U.S. Code » Title 49 » Subtitle SUBTITLE V— RAIL PROGRAMS › Part PART A— SAFETY › Chapter CHAPTER 201— GENERAL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF SAFETY

49 U.S.C. § 20137

Event recorders

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 49 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Definition.—In this section, “event recorder” means a device that—(1) records train speed, hot box detection, throttle position, brake application, brake operations, and any other function the Secretary of Transportation considers necessary to record to assist in monitoring the safety of train operation, such as time and signal indication; and(2) is designed to resist tampering.(b)Regulations and Orders.—Not later than December 22, 1989, the Secretary shall prescribe regulations and issue orders that may be necessary to enhance safety by requiring that a train be equipped with an event recorder not later than one year after the regulations are prescribed and the orders are issued. However, if the Secretary finds it is impracticable to equip trains within that one-year period, the Secretary may extend the period to a date that is not later than 18 months after the regulations are prescribed and the orders are issued.(Pub. L. 103–272, § 1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 875.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

20137

45:431(m).

Oct. 16, 1970, Pub. L. 91–458, 84 Stat. 971, § 202(m); added June 22, 1988, Pub. L. 100–342, § 10, 102 Stat. 629.

In subsection (b), the words “Not later than December 22, 1989” are substituted for “within 18 months after June 22, 1988” for clarity. The words “may extend the period to a date that is not later than 18 months after the regulations are prescribed and the orders are issued” are substituted for “may extend the deadline for compliance with such requirement, but in no event shall such deadline be extended past 18 months after such rules, regulations, orders, and standards are issued” to eliminate unnecessary words.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2007 · leading case: United Transp. Union v. Foster, 205 F.3d 851 (5th Cir. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Transp. Union v. Foster, 205 F.3d 851 (5th Cir. 2000). “See 49 U.S.C. § 20137 . Pursuant to this requirement, the FRA has promulgated regulations specifically covering the requirements for an event recorder.”
Vigil v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 521 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (D.N.M. 2007). “" 49 U.S.C. § 20137 . [4] Defendants refer to the lead locomotive as AM-195, and the second locomotive as AM-23.”
Vigil v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 521 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (D.N.M. 2007). “” 49 U.S.C. § 20137 . .Defendants refer to the lead locomotive as AM-195, and the second locomotive as AM-23.”
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.