Western Railroad Discussion > Locomotive Blue Card question

Attached is the FRA/DOT Blue Card for the CaterParrott Railnet GP40 7001. Looking at the card, what does Box 11, Out of Use Credit mean?  This particular unit has 137, is that measured in hours or perhaps even days?  Thanks for any replies.  Ben

---

You can accumulate out of service credits for air brake due date change out. In this case it is a 26L with an 1104* day life (* They are not using the 1472 waiver due to no air dryer).

For every 30 day consecutive period the unit is oos you can grab those oos days as credit against the 1104 date.

Also can push out the periodic inspection, 92 days in this case using the applicable oos credits.

The reverse of the card should have those specific dates calculated out.

What looks odd is that there are 137 oos days claimed but the 1104 was done on 1-4-2024 and there was a following 92 day done on 4-4-2024, so 
I am not sure what's going on. The calendar should have restarted with the new 1104.



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 06/21/24 07:42 by train1275.

It's possible the shop personnel did not use the oos credits...thinking the engine was due and did whatever inspection they thought necessary. 

engineerinvirginia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's possible the shop personnel did not use the
> oos credits...thinking the engine was due and did
> whatever inspection they thought necessary. 

By renewing the 1104 and issuing the 2024 card I don't see how they can keep the credits, they should have zeroed out, there is no longer anything to apply them against. - and there are not 137 days between the 1-4-2024 and 4-4-2024 dates.

From the FRA Compliance Manual:

The out-of-use credit inserted on an inspection line of the FRA Form F6180.49A accounts for the continuous record of a locomotive’s use for a calendar year. These random days cannot be accumulated nor used to extend the intervals prescribed for any test or inspection under this part, unless the time period is for 30 or more consecutive days. The creditable out-of-use time of 30 or more days, which is used to extend the test or inspection intervals, must be recorded in Block Number 11 on the FRA Form F6180.49A when a new form is created. Once the credit is used, it should be deleted from the form. 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/21/24 07:37 by train1275.

train1275 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> engineerinvirginia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's possible the shop personnel did not use
> the
> > oos credits...thinking the engine was due and
> did
> > whatever inspection they thought necessary. 
>
> By renewing the 1104 and issuing the 2024 card I
> don't see how they can keep the credits, they
> should have zeroed out, there is no longer
> anything to apply them against. - and there are
> not 137 days between the 1-4-2024 and 4-4-2024
> dates.
>
> From the FRA Compliance Manual:
>
> The out-of-use credit inserted on an inspection
> line of the FRA Form F6180.49A accounts for the
> continuous record of a locomotive’s use for a
> calendar year. These random days cannot be
> accumulated nor used to extend the intervals
> prescribed for any test or inspection under this
> part, unless the time period is for 30 or more
> consecutive days. The creditable out-of-use time
> of 30 or more days, which is used to extend the
> test or inspection intervals, must be recorded in
> Block Number 11 on the FRA Form F6180.49A when a
> new form is created. Once the credit is used, it
> should be deleted from the form. 

Perhaps then the recordkeeper did not know you can't roll over credits. 

More than likely.

I've seen plenty of that and been guilty too !

I had one employer that had a disjointed system of generating blue card updates and the work was done by a planner. I kept a running 3 month calender of my own in all my locomotive mechanical jobs over the years and suddenly realized we had units that I showed due that were not directed to come in for air brake or periodics when I seat of the pants had them marked on my rolling calendar. Come to find out the planner really didn't know how to do the OOS calcs and we came really close to coming out of compliance. we caught it, then audited everything and worked up a different process.

I usually ran a blue card draft past several colleagues when I generated them as it is easy to screw up at times, especially when you are in a hurry to release the engine and get the card in it.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/21/24 08:25 by train1275.

Are the "Item Numbers" in Box 15, listed on reverse side, or are they part of a set of specific items that the inspector needs to look at and listed on a seperate form/guideline?  I didn't look at the reverse side of this card nor any other that I have seen thru the years. Thanks for all the replies. Appreciate it. Ben

There's a couple of inconsistencies. First that sticks out to me is no person conducting or certifying the record anywhere. Second, the OOS credit could be legitimate if the locomotive was not used as there's no reason they couldn't have performed a 92 day inspection while it was OOS although there would be no need. However, that OOS credit would be illegitmate if the locomotive had been used since 1/4/24. Third, the RR Code is listed as "215" when it should be the railroad's AAR assigned reporting mark.

Good stuff.


Jeff

ns2557 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are the "Item Numbers" in Box 15, listed on
> reverse side, or are they part of a set of
> specific items that the inspector needs to look at
> and listed on a seperate form/guideline?  I
> didn't look at the reverse side of this card nor
> any other that I have seen thru the years. Thanks
> for all the replies. Appreciate it. Ben

They are listed below the periodic inspection box, about in the middle of the card.

CDTX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's a couple of inconsistencies. First that
> sticks out to me is no person conducting or
> certifying the record anywhere. Second, the OOS
> credit could be legitimate if the locomotive was
> not used as there's no reason they couldn't have
> performed a 92 day inspection while it was OOS
> although there would be no need. However, that OOS
> credit would be illegitmate if the locomotive had
> been used since 1/4/24. Third, the RR Code is
> listed as "215" when it should be the railroad's
> AAR assigned reporting mark.
>
> Good stuff.
>
>
> Jeff

You are correct. I wonder if this is a draft card someone was working up?  Was it actually on the loco ?
As to the railroad code, I've used that before, but now can't remember where it came from or how it was assigned.  I think it was four digit. Alternative was alpha reporting marks.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/21/24 08:23 by train1275.

train1275 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CDTX Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There's a couple of inconsistencies. First that
> > sticks out to me is no person conducting or
> > certifying the record anywhere. Second, the OOS
> > credit could be legitimate if the locomotive
> was
> > not used as there's no reason they couldn't
> have
> > performed a 92 day inspection while it was OOS
> > although there would be no need. However, that
> OOS
> > credit would be illegitmate if the locomotive
> had
> > been used since 1/4/24. Third, the RR Code is
> > listed as "215" when it should be the
> railroad's
> > AAR assigned reporting mark.
> >
> > Good stuff.
> >
> >
> > Jeff
>
> You are correct. I wonder if this is a draft card
> someone was working up?  Was it actually on the
> loco ?
> As to the railroad code, I've used that before,
> but now can't remember where it came from or how
> it was assigned.  I think it was four digit.
> Alternative was alpha reporting marks.

Yes, It was on the locomotive.  Ben

CDTX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's a couple of inconsistencies. First that
> sticks out to me is no person conducting or
> certifying the record anywhere. Second, the OOS
> credit could be legitimate if the locomotive was
> not used as there's no reason they couldn't have
> performed a 92 day inspection while it was OOS
> although there would be no need. However, that OOS
> credit would be illegitmate if the locomotive had
> been used since 1/4/24. Third, the RR Code is
> listed as "215" when it should be the railroad's
> AAR assigned reporting mark.
>
> Good stuff.
>
>
> Jeff

Jeff, I removed the names on the card, to protect the innocent, as they would say. There were names on the card. Ben

train1275 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ns2557 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Are the "Item Numbers" in Box 15, listed on
> > reverse side, or are they part of a set of
> > specific items that the inspector needs to look
> at
> > and listed on a seperate form/guideline?  I
> > didn't look at the reverse side of this card
> nor
> > any other that I have seen thru the years.
> Thanks
> > for all the replies. Appreciate it. Ben
>
> They are listed below the periodic inspection box,
> about in the middle of the card.

Thanks, I did not notice that until you pointed them out.  Ben

ns2557 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> train1275 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ns2557 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Are the "Item Numbers" in Box 15, listed on
> > > reverse side, or are they part of a set of
> > > specific items that the inspector needs to
> look
> > at
> > > and listed on a seperate form/guideline?  I
> > > didn't look at the reverse side of this card
> > nor
> > > any other that I have seen thru the years.
> > Thanks
> > > for all the replies. Appreciate it. Ben
> >
> > They are listed below the periodic inspection
> box,
> > about in the middle of the card.
>
> Thanks, I did not notice that until you pointed
> them out.  Ben


The item codes are listed on the front page mid document. 

As to the names...good call!!!!


Jeff