C. to Manassas and Fredericksburg on Virginia Railway Express (VRE). During the Northam Administration, the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority announced plans for purchasing rights-of-way from CSX and NS to bring more passenger trains to the state and expand local rail. So far, the Youngkin Administration has not disturbed that program.

e situation in Congress is unsettled. Now that Republicans have won the House, they have proposed a budget that would slash funding for Amtrak. Democrats still hold the Senate, so the actual results remain to be seen. So does funding for transit projects, although money for capital projects under the Infrastructure Innovation and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), is still being spent. e big question is what will happen to transit, including Metro, when the federal money from the COVID-19 relief legislation for the operating side runs out during the next year or two. at event has the potential to cause catastrophic damage to transit everywhere in the nation.

METRORAIL CHALLENGES

Even without the in uence of politics, the past few years have been di cult for Metrorail. ese di culties have been reported by commentators concerned with government, in popular media and here at Railway Age.

Jake Blumgart reported a litany of Metrorail’s problems on June 30, 2022 in Governing. He led o by saying that Metro’s situation with three jurisdictions is problematic: “With authority and accountability split between three jurisdictions, the nation’s third-largest transit system has lurched from one crisis to another. Now, with ridership and reliability tanking, the service faces an uncertain future. In the past half-year, Metro’s service has spectacularly fallen apart. A con uence of mishaps, scandals and regulatory scrutiny has engulfed it as WMATA faces the worst scal crisis in its recent history.”

As part of that litany, Blumgart mentioned Metro’s de cit due to decreases in ridership (a problem shared by other transit agencies), a derailment that forced the 7000 Series railcars out of service, agency disregard for workers’ safety, and a “culture that accepts

noncompliance“ with rules. He also mentioned several speci c accidents and other incidents that occurred on Metrorail over the years.

Safety was such a problem at Metrorail that the FTA exercised its newly acquired jurisdiction over safety for the rst time at the agency in 2015.

Metrorail’s problems have been reported in the popular media, too. As far back as April 26, 2016, a headline on National Public Radio (NPR) asked the question: “At A Time of Near-Constant Bad News for Metro, Why Has the WMATA Riders’ Union Gone Silent?” e situation does not appear to have gotten better. On June 11 of this year, Jordan Pascal and Olivia Guyapong of local NPR station WAMU reported a story on the network with the headline: “Metro May Look to Service Cuts and Fare Increases as it Faces $350 Million Budget Gap.” ey reported: “Higher fares and less service are going to be tough for riders to swallow, local Metro watchers say. Riders have already expressed frustration because they’re currently paying peak service fares while waiting 10-30 minutes for a train.” ey also quoted

POTOMAC YARD STATION: A MODEL OF SUSTAINABILITY

BY MARCIN TARASZKIEWICZ, P.E., WILL KIRBY, P.E., AND CHRIS RAND, P.E., HDR

The new Potomac Yard Metrorail Station opened in Alexandria on May 23, serving Metrorail’s Blue and Yellow lines. “The sustainably designed station demonstrates the vitality of rail transit for commuters,” says lead designer Arup. “It fosters sustainability through its thoughtful design and its encouragement of high-density urban growth and low-carbon travel.” Arup provided structural, mechanical, engineering, plumbing, civil, fire and geotechnical engineering, as well as information technology and communications, sustainability, and security consulting and lighting design in support of Potomac Yard Constructors, the Halmar-Schiavone Joint Venture, and WMATA.

RAIL FLEET DECARBONIZATION OPPORTUNITY: WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR YOU?

Previously the largest railyard on the Eastern seaboard, Potomac Yard has undergone redevelopment over the past few decades. The addition of the new station, which is located between Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and the Alexandria, “will be key to catalyzing the development of the surround-

ing area into a walkable urban hub,” notes Arup. “Bordered on one side by wetlands and on the other by freight rail, the station is connected to the adjacent neighborhood by a pedestrian bridge at the north end. We designed the bridge to provide foot and cycle access over the freight rail corridor to the station pavilions, linking in with the adjacent Mount Vernon Trail and promoting sustainable mobility over car traffic. Our team also

oriented the south entrance pavilion to be more accessible for the sight-impaired traveling to and from the National Industries for the Blind, located across Potomac Avenue from the station. In the coming years, the station is expected to generate billions of dollars in new private sector investments, eventually supporting 26,000 new jobs and drawing 13,000 new residents to the burgeoning mixeduse community.”

Stephanie Gadigbi-Jenkins, a Metro Board member from the District, as saying, “It’s going to be important for the leadership in each of the jurisdictions to think about how to ensure that there’s sustainable funding for Metro in the long term ... and how to also meet the needs of riders.” at might be the ultimate challenge for elected o cials, but “can they meet it?” is the big question.

Back to the question: Are there too many jurisdictions, including Congress?

Blumgart blamed Metro’s multi-jurisdictional situation for many of its problems: “From the beginning, WMATA has been dogged by questions of authority and accountability. Although many transit systems cross state lines, there is usually one major stakeholder. At Boston’s MBTA, the Massachusetts governor is ultimately responsible. In New York City’s MTA, all roads lead to Albany. At WMATA, there is no single leader who can be held responsible. Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia and the federal government all share responsibility, which o en means no one does.”

ese concerns still haunt the agency. As recently as July 20, a Washington Post editorial headlined “Metro’s Countdown to Fiasco is Under Way in the D.C. Area” sounded the alarm: “Unless unresponsive regional leaders act soon, with signi cant additional aid from Congress, subway and bus commuting times will likely triple or quadruple, and train and bus service would halt at 9:30 p.m. ree in ve subway trains would be removed from service, as would nearly seven of 10 bus lines. at would drive away transit passengers, worsen rush-hour tra c jams and strike a lethal blow to the downtown core’s hopes for post-pandemic revival and the region’s prospects for longterm prosperity.” e paper chided D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and Govs. Youngkin and Moore for not working out what it described as “a politically painful and costly x,” and warned: “Metro’s looming problems—a perfect storm of issues that spell the end of transit service as the region has known it starting next summer—will not resolve themselves.”

REASONS FOR HOPE?

Metro is looking toward the future, as agencies always do, regardless of circumstances. Tara Suter reported in e Hill on July 10, that Metro had unveiled its

expansion plans: “Implementation of one of the six new proposals, designed to deal with a capacity increase on the transportation system, could cost anywhere from nothing to about $50 billion and could take up to 10 to 20 years to complete, according to o cials.” Her report contained a link to a WMATA report dated July 13 about a capacity study for the Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines. e report suggested rail options that include running the Blue Line to Greenbelt or to National Harbor, a Silver Line Express in Northern Virginia, and running the Silver Line to New Carrolton. Suter also reported, “Metro is also headed into its next nancial year with a $750 million operating de cit. O cials said the possible expansions, however, are necessary to increase system reliability.”

e big question remains whether politicians in four jurisdictions can get together and come up with a means for giving enough money and su ciently good advice to a transit system on which their constituents depend, in time for that money and that

advice to do any good. New York City’s transit was in terrible shape in the early 1980s when the late Richard Ravitch (later Lieutenant Governor) and state o cials came up with a plan that kept the subways going and allowed subsequent improvements. Today’s situation is di erent, with the COVID-19 relief money running out in a year or two, with potentially catastrophic results for transit agencies and riders everywhere.

In their WAMU/NPR report, Pascal and Guyapong urged listeners to remember the recent past: “ ink back to November 2020, when Metro faced a $500 million pandemicinduced budget de cit. Metro o cials proposed drastic cuts, including shuttering 19 stations, eliminating weekend service, laying o 2,400 workers, and [reducing train service to] every 30 minutes. Months later, the federal government came in with relief funds to save the day and avert a crisis.”

It’s unclear whether a similar result could happen today, with several jurisdictions that don’t always “play well together.” Time will tell, and soon.

DERAILMENT PREVENTION

FOLLOWING THE ‘FIVE I’ MODEL

By Gary T. Fry, Ph.D., P.E., Vice President, Fry Technical Services, Inc.

Welcome to “Timeout for Tech with Gary

T. Fry, Ph.D.,

P.E.”

Each month, we examine a technology topic about which professionals in the railway industry have asked to learn more.

is month we focus on high level derailment safety statistics that include 2022, the most recent complete year.

I am o en asked about safety in the railway industry and why it is such a conspicuous topic with railroaders. Safety is priority number one—the rst objective to secure—no matter the setting. A safety brie ng is the rst item of business on every meeting docket in the

industry. A safety brie ng is the rst work task on every rail jobsite. Truly, “Safety First” is a way of life for railroaders.

With such an emphasis on safety, I have been asked if a railroad is an especially unsafe environment. When asked, I explain my denition of a safe environment—a place where a responsible person can leave an active and alert toddler unattended for half an hour. ere aren’t too many places like that anywhere in the world. Everywhere else is a place where acceptable conditions of safety must be established and routinely assessed.

With that introduction, let’s look at some railway-speci c safety statistics. We will focus on train derailments. All the datasets used

herein are publicly available from the O ce of Railroad Safety in the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). ey re ect the latest update available as of July 21, 2023. Figure 1 (opposite) is a graph illustrating the number of reported derailments per million train-miles for each year from 1975, the beginning of the FRA dataset, through 2022, the last full year of data available. Two sets of data are plotted in Figure 1 indicating the rate of derailments on all tracks in the U.S. (denoted “Total” in orange) and the rate of derailments on main line, siding and industrial tracks (denoted “MSI” in blue).

Let’s focus on the MSI data, since these tend to be the most consequential

William Beecher

derailments, especially those occurring on main line track. As seen in Figure 1, there was substantial improvement between 1975 and 2010. Improvement from a high of 9.7 MSI derailments per million train-miles in 1978 down to 1.0 in 2010 represents an incredible 90% reduction.

e period from 1975 to 2010 deserves emphasis. During that time, maximum allowable interchange axle loads increased from 25 tons to 36 tons. at’s a 44% increase in direct loading, which substantially increased fatigue demand on critical steel components such as rail, rail welds and wheelsets. (Roughly for steel, fatigue demand increases with load raised to the third power, giving 1.44 x 1.44 x 1.44 = 3.0.) is remarkable safety outcome—tripling fatigue demand on critical components while reducing derailments by 90%—is the result of comprehensive, coordinated, multinational research e orts combined with strategic implementation of e ective innovations.

During the 13 years since 2010, the U.S. MSI derailment rate has stagnated—ranging narrowly between 1.0 and 0.8 derailments per million train-miles and averaging 0.9. Nevertheless, there is an important and positive trend to acknowledge. In 1978, main line derailments represented 51% of total derailments (4,473 out of 8,765); in 2010, 31%, (410 out of 1,333); and in 2022, 24% (287 out of 1,212). Obviously, there remains room to improve, so where do we go from here?

Refer again to Figure 1. I have included a blue dashed line to illustrate a possible future main line derailment rate trend that approaches zero by the year 2035. e orange dashed line for the total derailment rate results from an added objective that derailments on other tracks, such as in yards, do not increase. A er more than a decade of inertia, it is time to renew e orts to move the safety needle further, and there is a clear direction to focus those e orts.

Derailments can be caused by many factors that can occur individually or in combination—usually the latter. Traditionally in the U.S., the causal factors are grouped into ve categories: Track Factors, Human Factors, Equipment Factors, Signal Factors, and Miscellaneous Factors. Figure 2 (right) represents the most recent ten years of all reported derailment events in the U.S., including derailments on main line, yard, siding and industry tracks. e chart shows the annual breakdown of causal factors. In general, Track Factors and Human Factors are the predominant causes

of recent derailments, together being consistently responsible for more than 70% of the total. What if we want to pursue the focus on improving main line derailment numbers?

Over the past ten years, there has been an annual average of 322 main line derailments reported—nearly one per day. While Figure 2 covers all reported derailment events, Figure 3 (p. 26) represents the number of main line derailment events reported over the most recent ten years. Figure 3 also shows the

breakdown by causal factors. Consistently over this period, roughly 70% of main line derailments have been caused by Track Factors and Equipment Factors, which is di erent from the previous analysis of all derailments. Main line derailment safety is thus heavily weighted on improvements to track and equipment.

ere are many ways to parse derailment safety statistics, and I will add just one more chart: Figure 4 (p. 27)—main line derailment rates by class of railroad. As would

Figure 1: U.S. derailments per million train-miles. (Courtesy of Gary T. Fry.)

Figure 2: Annual breakdown of factors causing all reported derailments over the most recent ten-year period. (Courtesy of Gary T. Fry.)

Having supply issues getting hydraulic cushion units in a timely manner? Yard plugged up with cars waiting on long lead delivery of hydraulic cushion units?

Strato has the solution...

be expected, the main line derailment rate on Class I railroads is the lowest, with one for every 2,000,000 miles of train operation. Class II and III railroads are generally more than double that rate. Although the main line derailment rate is an important safety performance indicator, the underlying number of main line derailment events is even more important. Consider the most recent ten years. Of the 322 main line derailments that occur on average annually in the U.S., an annual average of 222 occurred on Class I’s.

In summary, 1975 to 2010 were remarkable in terms of the challenges answered by the global heavy-haul freight rail transportation industry and its research partners. Today, many opportunities remain to enhance the safety of rail transportation. It is time to renew e orts toward innovation, investment, and implementation as we look to the future, perhaps guided by the dashed lines in Figure 1—elimination of all main line derailments by 2035.

Toward this objective, the “Five-I” model is simple but very e ective, and has served the

Selective Cushioning Draft System

•In stock and ready to ship within 24 hours of order receipt

•Direct t into AAR EOC-7, EOC-8, EOC-9, & EOC-10 pockets*

•Easily adaptable for E-Type & F-Type systems

•AAR Conditionally Approved

Figure 3: Annual breakdown of factors causing main line derailments reported over the most recent ten-year period. (Courtesy of Gary T. Fry.)

rail industry well in past decades—Identify, Invest, Innovate, Implement and Improve!

Dr. Fry is Vice President of Fry Technical Services, Inc. (https://www. frytechservices. com/). He has 30 years of experience in research and consulting on the fatigue and fracture behavior of structural metals and weldments. His research results have been incorporated into international codes of practice used in the design of structural components and systems, including structural welds, railway and highway bridges, and highrise commercial buildings in seismic risk zones. He has extensive experience performing in-situ testing of railway bridges under live loading of trains, including high-speed passenger trains and heavy-axle-load freight trains. His research, publication, and consulting have advanced the state of the art in structural health monitoring and structural impairment detection.

WhatItIs,WhatItDoes

Thefiftheditionof TheRailroad:WhatItIs,What itDoes isidealfornovicesandexpertsalike.The easy-to-readnarrativepresentsabriefhistoryof railroadingandcurrentinformationonnewtechnologies.Itdelvesintomanyfacetsoftherailroad industryincludingsuchtopicsasfreightcars, locomotives,track,signalandcommunication technology,intermodaltraffic,operations,labor relations,anddesignengineering. BKRRNN

Figure 4: Annual breakdown of main line derailment rates reported on the three different classes of railroad companies. (Courtesy of Gary T. Fry.)

W OMEN IN RAIL

NOVEMBER 2, 2023

Chicago, IL

CONNECT. INSPIRE. INNOVATE.

Network and collaborate with a diverse group of women and allies who are making a difference in the rail industry. Learn how railroaders can maintain the momentum of inclusion, build strong support networks, and take advantage of ever-broadening career opportunities.

WHY ATTEND:

•Discover career advancement and development opportunities

• Learn about the career paths of women leaders and how today’s railways are supporting them

•Explore DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) initiatives

• Learn about mentorship best practices—from finding a mentor, to serving as one

•Discover how ERGs (Employee Resource Groups) are established for community building and support

•Connect with your peers—both upcoming talents and accomplished women in rail

SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS

CRASHWORTHINESS FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL POWERED VEHICLES

BY PRZEMYSLAW RAKOCZY, SENIOR RAIL RESEARCH ENGINEER, AND MATTHEW DICK, P.E., CHIEF OF STRATEGY & DEVELOPMENT, ENSCO, INC.

Following the global movement to reduce emissions and, ideally, use renewable energy instead of diesel fuel, the rail industry is looking for alternative means to propel future trains. One of the major current areas of development and research in the rail industry is alternative fuels, such as hydrogen, Renewable Natural Gas (RNG), and other means to store energy, such as Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS). This shift to new fuels and energy storage systems brings the necessity to review and, in some cases, update current crashworthiness requirements and test protocols to ensure safe operation and reduce the consequences of extreme events, such as derailments and collisions.

ALTERNATIVE FUELS

Several alternative fuels are currently being evaluated to replace diesel, each with the advantage of lower or zero emissions. However, they also have important characteristics that must be addressed.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is one of the first alternative fuels considered by the rail industry. Natural gas burns significantly cleaner and produces lower emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as compared to diesel.

The volume energy density of LNG is 40% of diesel and therefore requires an LNG tender for the same train range. Moreover, LNG needs to be stored in cryogenic tanks. To avoid the cryogenic storage challenges, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) is also considered. The volume energy density of CNG is lower than diesel, which requires the use of fuel tenders for long-haul operations. RNG is biogas that is manufactured to have similar performance to fossil natural gas but has further lowered emissions.

A very promising alternative fuel considered is hydrogen, which can be produced in the electrolysis from water and turned back into water in fuel cells to produce electricity. This makes hydrogen powered rail vehicles virtually emission-free if the hydrogen is produced

using renewable energy sources, such as photovoltaic or wind power plants. Like natural gas, the volume energy density of cryogenic liquid and compressed gas hydrogen is lower than diesel, which requires the use of fuel tenders for longhaul operations.

Another solution to propel the trains is BESS (Battery Energy Storage System), which typically uses lithium-based battery packs. The benefit of the BESS is that there are no emissions from the vehicles. The disadvantage is the limited range and time necessary to charge the batteries. However, it is a valuable alternative that could be advantageous in certain applications.

RAIL CRASHWORTHINESS

Railroads and suppliers introducing alternative fuel locomotives and passenger trains must comply with multiple applicable requirements in the Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, particularly Part 229, Railroad Locomotive Safety Standards, and Part 238, Passenger Equipment Safety Standards.

Both Safety Standards include various minimal crashworthiness requirements. Additionally, the Locomotive Safety Standard incorporates Association of American Railroads (AAR) S–580, “Locomotive Crashworthiness Requirements” and includes Appendix E, “Performance Criteria for Locomotive Crashworthiness.” The Passenger Safety Standards include very detailed requirements regarding crashworthiness of various types of equipment, including Power Modules and passenger portions of multiple-unit railcars. To operate alternative fuel equipment, railroads and suppliers must demonstrate to the FRA that their equipment complies with these requirements.

There are multiple aspects of rail crashworthiness that should be considered with respect to alternative fuels. One aspect is impact resistance. For example, head-on and side impacts that can cover multiple impact scenarios, in particular collisions with heavy road vehicles at grade crossings. Another aspect is crashworthiness during derailments. The risks and mitigation of consequences associated with damage and release of alternative fuels must also be evaluated. There are other unique crashworthiness scenarios that have to be considered, depending on the type of rail service, configuration of the train consist and design of the alternative fuel vehicle.

Certain crashworthiness research, tests and specifications have already been conducted and developed. The AAR developed crashworthiness requirements for LNG fuel tenders in the M-1004 standard, which provides a grade crossing impact case scenario between the LNG tender and an 80,000-pound truck at 40 mph. In 2021, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) conducted a fullscale test at the Transportation Technology Center (TTC) replicating the AAR M-1004 case scenario. As a result of the impact, the track structure supporting the tender and locomotives experienced tie shift and rail rollover, resulting in the derailment of both tender trucks and one truck of each locomotive. However, no puncture nor damage resulting in the commodity release occurred. Moreover, the safety shutoff valve was successfully

closed, demonstrating the ability to cut fuel supply to the locomotives even after a grade crossing impact on the tender. This test demonstrated that the fuel tenders won’t release the fuel even under extreme load conditions.[1]

The FRA also evaluated the puncture resistance of the cryogenic tank cars through simulations and full-scale tests at the TTC. This includes tests with liquid nitrogen to determine the influence of the extremely low temperatures on material and puncture resistance. This research is also applicable to the transportation of liquified hydrogen.[2]

Compressed gases, especially CNG, are used to propel urban buses in many cities around the world. There has already been significant research conducted, including drop and fire tests of the bus storage tanks. However, further research is needed to evaluate the safety of these tanks in the rail environment.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Despite the work that was conducted for the LNG fuel tenders and transportation of this fuel by rail, there is still work to be done. Alternative fuels and BESS create new challenges that need to be assessed, evaluated and mitigated.

The lithium batteries used in BESS are at risk of thermal runaways if damaged or overheated. Crashworthiness protection of the battery packs will need to be evaluated by testing to make sure they won’t be damaged or otherwise compromised during crash or derailment.

Similarly, additional tests and simulations are necessary to evaluate the safe operation of compressed or liquid hydrogen storage tanks, piping and valves in dynamic impact load conditions. The storage tanks, together with the protective structure, should also be evaluated for crashworthiness in the railway environment.

The TTC has multiple laboratory and field equipment specifically designed to evaluate crashworthiness of various types of equipment under different scenarios. This includes an impact wall qualified for three million pounds of impact accompanied with a ram car. The facility is also equipped with a squeeze test fixture that provides up to three million pounds

of longitudinal force. One of the specific challenges associated with gaseous fuels, such as LNG, CNG and hydrogen, is the prevention of fire and explosions during accidents in enclosed or partially enclosed environments, including tunnels, long underpasses, etc. This is an area that will require additional analysis, simulations and tests. The TTC has a 300-foot-long underground tunnel specifically designed and qualified to conduct blast, fire and smoke testing in conditions maximally resembling a real environment.

SUMMARY

Alternative fuel and battery-powered trains are already being introduced to the rail network. These vehicles present the opportunity to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. However, it is important that their crashworthiness safety is assured for their safe operation. Further research, including testing and simulation, is necessary to ensure a similar or increased safety compared to legacy technology. The TTC has played a major role in providing a technical basis for crashworthiness assessments in the past and is ready to provide similar services in the changing future. The TTC is ready to aid these alternative fuel and battery-powered train suppliers, (such as OptiFuel’s locomotive and tender shown in the picture) to ensure safe operations while reducing emissions.

REFERENCES

[1] Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Collision Test of a Fuel Tender, FRA RR 21-24, November 2021.

[2] Full-Scale Shell Impact Test of a DOT113C120W9 Tank Car Filled with Liquid Nitrogen, FRA RR 22-10, July 2022.

LIGHT

RAIL

Key Sessions

•Engineering for Operations

•Light Rail Engineering Standards

•Safety Certification

•Operations Planning and Modeling

•Battery and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Propulsion

•Signaling, Train Control and Street-Running Interfaces

•Leveraging Federal Funding

•PLUS Tour NJ Transit’s Hudson Bergen System

NOVEMBER 15 & 16

Hyatt Regency Jersey City on the Hudson Jersey City, NJ

Keynote

Kevin S. Corbett President and CEO

NJ Transit

SPONSORSHIPS & EXHIBITS

Jonathan Chalon 212.620.7224

jchalon@sbpub.com

LEARN MORE www.railwayage.com/lightrail

checks (diameter and length). Certi cation is available according to AAR standards.

A prototype hot air blower is slated for testing this winter. “ e 65 kw hot air blower has a new heater design and upgraded blower capabilities,” Baker says. “ is unit will produce more heat and generate increased levels of air ow to better push and melt snow at the points and further down the switch.”

Also in development are insulation kits for increasing the heat level on the rail when using calrod track heaters. “We have tested this product in the eld and in enviro-chambers at 0-10 degrees F,” Baker reports. “Our tests show an increase of 45-60 degrees F on the rail head when using insulation with the element. is opens up the option of using lesser wattage elements to achieve the same heating temperatures, thus saving energy. We will be rolling out this new product later this summer.”

THERMOMEGATECH

Leaving a locomotive engine running guarantees the water-cooling system won’t freeze in winter, but the result is fuel waste and increased air pollution. A more e cient option is to install ermOmegaTech’s freeze protection valve into the passenger railcar or locomotive’s cooling system to drain the system if the engine coolant temperature drops close to freezing, according to Bridget Sexton, Product Manager-Railroad Division for ermOmegaTech, which o ers a thermostatically controlled valve called the GURU® Plug.

When re-setting the GURU®, the supplier says it’s important to melt any ice formations on the cartridge and inside the hex body to prevent seal damage. “Over time the hex nut wears and that damage could lead to

problems,” Sexton explains. “We recommend replacing the hex nut as well as the cartridge for maximum performance, along with ensuring the hex nut seat is cleaned before reinserting.”

ermOmegaTech also o ers the GURU® Flag and Clip or GURU® Flag and Key tools to prevent the GURU Plug from triggering open by the cold water during the re ll process, Sexton says. e ag serves as a re lling indicator.

ermOmegaTech recently introduced the Anti Tamper Cap that requires a key to reset rather than the company’s traditional cap that requires a clip. Also new is the addition of color to the company’s hex nut that matches the cap color. e change, Sexton tells Railway Age, will help users identify the age of the hex nut to ensure the nut is replaced with the cartridge. Sept. 1 will mark the transition date going forward for shipping the season’s new color cap and hex nut.

THERMON

ermon’s snow-clearing devices for switches and wayside inspection systems help ensure the reliable movement of trains during the winter months, Rail Products Technical Manager Gregor Harris tells Railway Age. Selection of the appropriate system—whether electric element, hot air or high velocity ambient air—is dependent on weather conditions, power availability and space limitations, he says.

Recently, a new light rail transit project selected in-gage switch machines that did not allow for conventional heater track ducts. “Our solution included eld-side track ducts to direct hot air from the outside in,” Harris reports.

ermon’s new Fastrax HCP series control panel for electric element heating is now consistent with the operating logic and ArcticSense snow detection components used in all its products, Harris says. “ is facilitates standardized operating practices and reduces spare parts inventory,” he explains.

Due to the Hell re Blizzard Duty 905’s success, Harris reports, the company has dedicated a new manufacturing facility in San Marcos, Tex., to triple production capacity of the Hell re product line. e next generation Hell re is currently in development and will be in service at select locations this winter, he says. “ is evolution of the Hell re will provide a user-friendly interface as well as the ability to connect to a variety of wayside data collection devices.”

Close collaboration with the railroads, along with resolved supply chain issues, essentially allows the company to follow a “buildto-stock model,” Harris tells Railway Age. is ensures “we have the right products available at the right time.”

WABTEC

Wabtec’s Train Analysis Tool is helping railroads identify and resolve issues within the power consist. According to Vice PresidentProduct Management Chad ompson, the tool remotely collects data from all locomotives in a power consist and uses analytics to identify the root cause of issues impacting the consist’s propulsion and braking performance. e results and feedback on issue resolution are presented to a railroad’s mechanical department, he says.

“To accelerate identifying frozen blowdown valves, for example, Wabtec incorporated analytics in the Train Analysis Tool to provide a ‘Sense’ [or alert] when it detects a possible frozen blowdown valve,” ompson says. “ is new ‘Sense’ is expected to have a signi cant impact for railroads during the upcoming winter season.”

Wabtec also o ers Advanced Rail Cleaner to improve adhesion and related tractive e ort, Traction Antilock Braking System, and sub-freezing AESS.

ompson reports that Wabtec works with customers to evaluate commonly used winter components and performs an analysis yearly. e supplier also adjusts inventory levels for the winter season to ensure equipment is available when customers need it.

The PowerHouse™ Hybrid from PDI heats fluids without an additional engine or APU—completely eliminating the engine as part of the heating unit.

‘The Most Robust Model for Safety Culture Assessment’

Last month marked the 10-year anniversary of the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster in Quebec, Canada, the most tragic railroad accident in the modern freight railroad era. The accident resulted in 47 deaths, six million liters of crude oil leaking from 63 tank cars, and the evacuation of about 2,000 people from their homes.

There is nothing I, or anyone, can say to ease the pain or undo the damage resulting from this accident. But for the short line industry, it did result in one outcome that has made short line railroading much safer and that we believe has dramatically reduced the possibility of such a horrific accident in the future.

Even before the Lac-Mégantic accident, ASLRRA members aspired to formulate a more effective way to address and improve the safety culture of individual short lines. That effort was grounded in the belief that a company’s safety culture, or lack thereof, was a contributing cause of some railroad accidents. But “safety culture” is a multi-dimensional and potentially amorphous concept, and there was only limited agreement among short line leaders regarding how or even if meaningful improvement could be accomplished. And to be candid, it was thought that those short lines needing the most improvement would perhaps be resistant to acknowledging their shortcomings, and that companies in general would not consent to outside critiques of their internal practices. Lac-Mégantic turned what was an aspiration into an imperative.

The result was the 2015 formation of the Short Line Safety Institute (SLSI), a collaboration of ASLRRA, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe). SLSI, today a standalone not-for-profit organization, is funded through FRA’s Office of Research, Technology and Development, with bipartisan and bicameral support from Congress, and engages in continuous improvement efforts

through an ongoing program evaluation to ensure program fidelity and to adjust its approach as necessary. SLSI defines safety culture as the shared values, actions, and behaviors that demonstrate a commitment to safety over competing goals and demands. This is easier said than done, of course.

SLSI conducts safety culture assessments, hazardous material training, leadership development training and safety research. At the center of the SLSI mission are its safety culture assessments of individual short lines. These five-to-eight-day on-site assessments are voluntary, non-punitive, confidential assessments of short line railroads. The assessments utilize teams of assessors in a site-customized, in-depth process involving survey, observation and interviews at every level of the railroad’s personnel. They are admittedly and proudly quite thorough and rigorous.

SLSI uses the Ten Core Elements of a Strong Safety Culture, as identified by the U.S. DOT Safety Council as a framework to operationalize its definition of safety culture. In the end, the short line is presented with positive as well as negative findings about its safety culture and opportunities for improvement through recommended organizational changes or actions. The FRA has called SLSI “the most robust model for assessing safety culture in the U.S. railroad industry.”

The assessments are confidential because they are designed to be highly critical where criticism is merited. The willingness by individual short lines to subject themselves to, and act upon, constructive criticism of their safety culture is the core foundation of this program. It has been a crucial and gratifying response to our pre-Lac-Mégantic concern that this would be a significant stumbling block to implementing a meaningful safety initiative.

To date, 133 safety culture assessments have been conducted and 10 more have been scheduled between now and the end of the year. SLSI is

already booking reservations for 2024, and there continues to be exceptionally strong demand for the program.

Measuring the results of safety culture improvements can be a difficult task for any organization, as not all incidents are the result of a safety culture, particularly for short lines, which can be subject to the law of small numbers. However, the government does require annual reportable injuries for all railroads, and by that measure we can claim some real success. There are approximately 600 short line railroads. In 2000, 190 had zero reportable injuries. In 2015, the year SLSI was created, 286 had zero. In 2022, 350—well over 50%—had zero reportable injuries.

In 2015, the short line average incident rate was 2.63 reportable incidents per 200,000 person-hours worked. In 2022, the average incident rate dropped to a record low 2.01 reportable incidents per 200,000 person-hours worked. More than 50% is not the same as 100%, and 2.01 is not zero, but we believe with the continued work of SLSI and the commitment of the short line industry to do even better, we can steadily approach those goals.

This is not a ten-year anniversary to be celebrated. But it should stand as a stark reminder that we have a solemn obligation to do everything we can to mitigate against a similar disaster. ASLRRA is committed to this effort. We applaud our members that are committed to safety every minute of every hour of every day, and we encourage every short line to take advantage of SLSI’s Safety Culture Assessment program, its hazardous material and leadership development training, and the industry’s safety research.

Railroads & Economic Regulation (An Insider’s Account)

By Frank N. Wilner

Railroads & Economic Regulation traces the development, failures and successes of railroad economic regulation by an insider who was a White House appointed chief of staff at the Surface Transportation Board and a senior officer at the Association of American Railroads.

“Frank Wilner has written an exhaustive history of our nation’s railroads and the complicated, intriguing and often confusing federal regulation and lawmaking.”

Nick Rahall Member of Congress (West Virginia, 1977-2015)

“As a new member of the Surface Transportation Board, the book would have been indispensable to me. It places today’s regulatory issues into context based on their history and paints a picture of the characters who have made the railroad world what it is today.”

Debra L. Miller Member, Surface Transportation Board, 2014-2018

“The quality and depth of Wilner’s research provides a needed road map through the labyrinth of railroad regulation. It is a valuable resource for future policy decision making.”

Dr. Harvey A. Levine Retired, Vice President, Economics & Finance Association of American Railroads

“This definitive work expertly explains how a century of overregulation nearly strangled railroads, and how partial deregulation in 1980 helped save them.”

Bill Stephens Trains Magazine columnist

Railroads & Economic Regulation

(An Insider’s Account)

BKRER — $69.00 plus S/H

“This is a book as enjoyable as it is essential. To understand America’s economy, one needs to understand railroads, and to understand railroads, one needs to understand the story of their economic regulation.”

Chuck Baker President American Short Line & Regional Railroad Association

Safety in numbers

Your railroad depends on the safe and secure processing and transfer of data to serve your customers reliably and ef ciently.

Progress Rail’s hardware and software provide effective solutions to keep your data and operations safe from malicious attempts to disrupt your business.

You can depend on Progress Rail to provide information security across multiple platforms and OEMs.

Cybersecurity is just one more way We Keep You Rolling.

We keep you rolling.

Photo by Mike Danneman