[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 166 (Monday, August 28, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44457-44463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-21143]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 229
[FRA Docket No. RSGC-2, Notice No. 8]
RIN 2130-AA80
Locomotive Visibility; Minimum Standards for Auxiliary Lights
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA proposes to amend the locomotive safety standards to
increase train visibility. This action requires that certain
locomotives be equipped with auxiliary lights to enable motorists,
railroad employees and pedestrians to recognize approaching trains at a
greater distance. The proposed rule would require that locomotives
operated over public highway-rail crossings at greater speeds than 20
miles per hour be equipped with auxiliary lights.
DATES: Written comments. Comments must be received by October 27, 1995.
Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent
possible without incurring additional expense or delay.
Public hearing. If requested by September 27, 1995, FRA will
schedule a public hearing to receive oral comments from any interested
party.
ADDRESSES: Written comments. Comments should identify the docket and
notice numbers, and must be submitted in triplicate to the Docket
Clerk, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 400
Seventh Street, S.W., Room 8201, Washington, D.C. 20590. Parties who
want notice that FRA has received their comments should include a
stamped, self-addressed postcard with their filing. The Docket Clerk
will indicate on the postcard the date of receipt and will return the
card to the addressee. Written comments will be available for
examination before and after the closing date for comments during
regular business hours at the above address.
Public hearing. FRA will hold a public hearing on this proposed
rule if requested by a party to this rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gordon Davids, Bridge Engineer, Office
of Safety, FRA, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20590
(telephone: 202-366-9186); Grady Cothen, Jr., Deputy Associate
Administrator for Safety Standards, FRA, 400 Seventh Street SW.,
Washington, D.C. 20590 (telephone: 202-366-0897); or Kyle M. Mulhall,
Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20590 (telephone: 202-366-0635).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 3, 1993, FRA published an
interim rule (58 FR 6899, codified at 49 C.F.R. 229.133), with request
for comments, concerning measures to enhance the visibility of
locomotives. The interim rule implemented mandates of section 14 of the
Amtrak Authorization and Development Act (Pub. L. 102-533). This
enabling legislation added a new subsection (u) to Sec. 202 of the
Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (FRSA) [45 U.S.C. 431(u)], to
address locomotive visibility. On July 5, 1994, Sec. 202(u) of the
FRSA, together with all the other general and permanent Federal
railroad safety laws, was simultaneously repealed, revised and
reenacted without substantive change, and recodified as positive law at
49 U.S.C. 20143. As recodified, the section now reads as follows:
Locomotive Visibility
(a) Definition.--In this section, ``locomotive visibility'' means
the enhancement of day and night visibility of the front end unit of a
train,
[[Page 44458]]
considering in particular the visibility and perspective of a driver of
a motor vehicle at a grade crossing.
(b) Interim Regulations.--Not later than December 31, 1992, the
Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe temporary regulations
identifying ditch, crossing, strobe, and oscillating lights as
temporary locomotive visibility measures and authorizing and
encouraging the installation and use of those lights. Subchapter II of
chapter 5 of title 5 does not apply to a temporary regulation or to an
amendment to a temporary regulation.
(c) Review of Regulations.--The Secretary shall review the
Secretary's regulations on locomotive visibility. Not later than
December 31, 1993, the Secretary shall complete the current research of
the Department of Transportation on locomotive visibility. In
conducting the review, the Secretary shall collect relevant information
from operational experience by rail carriers using enhanced visibility
measures.
(d) Regulatory Proceeding.--Not later than June 30, 1994, the
Secretary shall begin a regulatory proceeding to prescribe final
regulations requiring substantially enhanced locomotive visibility
measures. In the proceeding, the Secretary shall consider at least--
(1) Revisions to the existing locomotive headlight standards,
including standards for placement and intensity;
(2) Requiring the use of reflective material to enhance locomotive
visibility;
(3) Requiring the use of additional alerting lights, including
ditch, crossing, strobe, and oscillating lights;
(4) Requiring the use of auxiliary lights to enhance locomotive
visibility when viewed from the side;
(5) The effect of an enhanced visibility measure on the vision,
health, and safety of train crew members; and
(6) Separate standards for self-propelled, push-pull, and multi-
unit passenger operations without a dedicated head end locomotive.
(e) Final Regulations.--(1) Not later than June 30, 1995, the
Secretary shall prescribe final regulations requiring enhanced
locomotive visibility measures. The Secretary shall require that not
later than December 31, 1997, a locomotive not excluded from the
regulations be equipped with temporary visibility measures under
subsection (b) of this section or the visibility measures the final
regulations require.
(2) In prescribing regulations under paragraph (1) of this
subsection, the Secretary may exclude a category of trains or rail
operations from a specific visibility requirement if the Secretary
decides the exclusion is in the public interest and is consistent with
rail safety, including grade-crossing safety.
(3) A locomotive equipped with temporary visibility measures
prescribed under subsection (b) of this section when final regulations
are prescribed under paragraph (1) of this subsection is deemed to be
complying with the final regulations for 4 years after the final
regulations are prescribed.
The interim rule was revised in response to comments and published
on May 13, 1994 (59 FR 24960). The revision broadened the permissible
dimensions for placement of ditch lights, crossing lights and strobe
lights, and broadened and redefined the range of frequencies for
flashing lights.
The interim rules designate ditch lights, crossing lights, strobe
lights and oscillating lights as interim locomotive visibility
measures. All locomotives not excluded from the final regulations must
be equipped by December 31, 1997, with either the interim visibility
lighting arrangements or the arrangements mandated by the final
regulation. Locomotives that comply with the interim rule or its
amendments are deemed to comply with any final rule for four years
after the final rule's issuance.
FRA Study of Auxiliary Lights
FRA's Office of Research and Development, through the Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center, has studied the impact of
auxiliary lights as alerting devices to improve locomotive visibility.
A copy of the final report will be placed in the docket of this
rulemaking.
As part of this study, FRA initially evaluated various lighting
systems, paint schemes, and reflective materials. Four of the alerting
light systems were selected for further study: standard locomotive
headlights and crossing, ditch, and strobe lights. FRA evaluated the
lights for compliance with FRA's interim advisory standards, cost and
reliability, and conducted field tests on their ability to increase an
approaching train's visibility.
Preliminary results are showing that the addition of auxiliary
lights significantly increases train visibility compared to use of
standard headlights alone. Results indicate a 10 to 20 percent increase
in the distance an approaching train can be recognized. Tests also
suggest that motorists are better able to predict the time it takes for
an approaching train to enter a crossing. Limited data collected from
three railroads participating in the study suggest that accident rates
drop significantly when auxiliary lights are used. Further, the
research provides clues that appear helpful in distinguishing among
candidate auxiliary lights. These findings are further discussed below.
After review, FRA has found no basis for changing current
requirements for placement and intensity of locomotive headlights. The
headlight serves its purpose without blinding other people approaching
the right-of-way. As discussed below, when augmented by auxiliary
alerting lights, the headlight becomes a part of the unique light
triangle that will make approaching trains more recognizable to
motorists.
FRA is continuing to review the use of auxiliary lights to enhance
side visibility of locomotives. Displaying a distinct pattern is key to
making the side of a locomotive more readily recognizable in the dark.
Use of retro-reflective materials (further discussed below) appears to
be the most promising approach to increasing the visibility of the
sides of rail equipment.
Section Analysis
1. Three-Light Triangle: Sec. 229.125(d)
FRA believes that a uniform light configuration on locomotives will
help the public become familiar with and quickly recognize the
appearance of an approaching locomotive. A configuration of three
front-mounted lights (defined in the interim rule, together with the
headlight, as ``ditch lights'' or ``crossing lights'') is the most
common system adopted by the railroad industry since the issuance of
the first interim rule in 1993. Those three lights form a triangle with
one major dimension (base or vertical axis) of at least 60 inches.
The normal human eye can discern two objects as separate when the
objects are spaced to form a visual angle of approximately one-half of
one degree. When the lights are seen as separate, the observer can
better estimate the speed of an approaching train because as the
locomotive moves closer the lights will appear to move further apart. A
space of 60 inches between lights causes the lights to appear separate
at 572 feet from the observer. Beyond 572 feet the lights are commonly
seen as one. This distance corresponds to an approach time of 13
seconds for a train moving at 30 miles per hour, or 6.5 seconds for a
train moving at 60 miles per hour.
Given the prevalence and practicality of the three-light triangle
system, the desire for a uniform appearance of an approaching
locomotive, and the physical advantages of this system, FRA believes it
to be the best lighting system to accomplish the purpose of this rule.
[[Page 44459]]
The dimensions proposed for the three-light triangle are the same
as those specified in the interim rule as revised on May 13, 1994.
Those dimensions were prescribed as the result of comments made on the
first interim rule of February 3, 1993. They are functionally the same,
but the second interim rule permits more flexibility in light placement
on locomotives to accommodate various locomotive configurations and
placement of other vital appliances.
Since the second interim rule was issued, FRA has received no
negative comments and no indication of problems with the prescribed
light placement. If any problems have arisen with these prescribed
dimensions, FRA would be most interested in knowing the nature of the
problem, and any suggested alternatives that would maintain the
effectiveness of visibility devices.
The 36-inch minimum height requirement will permit maintenance of
the 60-inch vertical dimension on locomotives with the headlight
mounted in a low front hood. This height requirement also aids the
observer's sight distance. The maximum vertical curve recommended by
the American Railway Engineering Association for main track has a rate
of change of grade of 0.2 percent per 100 feet. On this vertical curve,
a light three feet above the track will be visible to an observer at a
distance of 1,095 feet, provided the observer's eyes are three feet
above the track. A reduction in height of one foot, of either the
observer or the light, reduces the sight distance by approximately 100
feet.
One comment to the first interim rule requested a lower height
above the rail for lights on cab control cars in suburban passenger
service. FRA believes that an inflexible requirement to place lights on
cab control cars or other multiple unit locomotives as defined in this
regulation at a height of 36 inches might lead to a reduction in the
integrity of the car body structure at this critical location. Such
reduced structural integrity could increase the risk of injury to the
occupants of the equipment in the event of an accident. The proposed
final rule would therefore permit auxiliary lights to be mounted at
heights down to 24 inches above the rail on equipment that would not
readily accommodate a higher placement.
However, the lower, 24-inch minimum height for multiple unit
locomotives and cab control cars is not suitable for general railroad
service, owing to the reduced visibility on vertical curves, and
susceptibility to damage from snow and foreign material away from
commuter lines. FRA therefore believes that the minimum height of 36
inches for auxiliary lights should be retained for all other
applications.
Horizontal orientation of the auxiliary lights should also be
reasonably uniform in order to ensure recognition. FRA has selected the
``crossing light'' configuration (focused within plus or minus 15
degrees of a line parallel to the centerline of the locomotive) in lieu
of the extreme ``ditch light'' configuration as described in the
grandfathering rule (turned outward up to 45 degrees). In the extreme
ditch light configuration, there appears to be a risk that the
auxiliary lights might affect the night vision of motorists on parallel
roadways.
Research on locomotive conspicuity has noted that the alerting
lights meeting the criteria of the interim rule are considerably higher
in effective candela than lights used for similar purposes in aviation
and marine service. In addition, it was noted that a ditch light
application with the lights aligned outwardly might produce glare
affecting motorist vision. Presumably in light of similar
considerations, railroads applying auxiliary alerting lights have
generally opted for alignment directly down the railroad or inward
alignment at about 1 degree (``crosseyed''). FRA specifically requests
comment as to whether the final rule should contain more severe
restrictions than the 15-degree latitude provided in the interim rule
and this notice.
FRA also requests comment as to whether a dimmer feature should be
required for auxiliary lights similar to the dimmer used on headlights,
the minimum and/or maximum candela that should result, and, if a dimmer
is required, when use of the feature might be warranted. In addition,
FRA requests comment as to whether a maximum luminous intensity should
be specified for auxiliary alerting lights.
The interim rule and the proposed rule provide a minimum intensity
requirement of 200,000 candela for each auxiliary light. The criterion
assumes steady-state operation. Field observations suggest that current
alerting light pulsing systems provide more than adequate effective
candela; however, research conducted to date evaluated only strobe
lights for effective intensity in a pulsing or flashing mode. Should a
separate effective intensity requirement be stated in the final rule
for systems operating in the pulse mode? If so, what are the
appropropriate standard and test procedure?
FRA proposes to permit use of either the steady-state or pulsing
auxiliary lights, drawing permissible features from both the ``ditch
lights'' and ``crossing lights'' as described in the interim
requirements.
It should be noted that nomenclature for auxiliary lights is not
standard. For example, most non-pulsing installations referred to by
railroads as ``ditch lights'' have, in practice, been aligned within 15
degrees of centerline and would therefore meet FRA's proposed
requirements for permanent auxiliary lights. This proposed rule does
not elect a single option from among the configurations that railroads
continue to evaluate. Rather, it proposes a minimum standardization of
placement and alignment of the two auxiliary lights that, with the
locomotive headlight, form the distinct triangle.
FRA has considered the use of oscillating lights and strobe lights
for inclusion in this section. Both light systems offer significant
advantages but have unique drawbacks. An oscillating light can provide
a startling effect when the light rapidly reflects off nearby objects,
fog, or snow. However, in general, oscillating lights are costly and
difficult to maintain. Oscillating lights have often been used
individually, a configuration inconsistent with the triangular
signature common in European rail.
Desirable effects can also be achieved with pulsating strobe
lights, particularly those lights operated in pairs. However, extensive
use of strobe and oscillating-type lights on emergency vehicles has
reduced their usefulness as a distinct warning of an approaching train.
Further, strobe lights can tend to wash out against a light background
and may not compete well for attention in a nighttime environment with
a variety of light sources.
Research in support of this proceeding indicates that crossing
lights and ditch lights--the auxiliary lights most widely used by U.S.
railroads--also appear to perform well under both experimental
conditions and in revenue service. Experimental field tests compared
the performance of a lone headlight with combinations of a headlight
and each of the following: (i) pulsing ``crossing lights'' that were
aligned straight down the railroad, (ii) steady burning ``ditch
lights'' that were outwardly aligned at 15 degrees, and (iii) dual
strobe lights mounted on the top of the locomotive. All three types of
auxiliary lights outperformed the lone headlight by significantly
increasing the distance a train can be detected and improving an
observer's ability to estimate a train's arrival time at the crossing.
For detection distance, the crossing light performed best, followed
[[Page 44460]]
by the ditch and strobe lights. With respect to estimation of time of
arrival, the crossing lights were judged to result in the smallest
estimation errors for actual arrival time intervals between 7 and 22
seconds. However, the ditch lights clearly aided estimation of arrival,
as well.1
\1\ In the field tests, observers wore headphones to mask noise
from the oncoming locomotive. FRA has conducted separate analyses
that indicate locomotive horns provide a very powerful (though not
always sufficient) warning to motorists that the train is present
and its arrival at the crossing is imminent. FRA recognizes that
some overlap may exist between the two warning systems; however, to
the extent this overlap may be beneficial in modifying risky
behavior, its potential should be exploited. The actual service
experience tends to confirm the possibility that such an effect may
exist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Volpe Center gathered limited data from Norfolk Southern,
Conrail, and CalTrans (California) comparing accident experience of
locomotives equipped with crossing lights to locomotives equipped with
a headlight alone. These data suggest that the use of crossing lights
may result in a greater than 50-percent reduction in accident rates.
Although these trials lasted from only nine to twenty-four months, and
some of the accident reduction may have resulted from a ``novelty
effect'' (an initial impact that wanes as risk-taking motorists become
accustomed to the new lights), there is no reason to believe that there
will not be substantial and continuing benefits from use of auxiliary
lights.
All of the service applications examined by the Volpe Center
involved pulsing auxiliary lights, and the experimental field tests
potentially relevant to this issue involved a confounding variable
(angle of alignment). Accordingly, no empirically-based comparisons can
be made at this time between lights that pulse (alternately flash) on
approach to a crossing and those that burn steadily. Yet FRA is
required to issue a rule that would require that by December 31, 1997,
locomotives be equipped with a form of auxiliary lights. In order to
develop additional information that may later provide a basis for
distinguishing between steady burning and alternately pulsing
arrangements, FRA has requested that Association of American Railroads
(AAR) conduct a further study under which two or more major railroads
would equip portions of their fleets used in the same service with
steady and pulsing lights. In order to eliminate transient effects, the
study would follow the two matched fleets for a period of approximately
three years. The progress of this study will be tracked on an annual
basis, and at the conclusion of the study, FRA will review the data to
determine if a statistically significant difference can be discerned
between the effectiveness of steady and flashing lights. The results of
the study should provide a factual basis for determining whether
further refinement of the rule is appropriate and, if so, the degree of
urgency associated with any such change.
2. Flash Rates: Sec. 229.125(e)
Subsection (e) provides that auxiliary lights may be illumined
continuously or may be arranged to flash on approach to a highway-rail
grade crossing. If flashing lights are used, the rate must be not fewer
than 40 and not more than 180 per minute, as provided in the second
interim rule. FRA has received no negative comments regarding the range
of flash rates permitted for locomotive visibility lights in the second
interim rule. The rates are constrained by the need for visibility but
also the need to avoid a ``flicker vertigo'' effect on train crew
members.
FRA proposes to leave control of flashing lights to the discretion
of the railroad. Depending on their operations, some railroads might
consider it advisable to interconnect the horn and lighting controls to
provide joint activation when approaching a crossing, but that question
probably need not be addressed in a regulation.
3. Operation of Auxiliary Lights: Sec. 229.125(f)
Subsection (f) would require operation of auxiliary lights for a
period of at least 20 seconds prior to arrival of the locomotive at the
crossing. This is the same minimum period of warning utilized for
automated warning systems at public highway-rail grade crossings (see,
e.g., 49 CFR 234.225). Railroads using locomotives with flashing lights
would not be required to flash the lights in all operations, but the
auxiliary lights would be required to be illumined for at least 20
seconds prior to the arrival of the locomotive.
FRA specifically requests comment on whether allowance should be
made for not illuminating auxiliary lights under certain circumstances
for the safety of motorists, railroad employees working in the area, or
others. FRA believes that any such exception should be sufficiently
objective in nature to avoid controversy subsequent to a grade crossing
accident regarding the appropriateness of the decision not to use the
auxiliary lights.
4. Other Uses of Auxiliary Lights: Sec. 229.125(g)
Subsection (g) authorizes use of auxiliary lights for operations at
lower speeds over highway-rail grade crossings. Railroads are, in fact,
utilizing auxiliary lights for lower-speed movements. However,
circumstances may exist where use of the lights may affect night vision
of people along the railroad, outweighing the limited value of the
lights in preventing highway-rail grade crossing accidents in areas of
low speed rail operations. The proposed rule authorizes use of
auxiliary lights along the railroad between grade crossings. Auxiliary
lights offer promise for gaining the attention of trespassers on rail
rights-of-way who may be struck by trains. Although it can be strongly
argued that the railroads owe no duty of care to these people, it can
be hoped that the attention-getting light triangle may discourage
trespassing.
FRA does not believe that requiring continuous operation of
auxiliary lights should be mandated. Circumstances differ widely among
railroad operating environments, and railroads require the flexibility
to adopt policies adequately suited to these environments. Railroads
may wish to extinguish auxiliary lights when the headlight is dimmed
under existing operating rules. Rule 5.9 of the General Code of
Operating Rules, for instance, requires that the headlight be dimmed at
stations and yards where switching is done, when the engine is stopped
close behind another engine, when passing another train, and under
specified circumstances.
5. Defective en Route: Sec. 229.125(h)
Subsection (h) permits a lead locomotive with one defective
auxiliary light to proceed to a point where repairs can be made. FRA
believes this is a reasonable accommodation, given the low risk of an
accident at any given time and the ready availability of standard lamps
at railroad facilities along the way. If both auxiliary lights are out,
Sec. 229.9 (movement of non-complying locomotives) would apply, which
would ordinarily require that the locomotive be switched to a trailing
position or be operated at less than 20 miles per hour. It should be
noted that the requirement for auxiliary lights applies only to a lead
locomotive.
6. Grandfathering: Sec. 229.133
The interim provisions on auxiliary lights are contained in 49 CFR
229.133. Subsection (c), which makes use of auxiliary lights elective
during the period prior to December 31, 1997, would be repealed on that
date.
[[Page 44461]]
The interim provisions identify four alerting light arrangements
that FRA believed would increase locomotive visibility. First, ditch
lights, which are composed of two white lights focused within 45
degrees of the longitudinal centerline of the locomotive. Second,
strobe lights, which are two white stroboscopic lights that flash at a
rate between one pulse every 1.0 to 1.3 seconds. Third, crossing
lights, which are two white standard lights that flash at the same rate
as the strobes and are focused within 15 degrees of the longitudinal
centerline of the locomotive. And the final alerting lights system, an
oscillating light, which is composed of one white light that casts a
moving beam in circular shapes in front of the locomotive. These
alerting light systems will be ``grandfathered'' and considered in
temporary compliance with any final rule.
By law, ``grandfathered'' auxiliary lights installed before the
final rule is issued may continue in use for four years from the date
the final rule is issued. FRA encourages early installation of
auxiliary lights.
Related Issues
Other Light Systems
FRA believes that the public will soon become accustomed to the
appearance of the triangular light pattern at the front of locomotives.
The value of this standardization is increased if the triangle's base
is uniform along the lower front portion of the locomotive, rather than
the top (as with dual strobe light installations). The limited number
of locomotives equipped exclusively with strobe lights or oscillating
lights could eventually present a hazard to motorists and others who
could draw false visual clues from the lack of a triangular light
pattern. Nothing in this proposed rule would prohibit the use of such
additional lights should the operating railroad so desire, but their
use would not meet the requirements of the proposed rule.
Reflective Materials
The enabling legislation requires that the Secretary consider the
use of reflective materials to enhance locomotive visibility. Research
has shown that the frontal visibility of a locomotive displaying a
headlight is not affected by reflective material or distinctive colors.
The headlight is visible at a far greater distance than any light
reflected from the front of the locomotive.
Analysis of the 4,240 highway-rail grade crossing accidents
reported to FRA in 1993 shows that the lead locomotive of a train
struck the motor vehicle in 3,171 of the accidents. The motor vehicle
struck the lead locomotive in 664 accidents. In the remaining 405
accidents, the motor vehicle struck the train at a point behind the
lead locomotive.
This information suggests that enhancing the visibility of the
front of the train could affect up to 90 percent of crossing accidents.
The effect of increasing the visibility of the side of the train does
not have as clearly defined a potential to reduce accidents.
Nevertheless, FRA continues to conduct research, including analysis of
recently designed retro-reflective materials and evaluation of the
accident experience of car fleets equipped with retro-reflective
material. FRA is required by other legislation to consider the use of
retro-reflective materials on railroad cars as well as locomotives, and
will address the issue in a separate proceeding. See 49 U.S.C. 20148,
Pub. L. 103-440, Sec. 212 (Nov. 2, 1994). As soon as sufficient
information becomes available to support a decision on whether to place
reflective material on cars and locomotives, FRA will act accordingly.
Such action might take the form of a proposal to amend this regulation
before any rulemaking affecting railroad cars.
Applicability: Steam Locomotives; Locomotives Used Exclusively off the
General System; and Private Grade Crossings
This proposal would amend Part 229 of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations, which applies, in general, to railroads in the general
system and only to non-steam locomotives. FRA believes that, as a
general rule, steam locomotives are used with relatively less frequency
or at lower speeds than non-steam locomotives. Equipping steam
locomotives with alerting lights would likely cost more per unit, and
some steam operators would likely view the modification as detracting
from the historic authenticity of this antique equipment. FRA presently
has insufficient specific information indicating that safety would
benefit from application of auxiliary lights to steam units. However,
in light of the broad statutory mandate, FRA reserves the right to
require application of auxiliary lights to such units in the final
rule.
In 1992, FRA reviewed its policy regarding tourist, scenic and
excursion railroads that transport passengers on lines separate from
the general system of rail transportation. While in the past FRA has
usually limited its exercise of jurisdiction over passenger operations
to those on the general system, FRA determined that public safety
required a uniform floor of regulation for this growing segment of the
railroad marketplace. Only those railroads deemed ``insular'' were
excluded from this exercise of jurisdiction; however, several existing
sets of regulations, including Part 229, do not apply to passenger
railroads that are not part of the general rail system. Since a major
criterion of non-insular status is the presence of a public highway-
rail grade crossing, the issue is presented in this proceeding whether
these non-general system railroads should be required to equip their
locomotives with auxiliary alerting lights.
Recently, FRA determined that all railroads with automated warning
devices at public highway-rail crossings should be subject to new
regulations governing the inspection, testing and maintenance of these
``grade crossing signals'' (59 FR 50086; September 30, 1994). The
provision of the instant proposal that would exclude locomotives that
do not operate at greater than 20 miles per hour would render the
proposal inapplicable to many non-steam locomotives owned and operated
by non-insular passenger railroads off the general system. However, in
a minority of cases the proposed rule might require application of
auxiliary lights. There may be reasonable basis for excluding some or
all of these locomotives. For example, excursion service is often
provided seasonally and on a limited basis. On some small passenger
railroads, crossings may be less numerous or less heavily used by
highway traffic. In other cases, service may be provided only in the
daytime (when, according to experimental data, auxiliary lights may be
less effective in gaining the attention of motorists).
The statute permits FRA to exclude categories of operations if the
exclusion is in the public interest and consistent with safety.
Although the statute does not expressly authorize use of cost/benefit
analysis to make the findings justifying an exclusion, FRA has applied
similar statutory language to consider effectiveness and cost impacts
to enlighten the agency's deliberations. FRA solicits comment on the
issue of steam locomotives and locomotives used exclusively off the
general system. FRA has specifically invited the Tourist Railroad
Association (TRAIN) to address the question on behalf of its member
organizations.
FRA is also concerned with the safety of private grade crossings.
The proposed rule requires use of auxiliary lights only at public grade
crossings. Railroads clearly have an interest in reducing
[[Page 44462]]
accidents at private crossings and therefore may elect on their own to
use auxiliary lights at such locations. FRA, however, requests comments
on whether the agency should require use of auxiliary lights at all
highway-rail grade crossings.
Regulatory Impact
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This proposed rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing
policies and procedures and is considered ``nonsignificant'' under
Executive Order 12866. It is also considered to be not significant
under DOT policies and procedures. See 44 FR 11034.
Although the rule is ``nonsignificant,'' FRA nonetheless has
prepared a regulatory evaluation addressing the economic impact of the
rule. This regulatory evaluation has been placed in the docket and is
available for public inspection and copying during normal business
hours in Room 8201, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 400 Seventh Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Copies may also be obtained by submitting
a written request to the FRA Docket Clerk at the above address.
The evaluation found costs and benefits associated with the
proposed rule calculated for a twenty-year period using the seven
percent discount rate required by federal regulatory evaluation
guidelines. FRA expects twenty-year auxiliary light installation and
maintenance costs, which the railroad industry would not incur in the
absence of the proposed rule, to total between $87 million and $106
million. The lower estimate is based on a scenario in which all future
auxiliary lights are steady beam. The higher estimate is based on a
scenario in which all future auxiliary lights are pulsing. Information
available to FRA suggests that about 7,946 locomotives are currently
equipped with auxiliary lights that comply with the proposed rule.
About 52.84 percent of these locomotives have pulsing lights. The
remaining 47.16 percent have steady beams. Assuming the industry
continues to install auxiliary lights in this proportion, FRA expects
costs to reach approximately $97 million over the next twenty years.
Although specifications for pulsing and steady beam lights differ,
data are not available to establish that one light system is the more
effective. Assuming both are equally effective, to justify incurring
$97 million in costs, auxiliary lights must provide a benefit of
preventing an average of at least 11 accidents annually. FRA estimates
that auxiliary lights will prevent approximately 6,300 accidents
(involving 1,493 fatalities and 3,056 injuries) valued at $2.424
billion over twenty years. Analysis indicates this accident reduction
will almost certainly be achieved, and probably exceeded, by using
auxiliary lights.
Costs and benefits associated with the industry voluntary in-
service tests are not quantified in this analysis. FRA recognizes that
participating railroads will incur data collection costs. However,
given the permissive nature of the in-service tests, we cannot
determine the level of participation or the magnitude of costs which
the industry will incur. Nevertheless, safety benefits resulting from
the knowledge gained should far outweigh costs incurred by the
participants. Including test costs would not change the outcome of this
analysis.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires a review of rules to assess their impact on small entities,
unless the Secretary certifies that a final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
It is certified that this proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not require information collection; therefore, it is
not necessary to estimate the public reporting burden for purposes of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Environmental Impact
FRA has evaluated these regulations in accordance with its
procedures for ensuring full consideration of the environmental impact
of FRA actions, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other environmental statutes, Executive
Orders, and DOT Order 5610.1c. It has been determined that this rule
will not have any effect on the quality of the environment.
Federalism Implications
This rule will not have a substantial effect on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 12612, a
Federalism Assessment is not necessary.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106 (formerly codified at 45 U.S.C. 434),
issuance of this regulation preempts any State law, rule, regulation,
order, or standard covering the same subject matter, except for a
provision directed at a local safety hazard if that provision is
consistent with this rule and does not impose an undue burden on
interstate commerce.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 229
Railroad safety.
The Proposed Rule
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA proposes to amend Part 229,
Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 229--[AMENDED]
1. Revise the authority citation for Part 229 to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102-20103, 20110-20112, 20114, 20137,
20143, 20301-20303, 20306, 20701-20703, 21301-21302, 21304, 21306,
and 21311; 49 CFR 1.49 (c), (g) and (m).
2. Amend Sec. 229.125 by revising the section heading and by adding
paragraphs (d),(e),(f), (g) and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 229.125 Headlights and auxiliary lights.
* * * * *
(d) Effective December 31, 1997, each lead locomotive operated at a
speed greater than 20 miles per hour over one or more public highway-
rail crossings shall be equipped with operative auxiliary lights, in
addition to the headlight required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section. A locomotive equipped on [date of publication of final rule]
with auxiliary lights in conformance with Sec. 229.133 shall be deemed
to conform to the requirements of this section until [date four years
after date of publication of final rule]. Auxiliary lights shall be
composed as follows:
(1) Two white auxiliary lights shall be placed at the front of the
locomotive to form a triangle with the headlight.
(i) The auxiliary lights shall be at least 36 inches above the top
of the rail, except on MU locomotives and control cab locomotives where
such placement would compromise the integrity of the car body or be
otherwise impractical. Auxiliary lights on such MU locomotives and
control cab locomotives shall be at least 24 inches above the top of
the rail.
(ii) The auxiliary lights shall be spaced at least 36 inches apart
if the vertical distance from the headlight to the horizontal axis of
the auxiliary lights is 60 inches or more.
[[Page 44463]]
(iii) The auxiliary lights shall be spaced at least 60 inches apart
if the vertical distance from the headlight to the horizontal axis of
the auxiliary lights is less than 60 inches.
(2) Each auxiliary light shall produce at least 200,000 candela.
(3) The auxiliary lights shall be focused horizontally within 15
degrees of the longitudinal centerline of the locomotive.
(e) Auxiliary lights required by paragraph (d) of this section may
be arranged to burn steadily or flash on approach to a crossing. If the
auxiliary lights are arranged to flash, they shall flash alternately at
a rate of at least 40 flashes per minute and at most 180 flashes per
minute, for at least 20 seconds before the front of the train occupies
the crossing. The flashing feature may be activated automatically and
shall be capable of manual activation and deactivation by the
locomotive engineer.
(f) Auxiliary lights required by paragraph (d) of this section
shall be illuminated not less than 20 seconds before the locomotive
arrives at a public highway-rail grade crossing.
(g) For the safety of persons along the right of way, including
railroad employees and contractors--
(1) Railroads may elect to operate auxiliary lights when the speed
over the crossing is less than 20 miles per hour; and
(2) Railroads shall have the discretion to illuminate locomotive
auxiliary lights in other circumstances in addition to approaching a
public highway-rail grade crossing.
(h) When one required auxiliary light and the headlight of a
locomotive remain operative after the train has departed its initial
terminal, the locomotive may proceed as an equipped locomotive until
reaching the next point at which repairs to the inoperative light can
be made. If no required auxiliary light remains operative, the
locomotive may be moved only if the requirements of Sec. 229.9 are met.
Donald M. Itzkoff,
Deputy Federal Railroad Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-21143 Filed 8-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P