Locomotive Visibility; Minimum Standards for Auxiliary Lights

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safety laws, was simultaneously repealed, revised and reenacted without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