[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 6, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8881-8888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4838]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 229
[FRA Docket No. RSGC-2, Notice No. 10]
RIN 2130-AA80
Locomotive Visibility; Minimum Standards for Auxiliary Lights
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA amends 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
rule requires that locomotives operated over public highway-rail
crossings at greater speeds than 20 miles per hour be equipped with
auxiliary lights.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 6, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gordon Davids, Bridge Engineer, Office
of Safety, FRA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590
(telephone: 202-366-0507); Grady Cothen, Jr., Deputy Associate
Administrator for Safety Standards, FRA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,
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 August 28, 1995, FRA published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would change headlight regulations
for locomotives by requiring two auxiliary lights that would be placed
on the front of the locomotive to form a triangle with the headlight.
60 FR 44457. Publication of this final rule was required by section 14
of the Amtrak Authorization and Development Act (Pub. L. 102-533). This
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 locomotive
of a train, 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 multiple
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,
[[Page 8882]]
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.
After publication of the NPRM, FRA held a public hearing at the
request of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) and The American
Short Line Railroad Association (ASLRA). This hearing was held in
Washington, on November 28, 1995. FRA also extended the comment period
on the NPRM. FRA now responds to the comments concerning this
rulemaking.
FRA Study of Auxiliary Lights
FRA's Office of Research and Development, through the Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center (VNTSC), has studied the impact
of auxiliary lights as alerting devices to improve locomotive
visibility. A copy of the final report was 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 and for
cost and reliability and conducted field tests on their ability to
increase an approaching train's visibility.
The results were that the addition of auxiliary lights
significantly increased train visibility compared to the use of
standard headlights alone. Results indicated a 10 to 20 percent
increase in the distance an approaching train can be recognized. Tests
also indicated 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 suggested
that accident rates drop significantly when auxiliary lights are used.
The AAR dismisses FRA's findings on two grounds; one, that the
field tests did not adequately reproduce real conditions at highway-
rail grade crossings; and, two, that FRA failed to separate locomotives
that were and were not equipped with auxiliary lights when it
determined there was a drop in the accident rate after auxiliary lights
were installed on some locomotives.
FRA replies that the field tests were not intended to simulate real
conditions at highway-rail grade crossings. They were intended to
compare the responses of a selected group of subjects to the approach
of trains with several configurations of auxiliary lights, and a
control sample with no auxiliary lights. Real conditions at highway-
rail grade crossings involve so many variables that testing for all
possible conditions would not have been possible within the time and
resources available for this project. The tests were successful in
measuring the subjects'' response to the carefully selected parameters.
The in-service accident data was requested from the participating
railroads by VNTSC after the periods for which the data had been
accumulated. FRA used data that was available at the time, and the data
had not been collected with this rulemaking in mind. Therefore, the
data was not available for an ideal detailed statistical analysis.
However, the trend favoring the accident-reduction potential of
auxiliary lights was obvious throughout the analysis that was performed
and reported by VNTSC.
Section Analysis
1. Three-Light Triangle: Sec. 229.125(d)
It continues to be FRA's belief 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 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.
In its post-hearing comments, AAR objects to the standard measures
used for placing auxiliary lights. AAR argues that 236 Canadian
National locomotives, which operate over the United States border with
Canada, would have to be refitted to come into compliance since their
auxiliary lights are not arranged as required by this rule. As an AAR
spokesman at the public hearing states, however, ``[w]e could
understand FRA is looking toward standardization of some type over
time, and we support that.''
FRA is indeed concerned with giving a consistent warning so
motorists are not confused. In addition, the Canadian National filed
comments with FRA addressing the NPRM and did not raise this objection.
FRA did, however, consider AAR's latest comment.
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.
It is the goal of this rule to give a uniform warning. If the lights
are arranged in a standard position, then motorists at grade crossings
will become accustomed to judging the train's rate of approach. If the
distance between the lights vary, from locomotive to locomotive, then
the motorists will not be receiving a consistent warning. The Canadian
National locomotives have a maximum axis of as little as 44.5 inches.
The smaller axis reduces the distance at which the lights can be
discerned as separate, and would give a false visual indication of a
greater than actual distance from the train.
It is also unclear under what circumstances these Canadian National
locomotives will operate in this country, or if all of these
locomotives are intended to be used in the United States. Given the
fact that all carriers have been aware of the proposed dimensions for
several years, it is difficult to understand why locomotives in use in
this country would have been fitted with auxiliary lights which were
not in compliance with the interim standards or the NPRM.
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.
The dimensions 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 permitted more flexibility in light placement
on locomotives to accommodate various locomotive configurations and
placement of other vital appliances. FRA will, however, permit the
light arrangement on the Canadian National locomotives to be
grandfathered. Any locomotive equipped before May 30, 1994, with a
[[Page 8883]]
three-auxiliary-light arrangement with one axis at least 44 inches,
will be considered in compliance with this rule until such time as the
locomotive is rebuilt or retired. This liberalization of the
grandfathering provision will validate early investment in visibility
measures that increase safety.
The 36-inch minimum vertical axis requirement 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 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 retains the minimum height of 36 inches
for auxiliary lights 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. Several parties commented that this was a legitimate fear,
although no direct evidence was presented.
FRA had also requested comment as to whether a dimmer feature
should be required for auxiliary lights similar to the dimmer used on
headlights. The comments received on this point indicated that the
dimmer feature would be unnecessary. FRA can identify no compelling
safety need for a dimmer on auxiliary lights. The one argument made for
dimmers was that the device might prevent blinding motorists. As noted
above, FRA believes that aligning the lights as required in the final
rule should reduce this possibility. Several parties also argued that
requiring dimmers would significantly increase installation cost per
locomotive.
The interim rule and the proposed rule provided 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. No
comments were received suggesting a separate effective intensity
requirement be stated in the final rule for systems that operate
pulsing. At this time, FRA can identify no compelling safety reason to
set a different candela intensity for pulsing auxiliary lights.
FRA's final rule permits the 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 requirements for
permanent auxiliary lights. This 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.
Speed Limits
Much comment has been received concerning FRA's low speed exclusion
from the auxiliary lights requirement. FRA proposed this exception for
two reasons; one, accidents at lower speeds are significantly less
likely to cause injuries or fatalities (for example, on an annual
average, 92 percent of accident fatalities occur at speeds greater than
20 miles per hour); and two, FRA believed the cost of equipping these
locomotives, which are, on average, nearer the end of their useful
life, would not produce the justifying benefits, given the shorter time
for recovering the costs of upgrading.
FRA originally considered requiring the use of auxiliary lights
only during the 20 seconds before a locomotive entered a public
highway-rail grade crossing. It was quickly concluded, however, that it
would be too difficult for a train operator to tell whether or not he
was 20 seconds approach time from the crossing. FRA concluded,
therefore, that the interest of safety would be best served if all
locomotives required by this rule to be equipped with auxiliary lights
were required to use those lights whenever the locomotive is moving.
Only locomotives which never exceeded 20 miles per hour would be
allowed to operate without ever using auxiliary lights.
AAR, ASLRA, and parties representing tourist railroads requested an
increase in this speed limit. These parties asked that FRA raise the
speed exclusion to 30 miles per hour. FRA has considered this option
and also the option of raising the limit to 25 miles per hour. After
much consideration, FRA has concluded that the projected reduction in
accidents that would occur at speeds greater than 20 miles per hour if
locomotives at those speeds were equipped with auxiliary lights
significantly outweighs any cost savings from not having to equip the
affected class of locomotives.
FRA also believes that having large numbers of unequipped
locomotives would confuse the public. Many unequipped locomotives would
be able to operate on freight main lines if the speed were
significantly raised. Motorists crossing such lines will likely expect
to see the light triangle. This might be particularly true in rural
areas where many crossings are only passively signed. FRA's analysis of
costs and benefits, discussed further below, confirmed the positive
contribution that auxiliary lights can make to grade crossing safety,
even at speeds only slightly above 20 miles per hour. FRA therefore
will retain the 20 miles per hour speed exclusion.
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, AAR has indicated that they would conduct a
[[Page 8884]]
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 or the NPRM. The rates are constrained by the need for
visibility but also the need to avoid a ``flicker vertigo'' effect on
train crew members.
FRA leaves 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 need
not be addressed in a regulation.
3. Operation of Auxiliary Lights: Sec. 229.125(f)
In subsection (f), FRA proposed to require operation of auxiliary
lights for a period of at least 20 seconds prior to arrival of the
locomotive at the crossing. FRA received comments, however, that
estimating the approach time to a crossing is too difficult an
assignment to be reliably carried out by the locomotive engineer. FRA
agrees that this is an unfair responsibility to place on the train
crew. The Final Rule, therefore, requires continuous use of auxiliary
lights. Railroads using locomotives with flashing lights shall include
in the railroad's operating rules standard procedures for use of this
model of auxiliary light.
FRA received several comments from railroads asking allowance for
not using auxiliary lights under certain circumstances for the safety
of motorists, or railroad employees working in the area, or for certain
weather conditions. FRA believes that any exception should be made only
in the best interest of safety to avoid grade crossing accidents where
there has been a railroad decision not to use the auxiliary lights.
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 other specified circumstances.
FRA will allow railroads subject to this rule to except, for a
public safety purpose, auxiliary light use at any highway-rail grade
crossing so designated in the railroads'' operating rules, timetable,
or special order. These exceptions will be subject to disapproval by
FRA's Associate Administrator for Safety, or one of FRA's Regional
Administrators, after investigation and opportunity for response by the
railroad, for good cause stated.
FRA believes there will be little burden on the industry from this
requirement since it is currently standard practice for railroads to so
print such directions for use by train crews. Under existing railroad
rules, there are few exceptions, limited primarily to situations where
two trains are approaching each other and it is necessary to avoid
blinding their respective locomotive engineers.
4. Other Uses of Auxiliary Lights: Proposed Sec. 229.125(g)
FRA's proposed subsection (g) is deleted from the Final Rule.
Continuous use of auxiliary lights is now required for any lead
locomotive that is equipped with such lights.
5. Defective En Route: Sec. 229.125(g)
FRA's proposed subsection (h) is relettered, and its provisions are
now contained at subsection (g).
FRA received comments from several carrier representatives that
more flexibility was needed for making auxiliary light repairs. FRA's
proposed subsection regarding movement of defective locomotives
permitted a lead locomotive with one defective auxiliary light to
proceed to a point where repairs could be made. If both auxiliary
lights were 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.
FRA recognizes that light failures should be infrequent, and
accidents occurring during a period of failure even more rare. Although
each is important, the large number of safety items on a locomotive
presents a challenge with respect to appropriate use of an asset that
may be valued as high as two million dollars.
FRA's final rule requires that if either of the two auxiliary
lights on a lead locomotive is inoperative at an initial terminal, then
each inoperative auxiliary light must be fully repaired prior to the
train's departure. At any other time, a lead locomotive may continue
with one auxiliary light out to the place where the next calendar day
inspection is conducted. An en route failure of both lights would
require repair at the next location in the direction of movement where
repairs of the kind can be made. This movement must be consistent with
Sec. 229.9.
6. Exception for Historic Equipment: Sec. 229.125(h)
FRA also received comments on its proposed rule from parties
concerned with historic locomotive models that are not steam driven.
FRA agrees that requiring these rare locomotives to be equipped with
auxiliary lights is unnecessary and would compromise their historic
appearance. These locomotives, including inter-urban electric cars,
operate at low speeds on limited operations, and generally during
daylight hours. Fitting these historic locomotives with auxiliary
lights can entail the upgrading of the entire electrical system. This
expense seems unnecessary. FRA has been informed that these locomotives
were no longer built after the end of 1948. FRA will therefore allow an
exception for historic locomotives built before December 31, 1948. This
exception does not apply to any locomotive used in regular commuter or
inter-city passenger service. This exception does apply to locomotives
operated by historic or tourist railroads.
In 1992, FRA reviewed its policy regarding tourist, scenic and
excursion railroads that transport passengers on lines separate from
the general railroad system of 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
[[Page 8885]]
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.
FRA has determined that any passenger railroad that is not part of
the general railroad system of transportation should not be required to
comply with this rule. The small number of locomotives, if any, that
would fit in this category present little safety risk at grade
crossings. These trains tend to operate at lower speeds, carry fewer
passengers over grade crossings, and are used predominately during
daytime when visibility is better. This locomotive visibility rule
already excludes locomotives operated at 20 miles per hour or less.
This exclusion renders the rule inapplicable to many non-steam
locomotives owned and operated by passenger railroads off the general
system.
7. 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.
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 or more white lights that
cast a moving beam in circular or elliptical 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.
During the comment period on the NPRM, FRA was asked to extend the
grandfathering period beyond the minimum set by the statute. This
request was referred to as ``supergrandfathering.'' These comments
concerned oscillating and strobe lights.
FRA did consider the use of oscillating lights and strobe lights
for inclusion in the NPRM and final rule in Sec. 229.125(d). 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 railroad operators.
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 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.
FRA agrees with those parties who argued that evidence that
crossing lights are superior is not, however, extensive. FRA also
recognizes that it has been the agency's policy to encourage early
installation of auxiliary lights. Many carriers made just such good
faith investments in safety. FRA therefore will permit
``supergrandfathering'' for certain light arrangements. The final rule
will consider oscillating lights, installed in newly-acquired equipment
ordered prior to January 1, 1996, as permanently grandfathered. Use of
these lights is concentrated in low speed and commuter operations over
territories where an oscillating pattern should provide significant
benefits. Strobe lights will be permitted on a locomotive until the
locomotive is retired or rebuilt. Strobe lights will be permanently
grandfathered on any locomotive that is limited to operating at speeds
no greater than 40 miles per hour. FRA believes this approach best
validates early
[[Page 8886]]
investment in safety, while encouraging uniform light configurations.
FRA notes that application of strobe or oscillating lights, as
attention-getting supplements to the triangular pattern of auxiliary
lights made standard by this rule, can have further beneficial effects
on safety. Nothing in this final rule should be construed to discourage
use of such systems as supplements to the triangle pattern, either
through retention of existing lights or new installations.
Related Issues
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.
Applicability: Steam Locomotives
This rule amends 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 cost more per locomotive because of the need to update
generators, and some steam operators have commented that the
modification would detract 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 locomotives.
Regulatory Impact
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This final 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 this rule
calculated for a twenty-year period using the seven percent discount
rate required by federal regulatory evaluation guidelines.
This rule allows two distinct light system specifications--a
pulsing light system and a steady beam light system. Auxiliary light
requirements can be met by equipping locomotives with the lower cost
steady beam lights. However, realistically, some locomotives will have
steady beam lights installed and others will have pulsing lights
installed. Information available to FRA suggests that at least 8,327
locomotives are currently equipped with auxiliary lights complying with
the rule. About 52.84 percent of these locomotives have pulsing lights.
The remainder (47.16 percent) have steady beam lights. Small operators
involved mainly in shortline service may choose to equip their affected
locomotive fleet with the less expensive steady beam lights. Assuming
locomotives which operate at speeds below 30 m.p.h. are equipped with
steady beam lights and all others continue to be equipped in the
current proportions, we expect twenty-year costs to total about $83
million. This includes installation and maintenance costs which the
railroad industry would not incur in the absence of this rule.
Although specifications for pulsing and steady beam lights differ,
data is not available to establish that one light system is more
effective than the other. This analysis assumes both are equally
effective than the other. For total benefits of the auxiliary lights to
justify incurring $83 million in costs, use of the lights must prevent
an average of about nine accidents annually. FRA estimates that the use
of auxiliary lights will prevent at least 3,300 grade crossing
accidents (involving about 750 fatalities and 1,800 injuries) valued at
$1.3 billion over twenty years, or an average of about 165 accidents
annually. Analysis indicates this accident reduction will almost
certainly be achieved and probably will be substantially exceeded as a
result of using auxiliary lights. The benefit/cost ratio is 15.7:1.
Analysis of costs and benefits of locomotives operating at maximum
speeds between 21 and 25 m.p.h. indicates that for that particular
sector this rule has a benefit/cost ratio of no less than 1.3:1. The
return on investment represented by the ratio is relatively lower for
this sector. However, the increased safety still justifies incurring
the costs associated with applying the rule to this sector.
Costs and benefits associated with the 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 industry 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 application of
the knowledge gained should far outweigh costs incurred by the
participants. Including test costs would not change the final 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 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 will require that railroads note any grade crossings
excluded from
[[Page 8887]]
auxiliary light use in the railroads'' operating rules, time tables, or
special orders. It is therefore necessary to estimate the public
reporting burden for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
FRA is currently preparing this analysis. Once it is completed,
before the rule takes effect in December, 1997, the paperwork reduction
review will be placed in the docket.
FRA is anticipating a minimal paperwork impact from this rule given
the fact that railroad operating rules standardly contain the type of
operating instructions now required by FRA.
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 (superseding 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 Final Rule
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA amends Part 229, Title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 229 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102-20103, 20110-20112, 20114, 20133,
20137, 20138, 20143, 20301-20303, 20306, 20701-20703, 21301- 21302,
21304, 21306, and 21311; 49 CFR 1.49 (c), (g) and (m).
2. Section 229.9 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 229.9 Movement of non-complying locomotives.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c) and Sec. 229.125(h),
a locomotive with one or more conditions not in compliance with this
part may be moved only as a lite locomotive or a dead locomotive after
the carrier has complied with the following:
* * * * *
3. Section 229.125 is amended by revising the section heading and
by adding (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 March 6, 1996 with auxiliary lights
in conformance with Sec. 229.133 shall be deemed to conform to this
section until March 6, 2000. All locomotives in compliance with
Sec. 229.133(c) shall be deemed to conform to this section. 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.
(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
(1) to burn steadily or
(2) flash on approach to a crossing.
If the auxiliary lights are arranged to flash;
(i) they shall flash alternately at a rate of at least 40 flashes
per minute and at most 180 flashes per minute,
(ii) the railroad's operating rules shall set a standard procedure
for use of flashing lights at public highway-rail grade crossings, and
(iii) the flashing feature may be activated automatically, but
shall be capable of manual activation and deactivation by the
locomotive engineer.
(f) Auxiliary lights required by paragraph (d) of this section
shall be continuously illuminated immediately prior to and during
movement of the locomotive, except as provided by railroad operating
rules, timetable or special instructions, unless such exception is
disapproved by FRA. A railroad may except use of auxiliary lights at a
specific public highway-rail grade crossing by designating that
exception in the railroad's operating rules, timetable, or a special
order. Any exception from use of auxiliary lights at a specific public
grade crossing can be disapproved for a stated cause by FRA's Associate
Administrator for Safety or any one of FRA's Regional Administrators,
after investigation by FRA and opportunity for response from the
railroad.
(g) Movement of locomotives with defective auxiliary lights.
(1) A lead locomotive with only one failed auxiliary light must be
repaired or switched to a trailing position before departure from the
place where an initial terminal inspection is required for that train.
(2) A locomotive with only one auxiliary light that has failed
after departure from an initial terminal, must be repaired not later
than the next calendar inspection required by Sec. 229.21.
(3) A lead locomotive with two failed auxiliary lights may only
proceed to the next place where repairs can be made. This movement must
be consistent with Sec. 229.9.
(h) Any locomotive subject to Part 229, that was built before
December 31, 1948, and that is not used regularly in commuter or
intercity passenger service, shall be considered historic equipment and
excepted from the requirements of paragraphs (d) through (h) of this
section.
4. Amend Sec. 229.133 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 229.133 Interim locomotive conspicuity measures--auxiliary
external lights.
* * * * *
(c)(1) Any lead locomotive equipped with oscillating lights as
described in paragraph (b)(4) that were ordered for installation on
that locomotive prior to
[[Page 8888]]
January 1, 1996, is considered in compliance with Sec. 229.125(d) (1)
through (3).
(2) Any lead locomotive equipped with strobe lights as described in
paragraph (b)(2) and operated at speeds no greater than 40 miles per
hour, is considered in compliance with Sec. 229.125(d) (1) through (3)
until the locomotive is retired or rebuilt, whichever comes first.
(3) Any lead locomotive equipped with two white auxiliary lights
spaced at least 44 inches apart on at least one axis which was equipped
with these auxiliary lights before May 30, 1994, will be considered in
compliance with Sec. 229.125(d) (1) through (3) until the locomotive is
retired or rebuilt, whichever comes first.
Appendix B [Amended]
5. Amend Appendix B to Part 229--Schedule of Civil Penalties--by
adding in numerical sequence by section number the following:
2,500
5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willful
Section Violation violation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
229.125:
(a) Headlights.................................. 2,500 5,000
(d) Auxiliary lights............................ 2,500 5,000
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 28, 1996.
Jolene M. Molitoris,
Federal Railroad Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-4838 Filed 3-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P