Positive Train Control: Most Railroads Expect to Request an Extension, and Substantial Work Remains Beyond 2018

Forty railroads including Amtrak, commuter, and freight railroads are currently required by statute to implement PTC, a communications-based system designed to slow or stop a train that is not being operated safely. PTC must be interoperable, meaning trains can operate seamlessly on the same PTC-equipped track, including “tenants” that operate on track owned by another “host” railroad. Although the deadline for PTC implementation is December 31, 2018, railroads may receive a maximum 2-year extension to December 31, 2020, if they meet certain statutory criteria.

GAO was asked to review railroads' PTC implementation progress. This statement discusses (1) railroads' implementation progress and FRA's steps to assist them and (2) how railroads and FRA plan to approach the 2018 and 2020 deadlines. GAO analyzed railroads' most recent quarterly reports covering activities through June 30, 2018; sent a brief questionnaire to all 40 railroads; and interviewed officials from FRA and 16 railroads, selected in part based on those identified as at-risk by FRA.

As of June 30, 2018, many railroads remained in the early stages of positive train control (PTC) implementation—including equipment installation and early field testing. About half of the 40 railroads implementing PTC reported that they are still installing equipment, though many are nearing completion. However, with the exception of the largest freight railroads—known as Class I—and Amtrak, most railroads reported less progress in later implementation stages, especially revenue service demonstration (RSD), an advanced form of field testing that is required to fully implement PTC. Of the 28 commuter railroads required to implement PTC, 19 reported initiating field testing, but only 8 reported initiating RSD. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently clarified the criteria railroads must meet to qualify for a 2-year extension past the December 31, 2018, PTC implementation deadline. To receive an extension, railroads must meet 6 statutory criteria. For the sixth criterion, commuter and smaller freight railroads are authorized to either initiate RSD on at least one track segment or use FRA-approved substitute criteria. FRA clarified these and other requirements at three PTC symposiums hosted for railroads in summer 2018. For example, FRA officials said that for railroads eligible to use substitute criteria, initiating field testing instead of RSD was one approach that could potentially receive FRA's approval. FRA's actions are consistent with GAO's March 2018 recommendation that the agency communicate to the railroads the requirements and process for an extension.

Most railroads anticipate needing an extension, leaving substantial work for both railroads and FRA to complete before the end of 2020. Thirty-two of 40 railroads reported to GAO that they, or the railroad which owns the track on which they operate, will apply for an extension. Sixteen commuter and smaller freight railroads reported planning to apply for an extension using substitute criteria, and of these, 12 intend to apply for substitute criteria based on early testing such as field testing. Though substitute criteria are authorized in law, this approach defers time-intensive RSD testing into 2019 and beyond. In addition, railroads expressed concerns with the time and effort involved with interoperability testing—a key remaining hurdle for railroads such as Class I railroads that are further along with implementation. Further, railroads expressed concern that FRA's workload will markedly increase as railroads submit requests for extension approvals. FRA has acknowledged concerns about the pending surge of submissions and has taken recent steps to help manage the forthcoming influx of documentation, such as reallocating resources. Nonetheless, given that as of early September 2018, only 1 railroad—a Class I railroad—had applied for an extension, it remains unclear how many extension requests FRA will receive or what FRA's enforcement strategy will be for noncompliance with the statute, such as for railroads that fail to apply for an extension by the deadline. In addition, challenges related to PTC implementation and FRA's resources raise questions as to the extent FRA and the railroad industry are poised for full PTC implementation by December 31, 2020.

In March 2018, GAO recommended FRA take steps to systematically communicate extension information to railroads and to use a risk-based approach to prioritize agency resources and workload. FRA has taken some steps to address these recommendations, such as recently communicating and clarifying extension requirements to all railroads during three symposiums, and GAO will continue to monitor FRA's progress.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our work in reviewing railroads’  and the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) efforts to implement  positive train control (PTC). In September 2008—10 years ago this  month—a commuter train and freight train collided in the Chatsworth  neighborhood of Los Angeles, California, resulting in 25 deaths and over  100 injuries. In the wake of this accident, legislation was enacted  requiring certain railroads to implement PTC—a communications-based  system designed to slow or stop a train that is not being operated safely.  Forty railroads are required to implement PTC. These railroads include  28 commuter railroads and Amtrak, which collectively provide over 500  million passenger trips annually. Railroads that play a key role in our  nation’s freight network must also implement PTC, including the 7 largest  Class I and 4 Class II and III freight railroads.

As we have previously reported, PTC implementation is a complex and  lengthy process, which touches almost every part of major rail lines and  almost every aspect of railroads’ train operations. Each implementing  railroad must install more than 20 major components that will ultimately  communicate trains’ locations, movements, and speed, and then slow or  stop a train that is not being operated safely. Full implementation of PTC  involves a number of steps, including but not limited to: planning and  system development, equipment installation, testing, system certification,  and achieving interoperability. Since U.S. railroads often operate some or  all of their trains as “tenants” on the track of another railroad, known as  the “host,” interoperability is intended to enable trains that operate on the  same track to be governed by the PTC system and to move seamlessly  across track owned by different railroads.

When PTC implementation was mandated in 2008, the deadline for  railroads’ implementation was December 31, 2015. We reported in  September 2015 that nearly all railroads did not expect to meet this  deadline. In October 2015, Congress extended the deadline to  December 31, 2018, and established criteria that would enable FRA, the  agency responsible for overseeing PTC implementation, to grant railroads  meeting certain requirements an alternative schedule up to year-end  2020. Throughout this statement we refer to the alternative schedule as  the “extension.” My testimony today includes work conducted at the  request of Chairman Denham and Ranking Member Capuano as well as  Chairman Bill Shuster and Ranking Member Peter DeFazio of the House  Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Specifically, my  testimony discusses the efforts of FRA and railroads to implement PTC  as the December 31, 2018, deadline approaches and since we last  testified on PTC in March 2018. My statement today will address (1)  railroads’ implementation progress and the steps that FRA has taken to  assist them and (2) how railroads and FRA plan to approach PTC  implementation to meet the December 2018 and December 2020  deadlines.

To describe railroads’ progress, we analyzed the most recent available  quarterly PTC implementation reports that railroads submitted to FRA,  reports that reflected the progress as of June 30, 2018. We analyzed the  reports to determine the extent that each railroad has installed PTC  hardware and initiated testing. Based on our review of these data for  anomalies, outliers, or missing information and our previous assessment  of such quarterly reports for our March 2018 testimony, we determined  that these data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes of describing  railroads’ progress in PTC implementation. To describe railroads’ and  FRA’s progress and approaches, we interviewed representatives from 16  passenger and freight railroads, including the 12 railroads (11 commuters  and 1 Class III) that FRA identified in June 2018 as at risk of not having  implemented PTC or qualifying for an extension by December 31, 2018.

The remaining 4 railroads we interviewed were: Amtrak; 2 Class I freight  railroads, which were selected based on their relationships with tenant  railroads and substantial progress toward PTC implementation; and a  commuter railroad that received approval from FRA in March 2018 for an  exception from PTC system implementation. To describe how railroads  and FRA plan to approach PTC implementation for the December 2018  and 2020 deadlines, we sent 41 railroads a semi-structured  questionnaire. The questions we asked were based on the data  collection efforts from our March 2018 testimony. We analyzed railroads’  responses and summarized their plans and challenges into common  categories. To determine the stage of PTC implementation railroads  expected to reach by December 31, 2018, we considered railroads’  responses to our questionnaire, information provided in interviews, and  documents submitted to FRA regarding railroads’ planned implementation  approaches, among other information. To describe railroads’ progress  and FRA’s actions to assist railroads, we interviewed the industry  associations for commuter (American Public Transportation Association)  and freight (Association of American Railroads) railroads, and two PTC  vendors. We also reviewed applicable laws and FRA regulations,  presentations, reports, and guidance and interviewed FRA officials.

We conducted this performance audit from June 2018 to September 2018  in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.

PTC systems are required by law to prevent certain types of accidents or  incidents. In particular, a PTC system must be designed to prevent train- to-train collisions, derailments due to excessive speed, incursions into  work zone limits, and the movement of a train through a switch left in the  wrong position. While railroads may implement any PTC system that  meets these requirements, the majority of the railroads are implementing  one of four types of systems. PTC’s intended safety benefits can be fully  achieved nationwide when all required railroads have successfully  installed PTC components, tested that these components work together  and the systems function as designed, and are interoperable with other  host and tenant railroads’ PTC systems that share track. Interoperability  means the locomotives of any host railroad and tenant railroad operating  over the same track segment will communicate with and respond to the  PTC system, allowing uninterrupted movements over property  boundaries. Interoperability is critical to PTC functioning properly given  the complexity of the rail network in the United States. In much of the  country, Class I railroads function as hosts for Amtrak and commuter  railroads. For example, one of the seven major Class I railroads reports  that 24 tenant railroads operate over its PTC-equipped tracks, including  freight, Amtrak, and commuter railroads. A notable exception to this is the  Northeast Corridor, which runs from Washington, D.C., to Boston,  Massachusetts, which Amtrak predominantly owns and over which 6  freight and 7 commuter railroads operate as tenants.

PTC implementation involves multiple stages to achieve full  implementation, including planning and system development, equipment  installation and testing, system certification, and full deployment, including  interoperability. Each railroad must develop an FRA-approved PTC  implementation plan that includes project schedules and milestones for  certain activities, such as equipment installation. The equipment  installation stage involves many components, including communication  systems; hardware on locomotives and along the side of the track (called  “wayside equipment”); and software in centralized office locations as well  as onboard the train and along the track. Railroads are required to  report quarterly and annually to FRA on the railroad’s PTC  implementation status relative to the implementation plan. A railroad can  also revise its implementation plan to reflect changes to the project, which  then must be reviewed and approved by FRA.

In addition, railroads must demonstrate that the PTC system is deployed  safely and meets functional requirements through multiple stages of  testing. Before initiating testing on the general rail system, railroads must  submit a formal test request for FRA approval that includes, among other  things, the specific test procedures, dates and locations for testing, and  the effect the tests will have on current operations. The multiple stages of  PTC testing include:

Laboratory testing: locomotive and wayside equipment testing in a lab  environment to verify that individual components function as  designed.

Field testing: includes several different tests of individual components  and the overall system, such as testing of each locomotive to verify  that it meets functional requirements and field integration testing—a  key implementation milestone to verify that each PTC component is  integrated and functioning safely as designed.

Revenue service demonstration (RSD): an advanced form of field  testing in which the railroad operates PTC-equipped trains in regular  service under specific conditions. RSD is intended to validate the  performance of the PTC system as a whole and to test the system  under normal, real-world operations.

Interoperability testing: host and tenant railroads that operate on the  same track must work together to test interoperability to ensure each  railroad can operate seamlessly across property boundaries. Almost  all of the 40 railroads currently required to implement PTC must  demonstrate interoperability with at least one other railroad’s PTC  system.

Using results from field and RSD testing, combined with other  information, host railroads must then submit a safety plan to FRA for  approval. We have previously reported that these safety plans are about  5,000 pages in length. Once FRA approves a safety plan, the railroad  receives PTC system certification, which is required for full  implementation, and is then authorized to operate the PTC system in  revenue service. According to FRA officials, the FRA may impose  conditions to the PTC safety plan approval as necessary to ensure safety,  resulting in a conditional certification.

Railroads may receive a maximum 2-year extension from FRA past the  December 31, 2018, deadline if they meet six criteria set forth in statute.  Specifically, railroads must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of FRA, that  they have: (1) installed all PTC system hardware consistent with the total  amounts identified in the railroad’s implementation plan; (2) acquired all  necessary spectrum consistent with the implementation plan; (3)  completed required employee training; (4) included in a revised  implementation plan an alternative schedule and sequence for  implementing the PTC system as soon as practicable but no later than  December 31, 2020; (5) certified to FRA that they will be in full  compliance with PTC statutory requirements by the date provided in the  alternative schedule and sequence; and (6) for Class I railroads and  Amtrak, initiated RSD or implemented a PTC system on more than 50  percent of the track they own or control that is required to have PTC. For  commuter and Class II and III railroads, the sixth statutory criterion is to have either initiated RSD on at least one territory required to have  operations governed by a PTC system or “met any other criteria  established by the Secretary,” which FRA refers to as “substitute”  criteria.

FRA is responsible for overseeing railroads’ implementation of PTC, and  the agency monitors progress and provides direct assistance to railroads  implementing PTC. For example, FRA officials provide technical  assistance to railroads, address questions, and review railroad-submitted  documentation. FRA has a national PTC director, designated PTC  specialists in the eight FRA regions, and a few additional engineers and  test monitors responsible for overseeing technical and engineering  aspects of implementation and reviewing railroad submissions and  requests. In anticipation of the upcoming implementation deadline, in May  2017, FRA began to send notification letters to railroads it determined  were at risk of both not meeting the December 31, 2018, implementation  deadline and not completing the requirements necessary to qualify for an  extension. FRA identified “at-risk” railroads by comparing a railroad’s  hardware installation status to the total hardware required for PTC  implementation, according to the railroad’s implementation plan. FRA has  increased the “at-risk” threshold percentage over time as the deadline  approaches. See table 1.

FRA has additional oversight tools, which include use of its general civil  penalty enforcement authority for failure to meet certain statutory PTC  requirements. FRA has used this authority in 2017 and 2018 to assess  civil penalties against railroads that failed to comply with the equipment  installation milestones, the spectrum acquisition milestones, or both, that  the railroads had established in their implementation plans for the end of  2016 and 2017.

As part of our body of work on PTC, we found that railroads face  numerous PTC implementation challenges and made recommendations  to FRA to improve its oversight of implementation. Specifically, in 2013  and 2015 we found that many railroads were struggling to make progress  due to a number of complex and interrelated challenges, such as  developing system components and identifying and correcting issues  discovered during testing. Most recently, we found in March 2018 that  FRA had not systematically communicated information or used a risk- based approach to help railroads prepare for the 2018 deadline or to  qualify for an extension. We also found that many railroads were  concerned about FRA’s ability to review submitted documentation in a  timely manner, particularly given the length of some required  documentation such as safety plans and FRA’s limited resources for  document review. In March 2018, we recommended FRA identify and  adopt a method for systematically communicating information to railroads  and use a risk-based approach to prioritize its resources and workload.  FRA agreed with our recommendations.

Many Railroads Remain in Early Stages of PTC Implementation and FRA Has Clarified Extension Requirements Railroads Continue to Install and to Test PTC Systems, and Report Previously Identified Implementation Challenges

As of June 30, 2018, many railroads reported that they remain in the  equipment installation and field-testing stages, which are early stages of  PTC implementation. However, since we last testified in March 2018,  railroads have made progress on equipment installation. Based on our  analysis of the 40 railroads’ reported status as of June 30, 2018, about  half of the railroads have completed equipment installation, and many  others are nearing completion of this stage. Specifically, three-quarters of  the 40 railroads reported being more than 90 percent complete with  locomotive equipment installation. Similarly, nearly three-quarters of  railroads that must install wayside equipment reported being more than  90 percent complete. The remaining one-quarter of railroads are among  those designated by FRA as at-risk of both not meeting the end of 2018  implementation deadline and not completing the requirements necessary  to qualify for an extension. Specifically, in August 2018, FRA identified 9  railroads—all commuter railroads—as at-risk, fewer than the 12 railroads  FRA had previously designated as at risk in its June 2018 letters to  railroads.

Since we last testified, most commuter railroads reported slow progress  with testing, especially with RSD, while Class I railroads and Amtrak have  reached later stages of testing. Notably, all 7 Class I freight railroads and  Amtrak reported having initiated field testing and entering RSD as of June  30, 2018. We reported in 2013 and 2015 that Class I railroads and  Amtrak have been conducting PTC implementation activities for longer  than commuter railroads, which has likely factored into their advanced  progress. However, commuter railroads and Class II/III railroads have  progressed more slowly. For example:

Laboratory and initial field testing: 19 of 28 commuter railroads  reported having initiated this testing as of June 30, 2018, 6 more  commuter railroads than the 13 we previously reported as having  initiated field testing as of September 30, 2017. Additionally, 2 of 4  Class II/III railroads reported having initiated testing as of June 30,  2018.

RSD testing: 8 of 28 commuter railroads reported initiating RSD  testing as of June 30, 2018, 2 more commuter railroads than the 6 we  previously reported as having entered RSD testing as of September  30, 2017. No Class II/III railroads reported having initiated RSD. As  noted earlier, unless a commuter or Class II/III railroad receives  approval for using substitute criteria, the railroad must initiate RSD, a  final stage of PTC testing, on at least one territory by December 31,  2018, to qualify for an extension.

Railroad representatives reported that they continue to face many of the  same challenges we have previously identified. For example, in response  to our questionnaire to all 40 railroads implementing PTC, 14 reported  challenges with PTC vendors and contractors, which we originally  reported on in 2015. One railroad noted that, because its contractor  manages PTC projects across the country with the same deadline and  requirements, it can be difficult for all railroads to get the resources they  need from their contractor. We previously reported that there are a limited  number of vendors available to design PTC systems, provide software  and hardware, and conduct testing. For example, we reported in 2015  that, according to railroad industry representatives, there were two  vendors for the onboard train management computer and three vendors  for the wayside equipment. Likewise, we previously reported that  railroads face software challenges, and noted that railroads had concerns  with the number of defects identified during software testing, since these  take time to address. In response to our questionnaire, 11 railroads  reported encountering challenges related to maturity of the PTC software  systems, such as working through software bugs or defects during  testing.

FRA Has Recently Clarified Extension Requirements

In June, July, and August 2018, FRA held three PTC symposiums that  were attended by representatives from all 40 railroads and that focused  on the extension process and substitute criteria, PTC testing, and safety  plans, respectively. FRA’s June 2018 symposium covered information  consistent with our March 2018 recommendation that the agency adopt a  method for systematically communicating information related to the  requirements and process for an extension to railroads. Specifically,  FRA presented information on the procedures for requesting and  obtaining FRA’s approval for an extension to implement PTC beyond the  December 2018 deadline including FRA’s review process. FRA also  clarified that for railroads eligible to use substitute criteria, initiating field  testing was one approach that could potentially qualify as substitute  criteria, rather than initiating RSD.

Representatives we interviewed from the railroads that participated in the  symposiums found them to be helpful and some railroads reported that  the information presented led them to adjust their approach to meeting  the December 2018 deadline. For example, one railroad representative  we spoke to said that until the symposium, he was unaware that using  field testing as substitute criteria was a potential option. Some railroads  we met with also told us they are re-evaluating what activities and  documentation need to be revised and submitted to FRA before the  December 2018 deadline based on the information presented at the  symposiums. For example, representatives from one railroad we met with  said that FRA officials encouraged them to update their PTC  implementation plan right away with current equipment installation totals,  to ensure consistency across all required documentation by the end of  2018. A couple of railroads noted that the information presented at the  symposiums clarified many questions and would have been beneficial to  know a year or two earlier in the implementation process.

In addition, in recent months FRA has continued to provide assistance to  railroads and has taken a series of steps to better prepare railroads for  the 2018 deadline. These steps include meeting regularly with individual  railroads and developing approaches intended to help many railroads  meet the requirements necessary for a deadline extension. For example,  representatives from one commuter railroad said agency officials have  been willing to share lessons learned, clarify requirements, and review  draft documentation to provide informal feedback.

Railroads and FRA Are Working toward Extensions, Leaving Substantial Work to Be Completed Beyond 2018

Most Railroads Anticipate Needing an Extension, and Many Plan to Start RSD Testing Beyond 2018

More than three-quarters of railroads (32 of 40) reported to us that they  plan to apply for an extension. However, FRA officials noted that with  the exception of possibly one or two railroads, they anticipate that all  railroads will likely need an extension. As of September 2018, most  railroads have not submitted their request for an extension. A railroad  must demonstrate that it has met all of the criteria to qualify before it may  formally request an extension, and as previously discussed, many  railroads remain in the early stages of PTC implementation. Of the eight  railroads that anticipate reaching full implementation by December 31,  2018, five have conditionally certified safety plans; one has submitted its  safety plan for review; one plans to submit its safety plan to FRA in fall  2018 for certification; and one did not specify when it would submit its  safety plan for certification.

Of the 32 railroads that intend to apply for an extension, half reported that  they plan to use substitute criteria to qualify, including 12 commuter and 4  Class II and III railroads. Moreover, three-quarters of the commuter and  Class II and III railroads that plan to use substitute criteria (12 of 16)  intend to apply to use their initiation of field testing or lab testing as  substitute criteria. Figure 1 depicts the stage of PTC implementation  railroads at least expect to reach by December 31, 2018, to be in  compliance, based on railroads’ responses to our July-August 2018  questionnaire.

Although FRA has recently made clear that it is authorized to grant  extensions based on initiating field testing or other FRA-approved  substitute criteria, this approach defers time-intensive RSD testing into  2019 and beyond. In March 2018, we testified FRA officials told us that  moving from the start of field testing to the start of RSD can take between  1 and 3 years, and has averaged about 2 years for those railroads that  have completed that stage. We also testified that FRA officials believe  that most railroads underestimate the amount of time needed for testing.  FRA officials told us that they do not consider railroads that are approved  for an extension under substitute criteria to be necessarily at a higher-risk  of not completing PTC implementation by 2020. However, in light of these  time estimates and the unknown challenges that railroads may face  during testing, railroads that are in the early field-testing stage moving  into 2019 could face challenges completing PTC implementation by the  extended December 2020 deadline.

Railroads further behind in PTC implementation may need to apply for an  extension due to factors such as compressed implementation schedules,  as well as the time needed for FRA approvals. For example,  representatives from one commuter railroad said they hope to reach RSD  before the December 31, 2018, deadline, but that it would be difficult to  meet the extension requirements, apply for, and receive an extension  given the volume of paperwork FRA will be receiving at the end of the  year. Instead, the railroad plans to submit an extension request using  substitute criteria consisting of field testing in order to be in compliance at  the end of the year. Such an approach involves first applying for and  receiving approval for substitute criteria and then formally requesting an  extension and submitting supporting documentation to FRA before the  end of the year. Entering RSD prior to the deadline could be difficult given  that FRA officials told us they have advised railroads to allow at least a  month for FRA’s review of test requests, which must be approved prior to  initiating field testing and RSD.

Additionally, for some railroads further along in PTC implementation,  particularly Class I freight railroads, interoperability is a key remaining  hurdle for full implementation by the end of 2018, and railroads expect  this challenge to persist in the future. The two Class I railroads we  interviewed noted that ensuring all tenant railroads are PTC-equipped,  tested, and interoperable is a primary reason the railroads plan to request  an extension. One of these host railroads also reported that it has little  ability to influence its tenants’ progress with PTC implementation. Across  all 40 railroads, 8 reported current or anticipated challenges working with  tenant or host railroads, or both, to plan and conduct testing to ensure  interoperability. Moreover, given that few railroads have reached the  interoperability testing stage, the challenges railroads may face in this  stage remain unclear. For example, some railroads we interviewed noted  it is unknown how much time and effort will be required to work through  interoperability issues during testing to ensure the system’s reliability.  One railroad association stated that interoperability is, and will continue to  be, a substantial challenge for metropolitan areas with dense and  complex rail networks with several host-tenant relationships. For  example, according to one commuter railroad, 14 different freight and  commuter railroads will need to interoperate in the Chicago area.

FRA’s Substantial Workload Remains a Concern

FRA’s already substantial workload is expected to increase as railroads  continue to submit documentation necessary for extensions and continue  PTC implementation activities. FRA is focused on ensuring railroads are  in compliance through the December 2018 deadline—whether via an  extension or by completing implementation. While FRA officials report  that they anticipate almost all railroads will likely request an extension,  only one—a Class I railroad—had submitted an application for an  extension as of early September 2018. FRA will need to review and  approve all related documentation associated with each extension  request and make a determination within 90 days, meaning if a railroad  were to submit its extension request on December 31, 2018, FRA would  have until the end of March 2019 to approve or deny the railroad’s  extension request. In addition to extension requests and supporting  documentation, many railroads will also be submitting to FRA: requests  for substitute criteria, test requests to initiate field testing or RSD,  revisions to PTC implementation plans, and PTC safety plans.

To help manage the forthcoming influx of documentation, FRA officials  have offered to review draft documentation, such as substitute criteria  requests and test requests, and have advised railroads to take FRA’s  review times into account prior to submitting required documentation.  FRA officials told us that in trying to manage their workload, they initially  told railroads they did not have time to review draft submittals. However,  they found that taking the time to conduct draft reviews ultimately led to  higher quality formal submittals and accelerated the overall review  process. In addition, FRA officials said that their goal is to not delay any  railroad that is ready to move into testing, and that they advised railroads  to build 30–45 days for test request reviews into their project schedules.

Despite these efforts, railroads remain concerned about the agency’s  ability to manage the PTC workload in the coming months and beyond  2018. For example, 9 of the 40 railroads identified FRA’s resources and  review times as a challenge leading up to the December 2018 deadline.  Based on similar concerns, in March 2018, we recommended FRA  develop an approach to prioritize the allocation of resources to address  areas of greatest risk as railroads work to complete PTC  implementation. FRA has acknowledged the railroads’ concern given the surge of submissions requiring FRA approval in 2018 and has  reported the agency is reallocating existing expertise and expanding the  PTC workforce through training, expanding contracts with existing support  contractors, and initiating one additional contract to provide technical  support. For example, FRA officials told us that they reallocated  resources to shift PTC Specialists’ responsibilities to focus exclusively on  testing-related activities because their involvement is critical for the  testing stage.

Although FRA has taken steps to provide key extension information to  railroads and help ensure railroads’ compliance with PTC deadlines,  uncertainty remains, particularly in regard to FRA’s enforcement strategy  if railroads are noncompliant with the statute, such as if railroads were to  fail to apply for an extension by the deadline. Representatives from all  railroads implementing PTC we met with told us that FRA’s planned  enforcement approach for any railroad that fails to meet the requirements  for an extension beyond 2018 is unclear. FRA officials told us they have  shared the range of applicable civil penalties with railroads for years, but  that any policy decisions about how potential fines will be levied for non- compliant railroads is a policy decision that has not yet been made. In  addition, it is also unclear how the agency would approach enforcement  for railroads that have a host or tenant operating on their tracks that has  not completed implementation or met the requirements necessary for an  extension. FRA officials said that the goal of enforcement is to help bring  all railroads into compliance and that they would have to look at the  specific circumstances for any host-tenant issues before assessing a fine.

In conclusion, almost all railroads will likely request an extension beyond  2018, which will require FRA approval and, for many railroads, substitute  criteria requests that may result in approximately a third of railroads  remaining in the early stages of PTC implementation at the start of 2019.  However, given that almost no railroads have submitted extension  requests, it is unlikely we will know how many railroads will be granted an  extension by the December 31, 2018 deadline. Although FRA has  reported taking some actions in response to our March 2018  recommendation that they better prioritize resources, FRA resources and  review times remain a significant concern. These issues, combined with  the ongoing implementation, testing, and interoperability challenges that a  number of railroads reported to us, raise questions as to the extent FRA  and the railroad industry are poised for full PTC implementation by  December 31, 2020.

Chairman Denham, Ranking Member Capuano, and Members of the  Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be  pleased to respond to any questions that you may have at this time.

If you or your staff have any questions about this testimony, please  contact Susan Fleming, Director, Physical Infrastructure at (202) 512- 2834 or FlemingS@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this statement. GAO staff who made key contributions to this testimony  are Susan Zimmerman (Assistant Director); Katherine Blair; Greg Hanna;  Delwen Jones; Emily Larson; Joanie Lofgren; SaraAnn Moessbauer;  Maria Wallace; and Crystal Wesco.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety  without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain  copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be  necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.

Forty railroads, including Amtrak, commuter, and freight railroads, are required to implement positive train control (PTC)—a communications-based system designed to slow or stop a train that is not being operated safely. Although the deadline for PTC implementation is December 31, 2018, railroads that meet certain criteria may receive a maximum 2-year extension.

We testified that, as of June 30, 2018, many railroads remain in the early stages of PTC implementation, such as equipment installation and early testing. Most railroads anticipate needing an extension.

[This text was updated for clarification.]