Western Railroad Discussion > New BNSF rule following rail train rear-end collision

It has been said that railroad rules are written in blood.  Here is one that is clearly the direct result of the BNSF rear-end collision with a rail train that resulted in a Herzog employee fatality.

August 1, 2018 System Work Train Policy
In signaled territiory, when at the intended work location and before performing work associated with track maintenance (i.e., dumping ballast, loading/unloading track materials, etc.) on a main track or siding the conductor must:
      *Notify the train dispatcher of the milepost limits where the work will be performed.
      *Notify the train dispatcher when the work has been completed.
 

Offending train still has to pay attention, no amount of  rules are going to change that. 

SP4360 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Offending train still has to pay attention, no
> amount of  rules are going to change that. 

Yep, I can’t believe we are still having these types of collisions. 

Are we talking about the head-on collision between the train and Herzog rail train pulled by a hyrail truck on June 6th? I was thinking the rail train didn't have a conductor, just MOW employees?


MP555 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It has been said that railroad rules are written
> in blood.  Here is one that is clearly the
> direct result of the BNSF rear-end collision with
> a rail train that resulted in a Herzog employee
> fatality.
>
> August 1, 2018 System Work Train Policy
> In signaled territiory, when at the intended work
> location and before performing work associated
> with track maintenance (i.e., dumping ballast,
> loading/unloading track materials, etc.) on a main
> track or siding the conductor must:
>       *Notify the train dispatcher of the
> milepost limits where the work will be performed.
>       *Notify the train dispatcher when the
> work has been completed.
>  

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

The Herzog hy-rail truck is just an unloading machine. The rail train has locomotives on the other end of it to move the train. And, a train crew as well as MOW people.

funnelfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are we talking about the head-on collision between
> the train and Herzog rail train pulled by a hyrail
> truck on June 6th? I was thinking the rail train
> didn't have a conductor, just MOW employees?

That misinformaiton was already clearly debunked within 24 hours of it being posted at the time of the accident.

MP555 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> August 1, 2018 System Work Train Policy
> In signaled territiory, when at the intended work
> location and before performing work associated
> with track maintenance (i.e., dumping ballast,
> loading/unloading track materials, etc.) on a main
> track or siding the conductor must:
>       *Notify the train dispatcher of the
> milepost limits where the work will be performed.
>       *Notify the train dispatcher when the
> work has been completed.

And exactly how would that rule have prevented the accident that occured? If the train that ran into the back of the work train had already violated some set of instructions, how are more rules or instructions going to stop it?

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And exactly how would that rule have prevented the
> accident that occured? If the train that ran into
> the back of the work train had already violated
> some set of instructions, how are more rules or
> instructions going to stop it?

It so much reminds me of decades ago whan a UP train smoked right on through a slow order somewhere around Tacoma on BN. The trainmaster immediately accused the train dispatcher of not getting the slow to the train. Spatch showed the clearance at UP Jct. with the slow in question. The trainmaster than said the dispatcher was still at fault for not issuing a message telling crews to obey the train orders.

TAW

Well, looking at the new rule, I have just one question. Did the contractor running the Brunt notify the DS when they started or did they just assume that they were covered by the Form B?
I'm guessing they didn't notify the DS. 

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, looking at the new rule, I have just one
> question. Did the contractor running the Brunt
> notify the DS when they started or did they just
> assume that they were covered by the Form B?
> I'm guessing they didn't notify the DS. 

Are you referring to the train crew on the headend engine of the work train, meaning the BNSF engineer and/or BNSF conductor?

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, looking at the new rule, I have just one
> question. Did the contractor running the Brunt
> notify the DS when they started or did they just
> assume that they were covered by the Form B?

The contractor does not communicate with the dispatcher at all. That's the job of MOW and TY&E.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, looking at the new rule, I have just one
> question. Did the contractor running the Brunt
> notify the DS when they started or did they just
> assume that they were covered by the Form B?
> I'm guessing they didn't notify the DS. 

If I am not mistaken, the contractor would not communicate with the dispatcher for any kind of authority to use the track. Any communications with the dispatcher regarding operating authority would have to be made by a GCOR qualified BNSF employees (train crew or MOW employee). The contractor would then follow their instructions as to when to start or stop work. Even if there is no work train involved, any contractor working along the right-of-way where track would or could be fouled requires a GCOR qualified employee (for example a MOW flagman) to be with them to communicate with dispatchers to obtain any required authorities.

Posted from iPhone

So there should have been someone there who had communication with the DS, right?

On the NS we have a RWIC that either will have a form Y or get Track and Time from DS. The RWIC will then job brief employees and/ or contractors as to the specifics such as the working limits, effective times, JO's (joint authority), etc. and stay in constant communication with workers alerting them to any movements within the work area. 
As a contractor, we have our own radios, but we will never will directly communicate with a dispatcher unless the is an emergency.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/18 04:02 by Masterwelder.

Masterwelder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On the NS we have a RWIC that either will have a
> form Y or get Track and Time from DS. The RWIC
> will then job brief employees and/ or contractors
> as to the specifics such as the working limits,
> effective times, JO's (joint authority), etc. and
> stay in constant communication with workers
> alerting them to any movements within the work
> area. 
> As a contractor, we have our own radios, but we
> will never will directly communicate with a
> dispatcher unless the is an emergency.

That appears to be how FEC handles the end of job issue, too.

I've heard the foreman / employee in charge polling his people about whether men and equipment are clear of the track, and whether contractors under the purview are clear of the track.

One by one, the questions are asked on the radio, and one by one the individuals respond by name.  Only then does the foreman release the time and track given to him.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So there should have been someone there who had
> communication with the DS, right?

Yes, as stated before, the BNSF crew on the head end engine of the work train. AND/OR a BNSF MOW foreman.