April 2008 – Office of Safety Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) Training Federal Railroad Administration.

April 2008 – Office of Safety

Railroad Safety

Advisory Committee (RSAC)

Training

Federal Railroad Administration



Federal Advisory Committees

Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) History

Interest Based Bargaining

General RSAC Structure

RSAC Process



Federal Advisory Committee Act (1972) applies

whenever the President or an agency

establishes or uses an outside group to receive

recommendations

The Negotiated Rulemaking

Act was passed by Congress

in 1990



In 1994, the FRA established it’s first “ad hoc” formal

regulatory negotiation committee (“Reg-Neg”) to address

roadway worker safety

The resulting rulemaking both developed a new rule that

would reduce/eliminate the deaths and injuries occurring

to the industry’s roadway or track side workers and

demonstrated the validity of collaborative rulemaking

FRA’s successful use of negotiated rulemaking pointed to the need for the establishment of a formal advisory committee and process

Federal Advisory Committees & the FRA


RSAC History

The success of the initial government-industry working groups led

FRA to transition from;

March 1996 The Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) was

officially chartered by the Secretary of Transportation and was

comprised of 48 voting representatives drawn from 27 member

organizations representing large and small railroads, rail labor

organizations, state associations, rail passenger representatives

with suppliers and other interested parties participating as non-

voting associate or advisory partners

a hear-and-decidea hear-and-decide

regulatory procedureregulatory procedure a consensus modela consensus model


Essentially RSAC provides a forum where:

“Enhanced communication enables all concerned stakeholders to become more directly involved in improving our Nation’s rail safety through a collaborative rulemaking

process”

Railroad Safety Advisory Committee


RSAC History

Established to develop new regulatory standards, through a

collaborative process, with all segments of the rail community to find

solutions on safety regulatory issues

RSAC:

Early milestones:

Track Safety Standards revision (final 1998) Railroad Communications (final 1998)

RAIL INDUSTRY EXPERTS

WISDOM RESOURCESEXPERIENCE PRODUCE RESPONSIVEFLEXIBLE

BENEFICAL

RULES


RSAC History

Since the RSAC was federally chartered on March 25, 1996,

twenty-four tasks have been accepted and more than 375

Committee, working group, and task force meetings have

been conducted to address critical railroad safety issues

Full RSAC Committee today - 38 organizations representing

labor, railroads, suppliers, States, chemical suppliers and

passenger advocates - plus advisors from FTA, NTSB, TSA,

Canada, Mexico, and other diverse groups


RSAC Today


RSAC Today


RSAC Guiding Principles

Decisions about the best approach to safety is made with full

participation of all affected parties

Provide a continuing forum for advice and recommendations to FRA on

major railroad safety issues

Seek agreement on the facts and data underlying any real or perceived

safety problems

Identify cost-effective solutions to safety problems and regulatory

options to implement solutions

RSAC is solely advisory in nature

The RSAC provides advice and recommendations on specific tasks

assigned to it by FRA


RSAC may elect to accept or reject a task, or to recommend that a

task be restructured

Working groups are formed for each task; they are comprised of

stakeholders interested in the particular subject area, as determined

by the chair after expressions of interest

Working group recommendations can only proceed to full RSAC

committee with consensus among stakeholders

FRA sets a target date for the presentation of RSAC’s

recommendations to the Administrator

FRA may withdraw a task from the RSAC at any time

RSAC Guiding Principles


RSAC Process Flow

Initial working group meetingInitial working group meeting

WG DeliberationsWG Deliberations

WG Reaches ConsensusWG Reaches Consensus

RSAC forms working groups (WG)RSAC forms working groups (WG)

WG presentation to RSACWG presentation to RSAC

RSAC Considers RSAC Considers

WG RecommendationsWG Recommendations

Presentation of RSAC Presentation of RSAC

Recommendations to AdministratorRecommendations to Administrator

FRA Publishes Proposed and Final FRA Publishes Proposed and Final

Rulemaking ActionsRulemaking Actions

WG undertakes task

& acts as staff to RSAC

Chairperson briefs on task, resources, and

timetable for completion

Address relevant facts

Define safety problem

Develop options

All participants must support

recommendations of the group for consensus to

be reached

RSAC accepts task from FRARSAC accepts task from FRA


How Caucus Works

During RSAC proceedings, a group represented by several

members, or even one member, can ask for a caucus to

meet privately within their group

The person/s who have requested a caucus break report

back to the RSAC group the results of their caucus

It is important that the members maintain clear channels of

communication with the organization that they represent

and accurately convey the organizations position on an

issue


How Caucus Works

This method is used routinely and effectively for the following reasons: To clarify unity of the vote

To request information from additional experts

To clarify their private discussions

To verify the group’s position prior to a vote

To compose documents to present their positions

To review their positions

Upon invitation, FRA staff may meet with a caucus to gain a better understanding on the concerns underlying expressed positions


Principles of Interest Based Bargaining

A bargaining technique in which the parties start with (or

at least focus on);

Interests rather than proposals

Agree on criteria of acceptability that will be used to evaluate

alternatives

Generate several alternatives that are consistent with their

interests

Apply the agreed-upon acceptability criteria to the alternatives so

generated in order to arrive at mutually acceptable positions


Principles of Interest Based Bargaining

Successful Interest Based Bargaining depends in large measure upon the following:

Mutual trust Candor Willingness to share information

But even where these are lacking, the technique, with its focus on interests and on developing alternatives, tends to make the parties more flexible and open to alternative solutions and thus increases the likelihood of agreement



The RSAC consists of three membership levels, all of which will reflect representative parity:

The RSAC full Committee, which is appointed and chaired by FRA;

Working groups responsible for developing recommendations on one or more specific tasks assigned to the RSAC; and

Task Forces that develop data and recommended actions with respect to elements of tasks assigned to working groups



TASK FORCESTASK FORCES

““TF”TF”

WORKING GROUPSWORKING GROUPS

““WG”WG”

FULL RSAC COMMITTEEFULL RSAC COMMITTEE

Develops data and recommended Develops data and recommended actions with respect to elements of actions with respect to elements of tasks assigned to working groupstasks assigned to working groups

Develops recommendationsDevelops recommendationson one or more specific tasks on one or more specific tasks assigned to RSACassigned to RSAC

Accepts or rejects tasks from Accepts or rejects tasks from FRA, appoints and assigns tasks FRA, appoints and assigns tasks to working groups, approves or to working groups, approves or rejects WG recommendationsrejects WG recommendations


Task Statements

Task statements are drafted by FRA with approval of Administrator

24 accepted tasks to date Tasks are numbered by year i.e.

2008-01 Contain a purpose, description,

specifics and target dates for deliverables


Authority & Responsibility

The RSAC and all Working Groups established under authority of the RSAC will:

Seek agreement on the facts and data underlying any real or perceived safety problem

Identify cost effective solutions based on the agreed-upon facts

Identify regulatory options where necessary to implement those solutions


Voting

Proxy voting is essential to accommodate the busy schedules of those who will serve at the various levels without jeopardizing representation of their interests

Voting by proxy is permitted at any of the three levels, using a simple form developed by RSAC to record them

The RSAC, working group, or task force can choose to waive the use of written proxy as long as the proxy is noted in the records of the meeting


Working Group Formation

RSAC establishes a working group to undertake

each program development task (e.g.,

rulemaking or issue to be examined for possible

rulemaking)

A working group may be assigned more than

one task if tasks are clearly related, but standing

working groups are not employed


Working Group Formation

The working group functions as staff to the RSAC

and is comprised of individual representatives

from RSAC member organizations who may be,

but need not be, RSAC members themselves

That working group will be dissolved when the

task is completed (normally following issuance of

a final rule or decision not to institute rulemaking)


Working Group Deliberations

The working group meets as necessary, assigning

responsibility for specific tasks and formulating the

structure of their recommendations to the RSAC

If the working group has established a task force,

the working group is responsible for ensuring that

it meets the goal set for reporting to the working

group



For each task assigned, the working group

addresses the relevant facts, defines the safety

problem presented, develops a range of options

and decides upon a recommended option

When necessary to reach agreement on the

relevant facts, the working group is expected to

visit appropriate sites on railroads to observe the

facts directly



The working group will operate by full consensus,

with all participants supporting the

recommendations of the group, after having had

ample opportunity to persuade others of the

rightness of their preferred positions

Consensus: If all participants can live with and can live with and

supportsupport the final working group recommendation


Task Force Formation

The working group may establish a task force on any task

This may be especially useful where significant fact finding and data development are necessary, where the working group has more than one task at a time, and/or where the overall task assigned by FRA can be efficiently divided into sub-tasks


Task Force Formation

The task force reports to the working group that

established it

The task force must adopt its report by full

consensus, i.e., unanimously

When full consensus cannot be reached, the

task force notifies the working group of this fact


Working Group Presentation to the RSAC

Once the working group has reached consensus about its recommendations to the full RSAC, the RSAC Chairperson is notified

The RSAC receives the working group report and considers whether to adopt the recommendations set forth in the report

The working group normally presents its recommendations during a public meeting of the RSAC but mail ballot may be employed with prior briefing with the Committee’s approval


The Chairperson places the working group

presentation on the agenda for the next RSAC

meeting

Public notice of the presentation of the working

group’s recommendations to the RSAC is

published in the Federal Register, indicating the

date, time, and location for the meeting




When the RSAC meeting is convened, the

working group spokesperson presents its

recommendations to the RSAC and:

1. Responds to any questions regarding the factual

basis of the recommendations

2. Responds to any questions regarding the options

reviewed

3. Responds to any questions regarding specific

considerations bearing on those options


Having received the full consensus recommendations of

the working group, the RSAC has the following three

options:

1. By full consensus (unanimous vote), accept the working

group’s recommendations and forward them to the

Administrator without change

2. By majority consensus, accept the working group’s

recommendations and forward them, without change, to

the Administrator along with any non-consensus views

offered by any non-concurring voting members of RSAC

that were not represented on the working group

Committee Consideration of Recommendations (cont)



3. By full consensus (unanimous vote) return the working

group’s recommendations to the working group for

further consideration of specific issues

With regard to a particular task, the third option is

available only once


In event that there is no majority consensus to send

the working group’s recommendations to the

Administrator, but also no unanimous consensus to

return the task to the working group, the Chairperson

shall;

Formally report to the Administrator that no RSAC

recommendations will be made on that particular task

Task is normally withdrawn



The same is true where, on the second time before the

RSAC, there is no majority consensus to send the

working group’s recommendations to the Administrator

(In this case return to the working group no longer being

an option)

The RSAC considers the working group’s

recommendations in their entirety, seeking consensus

for approval of the recommendations as a whole



For the recommendation to be submitted to FRA, the

voting members of RSAC must approve the working

group’s recommendation without change

The full RSAC is not the appropriate level at which to

write or rewrite detailed recommendations. That is the

job of the working groups



Members of the RSAC consider whether they can live

with and support the recommendations embodied in the

working group report, taken as a whole. FRA employs

its full resources and energy to encourage and facilitate

the achievement of consensus



Recommendations to the Administrator

Once the RSAC reaches consensus, the Chairperson

transmits the RSAC’s recommendations to the

Administrator

If, with regard to a particular task, there was no full

consensus at the task force or working group level, or no

majority consensus at the RSAC level, the RSAC reports

the absence of consensus to the Administrator


In the absence of consensus recommendations, FRA will

simply determine the best course of action on a

particular issue without benefit of the RSAC’s advice

FRA may withdraw a task from RSAC at any time, and

will provide the RSAC an explanation when it does so

Recommendations to the Administrator


Proposed and Final Actions

To the maximum extent practicable, FRA utilizes the RSAC

to provide consensus recommendations with respect both to

proposed and final agency action

Except for those limited circumstances where an opportunity

for prior comment is unnecessary, FRA provides to the

general public in the Federal Register notice of its regulatory

proposals, an opportunity to comment in writing, and an

opportunity for an oral presentation (hearing)


Proposed and Final Actions

Following issuance of a proposed rule, FRA may

request RSAC assist the FRA in considering

comments received.

With respect to either a proposed or final rule,

FRA may schedule one or more meetings of the

RSAC during which information and views are

received from other interested persons


Regulations

Any rules resulting from the RSAC process must be:

1. Reasonable, clear, effective, and enforceable

2. Impose as small a burden as is practicable

3. Specify performance objectives (to the extent

feasible), rather than specifying the behavior or

manner of compliance


Accomplishments Track Safety Standards, General Revision Railroad Communications (Including Revision of Radio Standards and

Procedures) Steam-Powered Locomotives, Revision of Inspection Standards Locomotive Engineer Qualification and Certification, General Revision Roadway Maintenance Machines (On-Track Equipment) Safety Standards Locomotive Crashworthiness Locomotive Cab Working Conditions:

Sanitation Occupational Noise Exposure

Event Recorders (Data Survivability) Positive Train Control (Report to Congress; Performance Standards for

New Systems) Accident/Incident Reporting; Conformity with OSHA Injury/Illness

Amendments


Current Efforts

Passenger Safety Issues for the 21st Century

Roadway Worker Protection

Operating Rules (Human Factors)

Locomotive Safety Standards

Track Safety Standards and Continuous Welded Rail

Medical Standards for Safety-Critical Personnel

Railroad Bridge Safety


Process Recipe for Success

A recognition by all parties that an issue needs to be addressed

Participation by an FRA interdisciplinary team

Agreement on procedures before the negotiation

Clear focus on the details of the proposed remedy

Flexibility to incorporate industry rules and standards into the Federal regime

Appropriate consideration of costs and benefits

Follow-through by FRA to apply the results of the negotiations


Wrap Up


Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) History

Interest Based Bargaining


RSAC Process




Questions?


April 2008 – Office of Safety Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) Training Federal Railroad Administration.

Documents

rsac rsac

rsac committee

office of safety rsac

office of safety slide

solutions rsac

safety regulatory issues

rsac proceedings

time rsac