49 C.F.R. § 240.1
Purpose and scope
(a) The purpose of this part is to ensure that only qualified persons operate a locomotive or train.
(b) This part prescribes minimum Federal safety standards for the eligibility, training, testing, certification and monitoring of all locomotive engineers to whom it applies. This part does not restrict a railroad from adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent requirements not inconsistent with this part.
(c) The locomotive engineer certification requirements prescribed in this part apply to any person who meets the definition of locomotive engineer contained in § 240.7, regardless of the fact that the person may have a job classification title other than that of locomotive engineer.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1996–2025 · leading case: Starling v. Union Pac. R.R., 203 F.R.D. 468 (D. Kan. 2001).
Starling v. Union Pac. R.R., 203 F.R.D. 468 (D. Kan. 2001). “49 C.F.R. § 240.1 (b). One of the regulations provides: “It shall be unlawful to .”
Bhd. of Locomotive Engi v. FRA, 972 F.3d 83 (D.C. Cir. 2020). “See 49 C.F.R. §§ 240.1 , 242.1. Those regulatory requirements address such matters as the “eligibility, training, testing, certification and monitoring” of engineers and conductors.”
Norfolk S. Ry. Co. v. Zeagler, 748 S.E.2d 846 (Ga. 2013). “See 49 CFR § 240.1 . But Zeagler was a conductor, not an engineer.”
Daniels v. Union Pac. R.R., 530 F.3d 936 (D.C. Cir. 2008). “, 49 C.F.R. §§ 240.1 , 240.101, and, regardless of differences among the individual rail *938 roads’ programs, all railroads must “employ standard methods for identifying qualified locomotive engineers and monitoring their performance,” 56 Fed.”
Diehl v. CSX Transp., Inc., 349 F. Supp. 3d 487 (W.D. Pa. 2018). “" 49 C.F.R. § 240.1 (b). However, in this case, Plaintiff's Complaint does not specify that its claims are based only on failure to train locomotive engineers; instead, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a failure to train employees generally.”
Sheppard v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 357 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (E.D. Mo. 2005). “Whether failure to train allegations are preempted Last, defendant argues that plaintiffs claim n, failure to train, allegations are preempted by FRSA and controlling federal regulations, 49 CFR § 240.1 . In response, plaintiff cites Mr.”
State v. Wisconsin Cent. Transp. Corp., 546 N.W.2d 206 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “The section of regulations governing engineers, 49 C.F.R. § 240.1 (a), states: The purpose of this part is to ensure that only qualified persons operate a locomotive or train.”
Carpenter v. Mineta, 432 F.3d 1029 (9th Cir. 2005). “49 C.F.R. §§ 240.1 , 240.101. With respect to new engineer candidates, the regulations require a course of training as well as success on both knowledge and skills tests before a railroad may issue a certification.”
Smith v. Fed. R.R. Admin., 398 F. App'x 601 (D.C. Cir. 2010). “The FRA adopted a certification scheme for identifying individuals qualified to operate locomotives, 49 C.F.R. § 240.1 , and prescribed minimum federal safety standards, id.”
Perry v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Colo. 2021). “” 49 C.F.R. § 240.1 . The parties agree that Tri-State is a “plant railroad.”
Walker v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Or. 2024). “The Court has reviewed 49 C.F.R. § 240.121 (c)-(e) and Appendix F and agrees with Judge Russo.”
U.S. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Minnesota 2024). “49 C.F.R. § 240.1 et seq. (engineers); 49 C.”
— 49 C.F.R. § 240.1(c) — 1 case
Perry v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Colo. 2021). “” 49 C.F.R. § 240.1 . The parties agree that Tri-State is a “plant railroad.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.