Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

With more than 7,000 rail-highway grade crossings in the State, California needed an approach that would prioritize and treat the crossings in greatest need of safety improvements and leverage the common goals of California’s many rail safety partners.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

In California, the Section 130 program is a cooperative effort between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), railroad companies, and local agencies. It is the responsibility of CPUC to select crossings for inclusion in the statewide funding program based on their potential safety issues. To determine which crossings meet the requirements, CPUC staff must first analyze the available data on each crossing, including crash history, any safety concerns voiced by nearby residents or businesses, and near-miss data from railroads. Based on this data analysis process, crossings are then selected and scheduled for field reviews. Once complete, CPUC uses the results of the field reviews to identify and prioritize crossings for treatment under the Section 130 program.

Describe the new practice.

To ensure the crossings in need of treatment are prioritized properly and treated effectively, CPUC developed a two-phase process. The first phase uses a data-based analysis to identify and rank crossings with potential safety issues, and the second involves conducting a rail-highway diagnostic review to determine the specific safety needs of the highest ranked crossings.

Based on available data, a prioritized list that ranks locations is developed based on factors including accident history and trends, vehicle and train volumes, pedestrian issues, and geometry. Potential projects are selected based on their rank on the list. The second phase involves a Field Diagnostic Team—which consists of representatives from the railroad company(s), local agency(s), Caltrans, CPUC staff, and other rail safety partners as appropriate (for example, FHWA Division Office staff). The Field Diagnostic Team conducts a diagnostic review, where the crossing is observed and vehicle behaviors and potential issues, along with pedestrian safety concerns, are identified. The diagnostic team then develops a summary of their findings which includes options for improvement. The CPUC prioritizes the reviewed crossings and treats the highest ranked ones as funding allows.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

There is a lot of preparation work to support diagnostic reviews. A structured review begins with a group review of the data for each crossing. Then the field visit begins with a safety briefing and an overview of the process the team will use to review the site. The diagnostic team first reviews vehicle behaviors and potential issues, then turns their attention to pedestrian safety concerns.

At end of the review, the Field Diagnostic Team develops a summary of their findings, including any suggested safety options or improvements. Once all the diagnostic reviews for the year are completed, CPUC selects the highest ranked crossings for treatment based on the funding anticipated to be available. CPUC then develops individual project packages for Caltrans, including a scope of work, conceptual plans, project development report, project timeline, and a cost estimate. The project packages, along with a final priority list, are then submitted to Caltrans for programming, environmental clearance, right-of-way certification and, ultimately, funding.

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

The California diagnostic review process is a success because CPUC and Caltrans have been able to install treatments at locations selected for improvement based on data analysis. As a result, California applied robust safety improvements that address a rail-highway crossing from a holistic safety perspective, eliminating lingering safety issues that would require additional reviews year after year.

Contact

Bree Arnett
California Public Utilities Commission
Bree.Arnett@cpuc.ca.gov