Wisconsin Administrative Code Office of the Commissioner of Railroads
The Wisconsin Administrative Code, under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Commissioner of Railroads (OCR), outlines rules and regulations that govern railroad operations and related infrastructure issues in Wisconsin. The OCR is primarily responsible for overseeing railroad crossing safety, the allocation of funds for crossing improvements, the resolution of disputes between railroads and municipalities, and ensuring that railroad practices adhere to state safety standards.
The Office of the Commissioner of Railroads (OCR) handles cases related to railroad operations, safety concerns, and disputes between different parties. Below are detailed examples of cases and proceedings that demonstrate how the OCR operates and enforces the regulations within the scope of the Wisconsin Administrative Code.
1. In re Petition of City of Eau Claire for the Relocation of a Railroad Crossing (2010)
Key Issue: The relocation of a railroad crossing to improve safety and reduce traffic congestion in the city.
Background: The City of Eau Claire petitioned the OCR to authorize the relocation of an existing railroad crossing at a busy intersection due to concerns about traffic congestion and increased accident risk. The city argued that relocating the crossing to a safer location would reduce risks to motorists and pedestrians while improving traffic flow.
Ruling: The OCR conducted a detailed investigation and determined that the relocation was indeed necessary to improve safety and traffic efficiency. However, the OCR emphasized that any proposed changes must ensure that the relocation did not interfere with existing railroad operations or create new safety concerns. The OCR required both the city and the railroad company to collaborate on the funding and construction of the new crossing and associated safety measures.
Significance: This case highlights the OCR's role in balancing infrastructure development and safety concerns. It also shows how local government can petition the OCR for changes to railroad crossings and how the OCR oversees the process to ensure that changes do not create additional problems.
2. In re Petition of Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) for Improvement of a Railroad Crossing (2013)
Key Issue: The request for improvements to an existing highway-railroad crossing to enhance safety features.
Background: The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) petitioned the OCR for the improvement of a railroad crossing along a state highway that had a history of safety incidents. The department recommended installing better signaling systems, including gates, lights, and other warning devices to reduce the number of accidents at the crossing. The railroad company involved was initially resistant, citing concerns about the costs and operational disruptions.
Ruling: After reviewing data on accident rates and the proposed safety improvements, the OCR agreed with WisDOT's request. The OCR ordered the railroad company to install the recommended safety measures, noting that the public safety concerns outweighed the operational issues raised by the railroad. The OCR also ruled that a cost-sharing agreement would be put in place between WisDOT and the railroad company to fund the safety upgrades.
Significance: This case demonstrates the OCR's authority to compel railroad companies to improve safety at crossings, even in cases where railroad companies may be reluctant to invest in costly upgrades. It also reflects the collaborative process between state agencies and private entities to ensure public safety.
3. In re Petition of Village of Weston for the Closure of a Railroad Crossing (2015)
Key Issue: The closure of a railroad crossing to improve safety and reduce unnecessary risks.
Background: The Village of Weston filed a petition to close a railroad crossing that was located near a residential area. The village argued that the crossing posed a significant safety risk because of its proximity to a heavily trafficked intersection and a lack of sufficient safety measures. The village proposed building a new crossing at a more appropriate location, where improvements in visibility and warning systems could be made.
Ruling: The OCR determined that the proposed closure was in the public interest, as it would reduce the risk of accidents at the crossing. However, the OCR required that the village and the railroad collaborate on a funding plan to improve the new crossing and ensure that the surrounding infrastructure could accommodate the changes. The closure was approved, but the railroad was instructed to maintain its responsibility for the safety of the remaining crossings in the area.
Significance: This case demonstrates the OCR's oversight role in managing railroad crossings and its ability to make decisions that prioritize public safety, even when that involves closure of crossings. The case also emphasizes the need for collaboration between local governments and railroads in the planning and financing of such changes.
4. In re Dispute Between City of Milwaukee and Railroad Company Over Crossing Maintenance (2017)
Key Issue: Disagreement between a city and a railroad company over the maintenance responsibility for a crossing.
Background: The City of Milwaukee and a major railroad company were involved in a dispute over who was responsible for maintaining the safety features at a particular railroad crossing. The city argued that the railroad company should cover the costs for maintaining the crossing's signal system and barriers, while the railroad company contended that the city's maintenance of the surrounding road infrastructure should include the crossing’s safety features.
Ruling: The OCR intervened to resolve the dispute, clarifying the legal responsibilities of both parties. It determined that under state regulations, the railroad company was responsible for maintaining the railroad tracks and the associated safety mechanisms at the crossing, but that the city would bear responsibility for any roadway-related infrastructure. The OCR ordered both parties to negotiate a shared responsibility agreement for the maintenance of the crossing.
Significance: This case highlights the OCR’s role in resolving disputes between municipalities and railroad companies regarding infrastructure maintenance. It also underscores the complex legal framework that governs the shared responsibilities between local governments and private companies in managing railroad crossings.
5. In re Petition of Railroads for Grade Separation at a Major Crossing (2020)
Key Issue: The proposal to build an overpass or underpass to eliminate a level railroad crossing.
Background: A major railroad crossing in Wisconsin, located near a busy industrial area, posed significant safety risks due to frequent accidents. The railroads involved petitioned the OCR to approve a grade separation project, which would involve the construction of an overpass or underpass to eliminate the need for vehicles and trains to intersect at the same level. The railroads argued that the project would enhance both safety and efficiency for both freight and passenger services.
Ruling: The OCR approved the grade separation project but imposed strict requirements regarding environmental impact assessments, cost-sharing agreements, and safety audits. The OCR also insisted that the project include access for emergency vehicles and that the construction process would not disrupt local communities. The OCR also established a timeline for project completion, with periodic progress reports from the railroads and local government.
Significance: This case illustrates the OCR’s ability to authorize large infrastructure projects aimed at enhancing public safety while balancing the interests of railroads, local governments, and the public. It also demonstrates the OCR's role in overseeing complex projects that involve multiple stakeholders and regulatory requirements.
Conclusion
The Office of the Commissioner of Railroads (OCR) in Wisconsin plays an essential role in regulating the safety, infrastructure, and operations of railroad crossings and related issues. The cases highlighted here show that the OCR is involved in a wide range of activities, from safety improvements at crossings to resolving disputes over maintenance and jurisdictional responsibilities.
The OCR’s role is critical in ensuring public safety, mediating disputes, and facilitating infrastructure improvements that involve both railroad companies and local governments. By overseeing the regulatory process and ensuring that both public and private entities comply with safety and operational standards, the OCR helps to maintain a well-functioning and safe transportation network in Wisconsin.
RELATED Blog
comments