Agenda Date: November 30, 1999
Agenda Item:

Docket:  TR-981101
   Railroad Rulemaking--WAC 480-60-035 Walkways.

Staff:   Mike Rowswell, Rail Operations Manager
   Karen Caille, Administrative Law Judge
   Kim Dobyns, Policy Analyst

Recommendation:
Continue the rulemaking hearing in Docket No. TR-981101 until December 22, 
1999, during the Commission’s regular open meeting.

Attachments:

 Attachment 1: Draft Proposed Rule for Walkways.
 Attachment 2: Proposed Small Business Economic Impact Survey 

Discussion:

1.  Background:

 A suggested walkway rule was presented at the September 22, 1999 open meeting 
for adoption as part of the revisions proposed for Chapter 480-60 WAC.  Strong 
objections were raised to the walkway rule, some of which had not been 
considered previously.  A need for clarification of certain words also arose.  
As a result, the Commission directed staff to gather further comments on the 
walkway rule. 

 After the September 22, 1999 open meeting, further written comments were 
solicited and received from stakeholders.  Railroads stated opposition to any 
rule, and labor promoted a more stringent walkway rule than the rule proposed 
by staff.  At an operations rulemaking workshop held on September 28, 1999, 
several hours were set aside for comments on the walkway rule, during which 
additional concerns surfaced.  It became evident that another walkway workshop 
was needed, and that the economic impact on small businesses needed to be 
re-evaluated.  At the October 13, 1999 open meeting, the Commission continued 
consideration of WAC 480-60-035 (walkways), and directed staff to report the 
status of further efforts at the November 30, 1999 open meeting.  

 On November 9, 1999, a workshop was held to elicit and consider all concerns, 
and to attempt to resolve the disputed issues.  The workshop was attended by 
representatives of The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co., the Union 
Pacific Railroad, the Columbia Basin Railroad, the Palouse River and Coulee 
City Railroad, and the United Transportation Union.   

Docket  TR-981101
November 30, 1999
Page 2 


 At the end of the workshop, much of what is contained in Attachment 1 was 
agreed to in principle.  However, the railroads still reserved the right to 
question the need for the rule and to 
raise issues of preemption.  Also, an agreement on where walkways should be 
required was not reached.  

 Staff believes the new rule should be limited to yards.  This was done to 
narrow the areas of disagreement among the parties, take into account the 
available evidence of need for a rule, and recognize that experience gained 
with a limited rule can be used to determine whether a more extensive rule is 
needed.  Also, the major railroads and unions are working on the issue of 
walkways on mainlines through the Safety and Compliance Program (SACP) 
sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration.  Although the issue in the 
SACP involves walkways near dragging equipment detectors, resolution of that 
problem will provide information and guidance applicable to walkways near 
switches outside of yards.  Accordingly, staff believes that the issue of 
walkways near switches should be deferred.

 Staff redrafted the proposed rule as written in Attachment 1.  It was sent to 
all interested parties for further comment on November 23, 1999.  Comments are 
due by December 10, 1999. A Small Business Economic Impact Statement will be 
prepared.  A survey to measure the economic impact of the proposed rule on 
small businesses was sent with the proposed rule to all regulated railroads on 
November 23, 1999.  The survey is also due by December 10,1999.  The survey is 
attached to this memorandum as Attachment 2.  It is noted that participants at 
the workshop were given the opportunity to provide input on the elements that 
should be measured in the Small Business Economic Impact Statement.  

 Staff believes that another stakeholder meeting is unnecessary.  All 
considerations and concerns should have been brought forward by stakeholders by 
this time through the many opportunities provided by Staff.  Those who attended 
the workshop on November 9, 1999, articulated their positions clearly and 
constructively.  When final comments and the survey responses are received, 
Staff should have sufficient information to draft an appropriate rule.
 
Conclusion

Based upon the foregoing, Staff recommends the Commission continue the 
rulemaking hearing in Docket No. TR-981101 until December 22, 1999, during the 
Commission’s regular open meeting.