Why aren’t the FRA, AAR and APTA collaborating on, instead of pursuing separate, passenger and freight standards?
On Sept. 16, 2024, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) PRESS (Passenger Rail Equipment Safety Standards) Working Group issued a new Standards Program White Paper, APTA-PR-PS-WP-007-24, entitled “Battery-Electric and Hydrogen Passenger Rail Equipment Safety” (download below). The White Paper “… introduces proposed best practices for managing risks from onboard alternative propulsion energy systems utilizing batteries and/or hydrogen on passenger rail equipment … [H]azards and mitigations identified in this white paper are specific to such equipment and are intended to guide agencies in performing their project-specific hazard analyses to reduce risk in equipment designs, maintenance and operations.”
The paper’s Foreword says the document “… used a consensus-based process…” by which all members of APTA’S “Battery-Electric and Hydrogen Passenger Rail Committee” agreed to the contents as published.
Who were 73 Committee contributors to APTA’s White Paper? They were identified by name in the White Paper, and their affiliations include:
- Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
- Sandia National Laboratory, U.S. Dept. of Energy.
- Amtrak, Metra (the Chicago-area heavy rail commuter railroad), Southern California Regional Railroad Authority (operator of Metrolink commuter rail), San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, MTA Metro-North Railroad, MTA Long Island Rail Road and other commuter railroads/operators.
- Locomotive and/or passenger rolling stock manufacturers including Wabtec, Progress Rail, Stadler, Brookville Equipment, Siemens Mobility, Alstom and Talgo.
- And dozens of consultants.
The APTA White Paper contains zero recognized input from any freight railroad or the AAR. I find that amazingly strange given that:
- The FRA is the universal singular “safety regulator” of the U.S. railroad industry with authority over the entire “common carrier” standard-gauge network that exists in 49 of the 50 states in our union.
- All of the passenger/commuter railroads/operator members also operate on FRA-regulated trackage often common with freight railroads.
- Many of the rolling stock manufacturer members design, build and sell freight and passenger/commuter locomotives.
- The entire railroad industry—Class I, III and III and S&T freight railroads; Amtrak; commuter rail—is engaged in trying to wade through the fire hose deluge of potential operating benefits, operational and maintenance challenges and safety risks of lithium batteries and compressed or liquefied hydrogen as an “energy carrier” for fuel cells or an alternative fuel for modified diesel engines.
- Future passenger/commuter and freight locomotives using batteries and/or hydrogen for propulsion energy will share a lot of common technology.
Amtrak operates on or with freight railroads everywhere, including the Northeast Corridor. LIRR operates with freight operations (Class III New York & Atlantic provides freight service on LIRR trackage.) Metra and all six Class I freight railroads share trackage in the greater Chicago area. All are examples of the great commonalities of passenger, commuter and freight railroading: one track gauge, a common coupler configuration and often overlapping operating zones.
Did the FRA (which, again, is the safety regulator for the entire “connected” railroad industry) ever consider recommending a common effort involving APTA and the AAR and its member railroads? Did either the FRA or APTA consider inviting the AAR and member freight railroads to participate? And why aren’t APTA and the AAR regularly communicating who is considering or developing rail standards of common interest or need, and for what reason?
The situation with this “passenger White Paper” ironically mirrors the “split” that occurred in 1971 when the federal government created the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) in 1971 to relieve the freight railroads of almost-all passenger train operations. When that happened, the AAR essentially shed responsibility for most passenger-related Standards (mandatory requirements) and Recommended Practices (“nice to do” requirements), and APTA (which dates to the American Street Railway Association , established Dec.12, 1882) gradually assumed responsibility for all passenger standards and recommended practices.
Over the past decade-plus, however, passenger railroading has witnessed big changes in locomotive and car design, diverging from the configurations, standards and design details that Amtrak inherited in 1971. But the new-generation passenger rolling stock still largely rolls on tracks often shared with or owned by freight railroads.
But wait: Let’s not allow this philosophical train to leave the station as there are other passengers clearly wandering around on the same platform. Who is looking for which train headed to where and departing when? Read on …
This “passenger versus freight” divergence of “standards activity” between APTA and the AAR in the U.S. appears to be repeated internationally between the U.S. and Canada. Canada’s National Research Council (NRC), Transport Canada (Canada’s equivalent to the FRA) and the University of British Columbia in 2022 began a collaborative effort to “… evaluate the gaps associated with deploying hydrogen locomotives, also known as ‘hydrail’ and battery-powered locomotives.” Fortunately, the Canadian effort doesn’t define the work as being “only for” passenger or freight.
All six Class I freight railroads (including the U.S. operations of Canada’s two largest freight systems) frequently share and interoperate line-haul locomotives that cross the U.S.-Canada (and also the U.S.-Mexico) border. One, CPKC, is our first transnational railroad with operations, property, locomotives and personnel in all three nations.
Standards “here.” Standards “there.” Why not start working cooperatively for common North American Standards for both freight and passenger rolling stock when appropriate and warranted?
The career of Michael Iden spans 50 years including positions at Southern Railway (management trainee, Engineering & Research), GM-EMD (locomotive and engine manufacturing), C&NW (AVP-Motive Power) and Union Pacific (Senior Director Locomotive Engineering). He is a registered professional engineer in three states and was an FRA-licensed locomotive engineer at C&NW and UP (he never worked as a locomotive engineer but believes those who acquire and maintain locomotives should fully understand their use). After retiring from UP in 2018, Iden began consulting as Tier 5 Locomotive LLC (registered in 2013 “… before emissions Tier 4 became law …”) and serves clients particularly in the railroad and locomotive industries, focusing especially on emissions, decarbonization and managing the introduction of new technologies. He has served as chair of numerous AAR Committees including the first chairmanship of the Coupling Systems & Truck Castings Committee in 2004, is an Advisory Trustee for Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, Tex., and has been a guest lecturer for Michigan State University. Iden has a BSME from the Milwaukee School of Engineering and a Master of Management degree from Northwestern University, is married with two children and lives in Illinois. The opinions expressed are his own, independent of Railway Age. Always remember Putt’s first law of invention: “An innovated success is as good as a successful innovation.”
