
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16977-17007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06482]



[[Page 16977]]

Vol. 79

Wednesday,

No. 58

March 26, 2014

Part III





Department of Transportation





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





Federal Railroad Administration





49 CFR Part 238





Passenger Train Exterior Side Door Safety; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 2014 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 16978]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 238

[Docket No. FRA-2011-0063, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130-AC34


Passenger Train Exterior Side Door Safety

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FRA is proposing to improve the integrity of passenger train 
exterior side door safety systems and promote passenger train safety 
overall through new safety standards relating to the safe operation and 
use of passenger train exterior side doors. This proposed rule is 
intended to limit the number and severity of injuries involving 
passenger train exterior side doors and enhance the level of safety for 
passengers and train crewmembers.

DATES: Written comments must be received by May 27, 2014. Comments 
received after that date will be considered to the extent possible 
without incurring additional expense or delay.
    FRA anticipates being able to resolve this rulemaking without a 
public, oral hearing. However, if FRA receives a specific request for a 
public, oral hearing prior to April 25, 2014, one will be scheduled and 
FRA will publish a supplemental notice in the Federal Register to 
inform interested parties of the date, time, and location of any such 
hearing.

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments related to Docket No. FRA-2011-0063, 
Notice No. 1, may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: The Federal eRulemaking Portal, 
www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web site's online instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140, Washington, 
DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department 
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140 on the 
Ground level of the West Building, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket 
name, and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for 
this rulemaking (2130-AC34). Note that all comments received will be 
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading in 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act 
information related to any submitted comments or materials.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or 
visit the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140 on the Ground 
level of the West Building, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Knote, Staff Director, 
Passenger Rail Division, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal 
Railroad Administration, Office of Railroad Safety, Mail Stop 25, West 
Building 3rd Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 
(telephone: 202-493-6350); or Brian Roberts, Trial Attorney, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office 
of Chief Counsel, Mail Stop 10, West Building 3rd Floor, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6052).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Supplementary Information

I. Executive Summary
II. Statutory and Regulatory Background
    A. Passenger Equipment Safety Standards Background
    B. The Need for New Design Standards and Operating Practices 
Relating to Exterior Side Doors on Passenger Train Equipment
    C. RSAC Overview
    D. Passenger Safety Working Group and General Passenger Safety 
Task Force
III. Technical Background
    A. Overview
    B. Scope of FRA Safety Assessment of Passenger Railroads
    C. Uses of Passenger Car Exterior Side Doors
    D. Types of Passenger Car Exterior Side Doors
    E. Exterior Side Door Configurations and Operation
    F. Assessment Findings
    1. Door Position
    2. Door Control Panels
    3. FMECA
    4. Power Door Status
    5. No-Motion Electrical Circuit
    6. End-of-Train Electrical Circuit
    7. Door Safety Features
    8. Traction Inhibit
    9. Malfunctioning Equipment and Door Lock-Out
    10. Malfunctioning Equipment and Door By-Pass
    11. Effects of Throttle Use on Powered Exterior Side Doors
    12. Mixed Consist Operation
    13. Operating Rules
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
V. Regulatory Impact and Notices
    A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272; Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act
    D. Federalism Implications
    E. International Trade Impact Assessment
    F. Environmental Impact
    G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    H. Energy Impact
    I. Privacy Act

I. Executive Summary

    FRA is proposing to improve the integrity of passenger train 
exterior side door safety systems and promote passenger train safety 
overall through new safety standards relating to the safe operation and 
use of passenger train exterior side doors. This proposed rule is based 
on recommended language developed by the Railroad Safety Advisory 
Committee's (RSAC) General Passenger Safety Task Force (Task Force) and 
includes new requirements for both powered and manual exterior side 
doors and door safety systems on passenger trains. Proposed operating 
rules for train crews relating to exterior side doors and their safety 
systems on passenger trains as well as new definitions are also 
included in this NPRM. In addition, the rule proposes to incorporate by 
reference American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Standard 
PR-M-S-18-10, ``Standard for Powered Exterior Side Door System Design 
for New Passenger Cars'' (2011), which contains a set of minimum 
standards for powered exterior side door systems and door system 
functioning on new rail passenger cars and locomotives used in 
passenger service.
    Other proposed requirements include, but are not limited to: 
Equipping new passenger cars with powered side doors with an 
obstruction detection system and a door by-pass feature; connecting new 
passenger cars with either manual or powered exterior side doors to a 
door summary circuit to prohibit the train from developing tractive 
power if any of the exterior side doors are open; safety briefing for 
train crews to identify crewmember responsibilities as they relate to 
the safe operation of the exterior side doors; operating passenger 
trains with their exterior side doors and

[[Page 16979]]

trap doors closed when in motion between stations, except in limited 
circumstances or if prior approval has been received from FRA; and 
railroads developing operating rules on how to safely override a door 
summary circuit or a no-motion system, or both, as well as how to 
safely operate the exterior side doors of a passenger train with 
incompatible exterior side door safety systems.
    Through this rulemaking, FRA intends to limit the number and 
severity of injuries associated with the use and operation of passenger 
train exterior side doors and increase the overall level of safety for 
passengers and train crewmembers. FRA analyzed the economic impacts of 
this proposed rule against a ``no action'' baseline that reflects what 
would happen in the absence of this proposed rule. The proposed 
operating rules and adopted APTA standard for new equipment are 
expected to prevent about 19 injuries and 0.20 fatalities per year in 
the future on average, based on similar incidents in the past. The 
estimated benefits from these prevented casualties over a 20-year 
period total $81.9 million undiscounted; these estimated benefits have 
a present value calculated using a 7 percent discount rate of $42.4 
million, and a present value calculated using a 3 percent discount rate 
of $60.3 million. Given that some procedural and equipment errors may 
still occur in the future, the analysis assumes a 50 percent 
effectiveness rate in preventing these types of injuries and 
fatalities. In addition, there may be other benefits from the proposed 
rule, such as fewer passenger claims for personal property damage, 
maintaining passenger goodwill and trust (by reducing these low-
frequency but typically highly-publicized incidents), and by lowering 
future maintenance costs (through encouraging the replacement of older 
equipment with new passenger cars equipped with more reliable door 
safety systems).
    FRA also quantified the incremental burden of the proposed rule 
upon commuter and intercity passenger railroads. The primary 
contributor to the estimated costs is the train crew's task of 
verifying that the door by-pass devices on the train are sealed in the 
normal non-by-pass mode, a requirement in the proposed operating rules. 
The door by-pass devices are used to override door safety systems in 
certain circumstances, for example, allowing a train to develop 
tractive power and complete its route. The second greatest cost factor 
is the estimated cost to implement some of the proposed door safety 
features on new passenger cars and locomotives used in passenger 
service with either powered or manual doors. The estimated costs over 
the 20-year period of analysis total $15.0 million undiscounted, with a 
present value calculated using a 7 percent discount rate of about $8.0 
million, and a present value calculated using a 3 percent discount rate 
of about $11.2 million. The proposed rule incurs relatively small costs 
because most of the initial burdens are expected from changes to 
railroad operating rules. The design standards for door safety systems 
apply to new passenger cars and locomotives used in passenger service 
where they can be installed cost-effectively.
    These costs and benefits result in net positive benefits over 20 
years of about $67.0 million undiscounted, with a present value 
calculated using a 7 percent discount rate of $34.4 million, and 
present value calculated using a 3 percent discount rate of $49.1 
million.

II. Statutory and Regulatory Background

A. Passenger Equipment Safety Standards Background

    In September 1994, the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) 
convened a meeting of representatives from all sectors of the rail 
industry with the goal of enhancing rail safety. As one of the 
initiatives arising from this Rail Safety Summit, the Secretary 
announced that DOT would begin developing safety standards for rail 
passenger equipment over a five-year period. In November 1994, Congress 
adopted the Secretary's schedule for implementing rail passenger 
equipment safety regulations and included it in the Federal Railroad 
Safety Authorization Act of 1994 (the Act), Public Law 103-440, 108 
Stat. 4619, 4623-4624 (November 2, 1994). Congress also authorized the 
Secretary to consult with various organizations involved in passenger 
train operations for purposes of prescribing and amending these 
regulations, as well as issuing orders pursuant to them. Section 215 of 
the Act (codified at 49 U.S.C. 20133). The Secretary has delegated such 
responsibilities to the Administrator of FRA (see 49 CFR 1.89).
    FRA formed the Passenger Equipment Safety Standards Working Group 
to provide FRA with advice in developing the regulations mandated by 
Congress, and on May 12, 1999, published a final rule containing a set 
of comprehensive safety standards for railroad passenger equipment. See 
64 FR 25540. After publication of the final rule, interested parties 
filed petitions seeking FRA's reconsideration of certain requirements 
contained in the rule, and on June 25, 2002, FRA completed its response 
to the petitions for reconsideration. See 67 FR 42892. The product of 
this rulemaking was codified primarily at 49 CFR part 238 and 
secondarily at 49 CFR parts 216, 223, 229, 231, and 232.
    One of the purposes of the Passenger Equipment Safety Standards is 
protecting the safety of passenger train occupants in an emergency 
situation, including providing for emergency egress and rescue access 
through exterior side doors. See Sec. Sec.  238.235 and 238.439. FRA 
has engaged in rulemaking to amend the Passenger Equipment Safety 
Standards, and notably, on February 1, 2008, FRA published a final rule 
on Passenger Train Emergency Systems addressing: emergency 
communication, emergency egress, and rescue access. See 73 FR 6370. FRA 
has also established additional requirements for passenger train 
emergency systems, including doors used for emergency egress and rescue 
access. See Passenger Train Emergency Systems II final rule, published 
on November 29, 2013, 78 FR 71785. These subsequent proceedings have 
not focused on the safety of doors systems in non-emergency situations, 
however.

B. The Need for New Design Standards and Operating Practices Relating 
to Exterior Side Doors on Passenger Train Equipment

    FRA's principal reason for initiating this rulemaking is to reduce 
the number and severity of injuries caused by exterior side doors 
striking or trapping passengers as they board or alight from passenger 
trains in non-emergency situations. FRA has observed that incidents 
involving exterior side doors in routine use on passenger trains have 
previously resulted in casualties and serious injuries. For example, on 
November 21, 2006, a New Jersey Transit Rail Operations (NJT) train was 
departing a station in Bradley Beach, New Jersey when the closing 
exterior side doors of the train caught and held a passenger attempting 
to exit the train. The passenger was then dragged by the train along 
the station platform as the train was leaving the station. The 
passenger died as a result of his injuries.
    Through its investigation of the incident, FRA found that the 
assistant conductor of the train was not in the proper position to 
monitor all of the train's exterior side doors as they were closing, 
because the passenger exited through a door behind where the assistant 
conductor was looking. The assistant conductor also did not observe the 
door-indicator lights on the door

[[Page 16980]]

control panel, which indicated that the exterior side doors on the 
passenger car were not all closed as intended. In addition, FRA learned 
that the train was being operated with its door by-pass switch 
activated, negating the passenger car's door safety system, which was 
designed to reopen the exterior side doors after detecting an 
obstruction.
    As a result of this incident, NJT reviewed its operating rules and 
limited the use of the door by-pass feature in its passenger train 
operations. Contemporaneously, FRA issued Safety Advisory 2006-05, 
``Notice of Safety Advisory: Passenger Train Safety--Passenger Boarding 
or Alighting from Trains'' (71 FR 69606 (December 1, 2006)). The safety 
advisory recommended that passenger railroads reassess their rules and 
procedures to make certain that trains do not depart a station until 
all passengers have successfully boarded or alighted from the train. 
The safety advisory also noted the important role of passenger train 
crews in the safe operation of a train after a door by-pass switch has 
been activated. Passenger railroads were encouraged by FRA to 
voluntarily implement the recommendations of the safety advisory.
    Subsequently, there have been other instances where passengers have 
become trapped in exterior side doors of trains. On February 2, 2007, a 
local police officer witnessed a passenger stuck between the exterior 
side doors of a moving Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) train at a station 
in New York City, New York. As a result, the passenger's right leg was 
dragged on the tactile strip of the station platform, causing abrasions 
to the passenger's leg. The police officer stopped the train and pulled 
the passenger free from the exterior side doors.
    Some of these instances were ``close calls'' in which passengers 
have narrowly avoided injury. On March 4, 2011 in La Grange, Illinois, 
a passenger's arm and cane got caught in the closing exterior side 
doors of a Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 
(Metra) train while attempting to board the train. A fellow passenger 
inside the train was able to flip the door's emergency switch just as 
the train began to move. As a result, the trapped passenger was 
released and able to avoid being dragged down the station platform. A 
similar incident occurred on a Metra train on December 19, 2009, when a 
four-year-old boy's boot became caught in the exterior side doors when 
alighting from the train. The child's mother needed to pull the child's 
leg free from the train doors as the train was leaving the station.
    As a result of these types of incidents, Metra changed its 
operating rules to require a ``second look'' up and down each train 
before departing a station. This operating rule requires the conductor 
to close all exterior side doors on the train, except the door in which 
he or she is standing, to take a second look up and down the station 
platform to make sure that all the train's exterior side doors are 
closed and clear of passengers. After the second look, the conductor 
may then close his or her open door and signal to the train's engineer 
to depart the station.
    Based on these types of incidents, and other findings and concerns, 
including initial findings from safety assessments of exterior side 
door systems on passenger railroads in the northeast region of the 
United States, in early 2007 FRA tasked RSAC to review Safety Advisory 
2006-5 and develop recommendations for new safety standards to improve 
passenger and crewmember safety relating to the operation and use of 
exterior side doors. The Task Force, a subgroup of the Passenger Safety 
Working Group (Working Group), was assigned to develop these 
recommendations.
    The Task Force was already reviewing passenger station gap issues 
in April 2007 when it was assigned this task. The Task Force then 
assembled the Passenger Door Safety Subgroup (Door Safety Subgroup) to 
develop recommended regulatory language to improve the safety of 
exterior side door systems on passenger trains. FRA shared with RSAC 
its initial findings that many passenger railroads in the Northeast 
were not being operated with fully-functional passenger train exterior 
side door safety systems, and afterward went on to conduct in-person 
assessments of the exterior side door safety systems on a total of 
twenty-four passenger railroads throughout the Nation. From these 
various inspections, FRA reviewed many different models of passenger 
equipment and was able to gain important information about the risks to 
passengers and train crews associated with the operation and use of 
passenger train exterior side doors. This information was shared with 
the Door Safety Subgroup, which met a total of nine times from 2008 to 
2011.
    Through its meetings, the Door Safety Subgroup developed proposed 
regulatory language to improve the safe use and operation of exterior 
side doors on passenger trains. The proposed language was approved by 
the Task Force on February 25, 2011. It was then subsequently adopted 
by the Working Group and full RSAC on March 31, 2011, and May 20, 2011, 
respectively.
    While the Door Safety Subgroup was developing proposed regulatory 
language, APTA developed and approved Standard SS-M-18-10, ``Standard 
for Powered Exterior Side Door System Design for New Passenger Cars.'' 
Subsequent to RSAC's approval of the consensus recommendations that are 
the basis of this NPRM, APTA changed its numbering nomenclature for its 
safety standards, which resulted in the numbering of this standard 
changing from SS-M-18-10 to PR-M-S-18-10. This standard is otherwise 
identified as PR-M-S-18-10 in this proposed rule; however, the 
numbering change has not affected the substantive content of the 
standard. This APTA standard contains minimum standards for powered 
exterior side door systems and door system function on new rail 
passenger cars, as the standard was designed by APTA to be used in 
specifications for the procurement of new passenger cars. The standard 
addresses door system design requirements at the door level, car level, 
and train level. Non-powered doors and other types of doors on 
passenger cars that are not exterior side doors are not covered by 
APTA's standard. This NPRM proposes to incorporate by reference this 
APTA standard for powered exterior side door safety systems on new 
passenger cars and connected door safety systems on new locomotives 
used in passenger service. A copy of this APTA standard is included in 
the docket of this rulemaking for public review.

C. RSAC Overview

    In March 1996, FRA established RSAC as a forum for collaborative 
rulemaking and program development. RSAC includes representatives from 
all of the agency's major stakeholder groups, including railroads, 
labor organizations, suppliers and manufacturers, and other interested 
parties. A list of RSAC member groups includes the following:
     American Association of Private Railroad Car Owners 
(AAPRCO);
     American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials (AASHTO);
     American Chemistry Council;
     American Petroleum Institute;
     American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association 
(ASLRRA);
     American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA);
     APTA;
     Association of American Railroads (AAR);
     Association of Railway Museums;
     Association of State Rail Safety Managers (ASRSM);

[[Page 16981]]

     Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET);
     Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division 
(BMWED);
     Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS);
     Chlorine Institute;
     Federal Transit Administration (FTA);*
     Fertilizer Institute;
     High Speed Ground Transportation Association;
     Institute of Makers of Explosives;
     International Association of Machinists and Aerospace 
Workers;
     International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers;
     Labor Council for Latin American Advancement;*
     League of Railway Industry Women;*
     National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP);
     National Association of Railway Business Women;*
     National Conference of Firemen & Oilers;
     National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association 
(NRCMA);
     National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak);
     National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB);*
     Railway Supply Institute (RSI);
     Safe Travel America (STA);
     Secretaria de Comunicaciones y Transporte;*
     Sheet Metal Workers International Association (SMWIA);
     Tourist Railway Association, Inc.;
     Transport Canada;*
     Transport Workers Union of America (TWU);
     Transportation Communications International Union/BRC 
(TCIU/BRC);
     Transportation Security Administration (TSA);* and
     United Transportation Union (UTU).
    * Indicates associate, non-voting membership.
    When appropriate, FRA assigns a task to RSAC, and after 
consideration and debate, RSAC may accept or reject the task. If the 
task is accepted, RSAC establishes a working group that possesses the 
appropriate expertise and representation of interests to develop 
recommendations to FRA for action on the task. These recommendations 
are developed by consensus. A working group may establish one or more 
task forces to develop facts and options on a particular aspect of a 
given task. The individual task force then provides that information to 
the working group for consideration. When a working group comes to 
unanimous consensus on recommendations for action, the package is 
presented to the full RSAC for a vote. If the proposal is accepted by a 
simple majority of RSAC, the proposal is formally recommended to the 
Administrator of FRA. FRA then determines what action to take on the 
recommendation. Because FRA staff members play an active role at the 
working group level in discussing the issues and options and in 
drafting the language of the consensus proposal, FRA is often favorably 
inclined toward the RSAC recommendation. However, FRA is in no way 
bound to follow the recommendation, and the agency exercises its 
independent judgment on whether the recommended rule achieves the 
agency's regulatory goal(s), is soundly supported, and is in accordance 
with policy and legal requirements. Often, FRA varies in some respects 
from the RSAC recommendation in developing the actual regulatory 
proposal or final rule. Any such variations would be noted and 
explained in the rulemaking document issued by FRA. However, to the 
maximum extent practicable, FRA utilizes RSAC to provide consensus 
recommendations with respect to both proposed and final agency action. 
If RSAC is unable to reach consensus on a recommendation for action, 
the task is withdrawn and FRA determines the best course of action.

D. Passenger Safety Working Group and General Passenger Safety Task 
Force

    In May 2003, RSAC established the Working Group to handle the task 
of reviewing passenger equipment safety needs and programs as well as 
developing recommendations for specific actions to advance the safety 
of rail passenger service. Members of the Working Group, in addition to 
FRA, include the following:
     AAR, including members from BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), 
CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), and Union Pacific Railroad Company 
(UP);
     AAPRCO;
     AASHTO;
     Amtrak;
     APTA, including members from Bombardier, Inc., Herzog 
Transit Services, Inc., Interfleet Technology, Inc. (Interfleet, 
formerly LDK Engineering, Inc.), LIRR, Maryland Transit Administration 
(MTA), Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company (Metro-North), Metra, 
Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink), and 
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA);
     ASLRRA;
     BLET;
     BRS;
     FTA;
     NARP;
     NTSB;
     RSI;
     SMWIA;
     STA;
     TCIU/BRC;
     TSA;
     TWU; and
     UTU.
    In September 2006, the Working Group established the Task Force 
principally to examine the following issues: (1) Exterior side door 
securement; (2) passenger safety in train stations; and (3) system 
safety plans. Members of the Task Force include representatives from 
various organizations that are part of the larger Working Group and, in 
addition to FRA, include the following:
     AAR, including members from BNSF, CSXT, Norfolk Southern 
Railway Co., and UP;
     AASHTO;
     Amtrak;
     APTA, including members from Alaska Railroad Corporation, 
Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain), LIRR, Massachusetts 
Bay Commuter Railroad (MBCR), Metro-North, MTA, NJT, New Mexico Rail 
Runner Express, Port Authority Trans-Hudson, SEPTA, Metrolink, and Utah 
Transit Authority;
     ASLRRA;
     ATDA;
     BLET;
     FTA;
     NARP;
     NRCMA;
     NTSB;
     Transport Canada; and
     UTU.
    After being assigned its task by the Working Group, the Task Force 
assembled the Door Safety Subgroup to develop recommended regulatory 
language to improve the safety of exterior side door systems on 
passenger trains. The Door Safety Subgroup consisted of Task Force 
members who were interested in addressing the risks associated with the 
operation and use of exterior side doors on passenger equipment. The 
Door Safety Subgroup met during scheduled Task Force meetings on the 
following dates and in the following locations to discuss passenger 
train exterior side door safety:
     April 23-24, 2008, in San Diego, CA;
     July 29-30, 2008, in Cambridge, MA;
     December 2, 2008, in Cambridge, MA;
     March 3, 2009, in Arlington, VA;
     April 21, 2009, in Washington, DC;
     May 27-28, 2009, in Cambridge, MA;

[[Page 16982]]

     July 7-8, 2009, in Philadelphia, PA;
     October 6-8, 2009, in Orlando, FL; and
     February 24-25, 2011, in Washington, DC
    To aid the Task Force in its delegated task, FRA's Office of Chief 
Counsel in conjunction with FRA's Office of Railroad Safety first 
drafted proposed regulatory text for discussion purposes at Door Safety 
Subgroup meetings. Door Safety Subgroup members would then make changes 
to this proposed draft text. Staff from the John A Volpe National 
Transportation System Center of the Research and Innovative Technology 
Administration also attended these meetings and contributed to the 
discussions. Minutes of each of these meetings are part of the docket 
in this proceeding and are available for public inspection.
    Through these various discussions, the Door Safety Subgroup 
developed proposed regulatory language which was accepted by the Task 
Force as a recommendation to the Working Group on February 25, 2011. 
The Task Force's consensus language was then subsequently approved by 
the Working Group on March 31, 2011. The consensus language was then 
presented before the full RSAC on May 20, 2011, where it was approved 
by unanimous vote. Thus, the Working Group's recommendation was adopted 
by the full RSAC as the recommendation to FRA.
    In issuing this NPRM, FRA is also proposing some regulatory text 
that was not expressly part of the RSAC's consensus recommendation. For 
instance, for the benefit of the regulated community, in proposed Sec.  
238.131(c) FRA identifies other sections in part 238 that include 
substantive door safety requirements. Further, the proposed rule makes 
clear that all exterior side doors on new intercity passenger train 
equipment--in addition to new commuter train equipment--would be 
subject to the requirements of proposed Sec.  238.131. FRA strongly 
believes that new passenger cars with manual or powered exterior side 
doors should have door safety systems and be covered by the 
requirements of proposed Sec.  238.131, along with connected door 
safety systems on new locomotives used in passenger service. The door 
safety system should alert the train crew if an exterior side door is 
opened while the train is moving between stations by virtue of the door 
status indicator above the opened door and the door summary status 
indicator in the engineer's cab. The train should also lose power 
through the traction inhibit feature, which all together should allow 
the train crew to make a timely response to the incident. FRA invites 
comment on this proposal.
    Moreover, FRA makes clear that, in addition to exterior side doors 
that are used for the boarding and alighting of passengers at train 
stations, other full-sized exterior side doors are included under the 
provisions of this proposed rule. For example, full-sized exterior side 
doors used for loading baggage or stocking dining car supplies on 
passenger cars would be covered under this proposed rule. FRA believes 
that these types of exterior side doors should be covered under this 
passenger door rulemaking because passengers may be able to access 
these full-sized doors and use these doors to exit a train while the 
train is in motion between stations. Therefore, such doors should be 
incorporated into the train's door safety system so that the train crew 
receives some notification if one of these doors is not closed or is 
opened while the train is in motion. However, FRA is not seeking to 
include small hatches of compartment-sized doors under the requirements 
of the proposed rule. FRA also seeks comment on this proposal.
    In addition, it is not FRA's intent to regulate the use or 
operation of exterior side doors on private cars through this 
rulemaking. However, FRA does invite comment on whether private cars 
should be subject to any of the proposed requirements of this 
rulemaking. Specifically, FRA invites comment on the extent to which 
private cars in a passenger train may affect the safe operation of the 
train's door safety system, and, if so, what requirements would be 
appropriate to provide for the safe operation of the train's door 
safety system. Based on the comments received, in the final rule FRA 
may specify requirements affecting private cars to the extent that they 
are necessary for the safety of the passenger train as a whole.
    FRA has made others changes from the RSAC recommendation. These 
changes are for the purposes of clarity and formatting in the Federal 
Register and are not intended to affect the RSAC's consensus. FRA 
believes that all the changes made from the RSAC recommendation are 
consistent with the intent of the Task Force, Working Group, and full 
RSAC. However, FRA invites comment on any proposed regulatory language.
    In this regard, FRA has decided that it is unnecessary to include a 
section of the RSAC recommendation that would require powered exterior 
side passenger doors to be connected to a manual override device that 
is capable of opening the exterior side door when the door is locked 
out. FRA is not including such a proposal in this NPRM because this 
requirement is a design requirement already covered by regulation, 
specifically Sec.  238.112(a) and (b). Please note that this 
requirement was formerly contained in Sec. Sec.  238.235(a) and (b) and 
238.439(b) for Tier I and Tier II passenger equipment, respectively, 
and then consolidated in Sec.  238.112(a) and (b) by the November 29, 
2013 Passenger Train Emergency Systems II final rule (78 FR 71785). 
However, FRA invites comment on whether these regulations sufficiently 
address the Task Force recommendation.
    FRA has also moved an RSAC consensus item proposed under existing 
Sec.  238.305 (Interior calendar day mechanical inspection of passenger 
cars) to new proposed Sec.  238.133(g)(2). The proposed language would 
require that all exterior side door safety system override devices are 
inactive and sealed, as part of the calendar day inspection of 
passenger cars and locomotives used in passenger service. FRA moved 
this consensus item from under Sec.  238.305 to proposed Sec.  238.133 
principally because under Sec.  238.305 the proposed requirement would 
apply only to Tier I passenger cars (i.e., passenger cars operating at 
speeds not exceeding 125 mph) and would not expressly address 
conventional (non-passenger-carrying) locomotives used in passenger 
service. Therefore, as proposed under Sec.  238.133, the inspection 
requirement would apply to all tiers of passenger cars, including Tier 
II passenger cars (i.e., passenger cars operating at speeds exceeding 
125 mph but not exceeding 150 mph), as well as apply to conventional 
locomotives used in passenger service. FRA invites comment on this 
proposal.
    Furthermore, FRA is also inviting comment on the implementation 
schedule of certain provisions of this rulemaking in proceeding to a 
final rule. FRA is proposing that all mechanical requirements for new 
passenger cars with manual and powered exterior side doors, along with 
connected door safety systems on new locomotives used in passenger 
service, apply to equipment ordered on or after 120 days after the date 
of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, or placed in 
service for the first time on or after 790 days after the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. However, for 
certain operating rules and training requirements proposed under 
Sec. Sec.  238.135 and 238.137, FRA is considering a three-year 
implementation period from the effective date of the final rule. FRA 
believes this would afford railroads adequate time to train all of 
their employees during annual

[[Page 16983]]

refresher training without having to incur additional training costs. 
FRA requests comment on these proposed implementation dates and invites 
suggestions from the regulated community as well as the greater public 
on the time schedule for implementing the final rule's requirements.
    Finally, FRA has conformed the proposed rule to changes made to 
part 238 by the Passenger Train Emergency Systems II final rule, which 
was recently issued. See 78 FR 71785; Nov. 29, 2013.

III. Technical Background

A. Overview

    Passenger railroads have responded to growth in ridership by 
expanding rail service, investing in new rail equipment, and 
incorporating new technologies into their passenger equipment. This has 
resulted in the varied arrangements of powered exterior side doors in 
passenger trains today. Many types of these power door systems have 
safety features to alert train crewmembers of an obstruction in a door.
    These power door systems are complex. They employ components and 
electrical circuits to open and close the exterior side doors and 
contain door status indicators, which provide a means to determine 
motion and the end of the train. Power door systems operate 
electrically from commands given by train crews through signals from 
door switches, sensors, relays, and other devices that interface with 
and monitor the exterior side doors individually and throughout the 
entire trainline circuit. These various appurtenances typically act to 
provide a warning when exterior side doors are closing, respond to 
obstructions in closing doors, and prevent the doors from opening when 
a train is in motion. When connected to the propulsion system, these 
devices will inhibit the development of tractive power if an exterior 
side door is prevented from closing. Lock-out and by-pass systems are 
also employed to allow trains to operate even when equipment related to 
the exterior side doors is malfunctioning.
    However, not all passenger cars are equipped with powered exterior 
side door systems. In fact, for those passenger railroads with cars 
equipped with manually operated exterior side doors or trap doors, some 
have allowed the doors to remain open between train stations to 
increase operating efficiency. Trap doors are metal plates that, when 
raised, reveal a fixed or moving stairwell to facilitate low-level 
boarding; to provide for high-level platform boarding, the train crew 
closes (or keeps closed) the trap to cover the stairwell. Trap doors 
are not, in themselves, exterior side doors, but are manually operated 
by the train crew to enable boarding and alighting through the exterior 
side doors.

B. Scope of FRA Safety Assessment of Passenger Railroads

    FRA initially reviewed accident data involving passenger train 
exterior side doors immediately following the incident in Bradley 
Beach, New Jersey, discussed in Section II.B., above. From its review, 
FRA determined that while accidents were infrequent they could have 
severe consequences. FRA identified numerous factors, conditions, and 
components that could adversely impact the safe operation or the 
integrity of the door safety system of a passenger train. These include 
door position, door controls, door status indicators, no-motion and 
end-of-train electrical circuits, power failure, traction-inhibit 
throttle movement, mixed consist operation, malfunctioning equipment, 
door operating rules, and employee knowledge of the door safety 
system(s) on the train he or she is operating.
    As discussed above, FRA decided to perform a safety assessment of 
twenty-four railroads operating passenger trains utilizing many 
different models of equipment in the United States. These assessments 
were performed to identify the risks endangering passenger and crew 
safety, specifically when passengers were riding upon, boarding, or 
alighting from trains. Analytical techniques were employed to identify 
any limitations of the safety features engineered into the trains' 
exterior side doors and of the railroads' rules governing their 
employees operation of them. Each of the passenger railroads was 
assessed individually, and exterior side door safety concerns were 
found with virtually all of the railroads surveyed. However, the door 
safety concerns varied among the railroads in nature and in degree.
    There are various types of trains that are designed for particular 
purposes. The type and sequence of locomotives and cars that are 
assembled or coupled together to form a train is referred to as the 
train consist. A train consist can be changed frequently at the 
railroad's discretion. As part of its assessment, FRA reviewed the 
predominant types of passenger train service utilized in the United 
States to determine the risks posed to passengers and train crews by 
exterior side door safety systems.
    One type of service involves passenger trains with conventional 
locomotives in the lead pulling consists of passenger coaches and 
sometimes other types of cars such as baggage cars, dining cars, and 
sleeping cars. Such trains are common on long-distance, intercity rail 
routes operated by Amtrak.
    Most passenger rail service in the Nation is provided by commuter 
railroads, which typically operate one or both of the two most common 
types of service: Push-pull service and multiple-unit (MU) locomotive 
service. Push-pull service is passenger train service typically 
operated in one direction of travel with a conventional locomotive in 
the rear of the train pushing the consist (the ``push mode'') and with 
a cab car in the lead position of the train. The train can then 
transition into the opposite direction of travel, where the service is 
operated with the conventional locomotive in the lead position of the 
train pulling the consist (the ``pull mode'') with the cab car in the 
rear of the train. A cab car is both a passenger car and a locomotive. 
The car has both seats for passengers and a control cab from which the 
engineer can operate the train. Control cables (or electric couplers) 
run the length of the train to facilitate commands between the control 
cab, passenger cars, and the locomotive. These control cables make up 
an electric circuit called the trainline circuit. Electrical cables 
also run the length of the train to provide power for heat, light, and 
other purposes. Passenger train service using self-propelled electric 
or diesel MU locomotives may operate individually, but typically 
operate semi-permanently coupled together as a pair or triplet with a 
control cab at each end of the train consist. During peak commuting 
hours, multiple pairs or triplets of MU locomotives are combined and 
operated together to form a single passenger train.
    In Amtrak's Northeast Corridor, high-speed Acela Express passenger 
train service is provided using trainsets. Acela Express trainsets are 
train consists of specific types of passenger cars such as first class, 
business class, and caf[eacute] cars that are semi-permanently coupled 
between power cars located at each end of the consist. These trainsets 
virtually never change as the power cars and passenger cars are semi-
permanently coupled and integrated together with computer controls. The 
power cars provide tractive power to both ends simultaneously and have 
a control cab from which the engineer can operate the train but do not 
carry passengers.

C. Uses of Passenger Car Exterior Side Doors

    Passenger car exterior side doors are designed for various purposes 
on

[[Page 16984]]

passenger trains. Most exterior side doors are used for passenger 
boarding and alighting at train stations. However, exterior side doors 
also have other uses. For example, exterior side doors can be used for 
emergency responder access and passenger egress during emergency 
situations, whether or not the doors are normally used for passenger 
boarding or alighting. As previously stated, exterior side doors can 
also be used for non-passenger related functions such as loading 
baggage or stocking dining car supplies. Exterior side doors that serve 
these purposes often vary greatly in size and dimension. In some 
instances, these exterior side doors are full-sized doors, while on 
other equipment the doors are essentially just small hatches or are 
compartment-sized.

D. Types of Passenger Car Exterior Side Doors

    Through its safety assessments of exterior side door safety systems 
on passenger trains, FRA reviewed several generations of equipment. FRA 
found a wide range of doors and corresponding door safety features with 
varying levels of sophistication. The level of sophistication was 
generally limited by the technology that was available at the time that 
the passenger car was manufactured and the railroad's ability to 
purchase, or retrofit, equipment with more sophisticated door safety 
features.
    There are three types of exterior side doors in service today: 
hinged, sliding, and plug. Hinged doors on a passenger car operate like 
a door in a home entranceway. They swing inward into the car, to open, 
and back towards the exterior of the car, to close. Exterior sliding 
doors on a passenger car are moving panels of various sizes that 
retract into pockets within the side walls of the passenger car when 
opening. Sliding doors can be designed with one panel or leaf that 
slides open and closed. Sliding doors can also consist of two bi-
parting panels or leafs, which open by retracting from each other into 
the side wall and close by joining together in the center of the 
doorway. Plug doors on a passenger car are comprised of a sliding panel 
which opens and slides along the side of the car to open the exterior 
side door. However, the sliding panel does not retract into a pocket 
like a sliding door; instead, when closed, the door conforms to the 
side of the passenger car to seal out environmental noise and minimize 
aerodynamic resistance.

E. Exterior Side Door Configurations and Operation

    Passenger railroads use a variety of configurations for the 
exterior side doors on the passenger cars in their fleets. FRA reviewed 
passenger cars with exterior side doors located at multiple locations 
along the sides of the cars: at each end, at their quarter points, and 
in the middle.
    Passenger car exterior side doors may be operated manually, or with 
either electro-mechanical or electro-pneumatic power. Manually operated 
exterior side doors are simple hinged or sliding doors that are 
manually operated by passengers or crew members at each station stop. 
Powered electro-mechanical doors are doors that employ an electric 
motor to drive a mechanical operator for opening and closing. Powered 
electro-pneumatic doors, like electro-mechanical doors, employ a 
mechanical operator for opening and closing; however, powered electro-
pneumatic doors use compressed air to drive the mechanical operator 
instead of an electric motor. The mechanical operators provide opening 
and closing force to each door panel or leaf through mechanical linkage 
and a gearbox or similar device. All powered door systems require 
mechanical door operators.

F. Assessment Findings

    FRA identified a number of key factors, conditions, and components 
that could impact passenger and crew safety in relation to the use and 
operation of passenger train exterior side doors. These are addressed, 
individually, in detail below.
1. Door Position
    FRA reviewed the risk posed by the position of exterior side doors 
while passenger trains were in motion. FRA determined that railroads 
operating passenger trains with manually operated exterior side doors 
cannot control whether an individual door is opened or closed unless a 
crew member is present at each door. When a crew member is not present, 
passengers themselves can open the exterior side doors of the cars and 
exit or enter the train. Therefore, the potential exists for passengers 
to jump off or on moving trains at stations. At the same time, FRA 
found that other passenger trains were purposefully run with their 
manually operated exterior side doors in an open position, even though 
in some cases train crewmembers were not stationed at the doors.
    Passenger trains with powered exterior side doors are normally 
operated with the doors closed between stations. However, some 
passenger railroads operated trains with their doors open between 
stations. These passenger stations are in close proximity to each other 
and alternate between high- and low-level platforms for passenger 
boarding and alighting. The operation of passenger trains with open 
exterior side doors presents significant safety concerns as passengers 
and crewmembers could potentially fall out of an open door while the 
trains are in motion. Due to the safety hazards arising from operating 
a passenger train with open exterior side doors, FRA has determined 
that, with limited exceptions for crew use only, passenger trains 
should have their exterior side doors closed when they are in motion 
between stations.
2. Door Control Panels
    Powered exterior side doors on passenger cars are controlled and 
operated by door control panels, which are usually located on both 
sides of each car. These panels provide an interface between the 
train's door system and the train crew, and typically require 
activation with a door key. The door key is inserted into the control 
panel and is then used to turn the panel on or off. Once the panel is 
turned on, a conductor can issue commands to open or close exterior 
side doors by pressing buttons on the panel. Some passenger trains have 
door control panels that allow only local control of the exterior side 
doors. This means the conductor can operate the exterior side doors 
only in the same car as the door control panel. Other passenger trains 
allow their door control panels to operate all exterior side doors on 
the side of the train where the panel is activated. This allows the 
door control panel in any passenger car to open simultaneously all the 
exterior side doors on one side of the train. The conductor also has 
the ability to open or close only those doors forward of the activated 
panel, those doors rearward of the activated panel, or simply the 
single door directly adjacent to the activated panel.
    FRA found many instances in which door control panels were left 
energized after the door control panel key was removed. This can occur 
when the keyhole for the door control panel key is worn or not 
maintained and the conductor removes the key without actually turning 
off the door control panel. With the door control panel energized, 
passengers can press the door-open button on the panel and open one or 
more exterior side doors on the train even when the train is still in 
motion. This situation can occur on many different types of equipment.
3. FMECA
    As part of its assessment, FRA evaluated how the door systems on

[[Page 16985]]

various passenger trains responded to a loss of door control power by 
de-energizing the door control circuit breaker. FRA found significantly 
different responses on various railroads when door control systems 
experienced a circuit failure causing a loss of power. Some exterior 
side doors closed, some did not close at all, and others simply stopped 
if they were in motion at the time of the failure. Additionally, in a 
number of instances, the train could still produce tractive power even 
though the door control circuit failure allowed the exterior side doors 
to remain open.
    Employees who operate the exterior side doors of a passenger train 
should understand how a safety system for a door that they control will 
respond to a loss of power. Employees can then take steps to safeguard 
against any safety hazards raised by the loss of power. This proposed 
rule would require all door systems on new passenger cars and connected 
door systems on new locomotives used in passenger service to be subject 
to a formal safety analysis that includes a Failure Modes, Effects, and 
Criticality Analysis (FMECA) before being placed into service. By 
requiring new passenger cars and locomotives used in passenger service 
to be subjected to this analysis before being placed into service, 
railroads would help ensure that the failure of a single component of a 
door safety system would not create an unsafe condition for passengers 
and train crewmembers.
4. Power Door Status
    Power door status is monitored by door position switches and can be 
conveyed locally or through the trainline circuit using various 
arrangements of lights to relay the condition of the doors to the train 
crew. On most passenger trains, one or more lights will illuminate on 
the interior or exterior of a passenger car above the exterior side 
door that is open. The lights will then extinguish when the exterior 
side doors are closed.
    If the train's door status is configured with a door summary 
circuit for trainline display, one or more lights will illuminate on 
the active door control panel when all the doors are closed on that 
side of the train. Therefore, if a power door is prevented from 
closing, the external and internal lights would remain illuminated and 
the trainline door status light on the door control panel would not 
illuminate. This door status trainline circuit is often, but not 
always, displayed to the engineer as a door closed light in the 
locomotive cab. When the light is illuminated it indicates to the 
engineer that the exterior side doors on both sides of the train are 
closed and that the train is ready to safely leave the station.
    FRA found that all trains with powered exterior side door systems 
had some type of door status indicators that could be used by train 
crews to determine if there was an obstruction in the exterior side 
doors. However, in many instances the door status indicators were not 
being used as intended by on-board personnel. In some case, these 
indicators were not utilized by crewmembers because the indicators' 
lens color was not maintained properly and therefore not reliable. In 
other cases, FRA found that train crews looked in the general location 
of an indicator light on a door control panel, but at times mistakenly 
read the indication of a different indicator as the door status 
indicator because the lens color was not uniformly maintained. Door 
status indicators need to be maintained properly for ready and reliable 
reference by crewmembers that are tasked with safely operating the door 
systems. If properly maintained, these indicators should alert train 
crewmembers about a possible obstruction in an exterior side door.
5. No-Motion Electrical Circuit
    No-motion is an electric circuit that is used by the door safety 
system to determine if a passenger car or train is moving or not. This 
circuit is designed to prevent the exterior side doors of a train from 
opening while the train is in motion, except for a crew access door. A 
crew access door can be any exterior side door on a passenger train 
that a crewmember opens for his or her use with a door control power 
key. No-motion electrical circuitry will also cause the exterior side 
doors to close when the train accelerates above a pre-determined speed. 
In the event that the no-motion circuit malfunctions, the conductor 
will not be able to open the exterior side doors using trainline 
commands since the circuit is designed to fail safely and the door 
system assumes that the train is in motion. However, in the event of 
such a malfunction, many passenger cars are equipped with a by-pass 
switch that can override the no-motion circuit and enable the exterior 
side doors to open.
    During its assessment, FRA discovered that on some railroads train 
crews actually used the no-motion circuit to close the exterior side 
doors when departing stations. In these instances, train crewmembers 
were not closing the exterior side doors using a door control panel, 
but instead were using the throttle to accelerate the train and close 
the exterior side doors through the no-motion circuit. The assessment 
also identified that on many railroads passenger and train crew safety 
was at risk because safety-sensitive switches that could impact the 
door system, such as the no-motion by-pass switch, were not properly 
positioned or protected. An improperly positioned no-motion by-pass 
switch presents the risk of an undesired opening of an exterior side 
door while the train is in motion, which could go undetected by the 
train's crew.
    Exterior side doors should be closed only after the train crew 
determines it is safe for the train to depart the station. In order to 
protect passenger and train crew safety, the no-motion by-pass switch 
should be secured or sealed. This will mitigate the potential of an 
accidental activation of this safety-critical device.
6. End-of-Train Electrical Circuit
    The end-of-train electrical circuit is part of the door safety 
system. The circuit is used to identify the last passenger car in the 
train consist, or the physical end of the train, or both. Door control 
system manufacturers have utilized various ways to identify and convey 
the end of the train to the door safety system. The end of the train is 
identified on different passenger cars by using jumpers, manual or 
automatic switches, circuitry in electric couplers, marker lights, or 
other devices. Door safety circuits can become compromised when the end 
of the train is established somewhere other than the last car of the 
train. This can occur by the unintentional activation of an end-of-
train switch. For example, in some passenger cars toggle switches, 
which are readily accessible to passengers, are used to establish the 
end of the train. If improperly positioned and activated by a passenger 
or train crewmember at a location that is not at the end of the train, 
all passenger cars that are rearward of the car with the activated end-
of-train switch would not be recognized by the door safety system. 
Because the door safety features in those cars would not function, this 
would increase the risk of a passenger becoming entangled in a door and 
dragged when the train departs the station.
    FRA's assessment identified eight railroads on which safety-
sensitive switches, like the end-of-train switch, were not properly 
positioned or protected. End-of-train switches should be secured and 
protected to prevent access by unauthorized personnel as well as 
unintentional activation, which could compromise the safety of the door

[[Page 16986]]

control system and go undetected by the train crew.
7. Door Safety Features
    As touched on above, the sophistication of passenger car door 
safety features is just as varied as the arrangement of the exterior 
side doors themselves. Hinged-type manually operated exterior side 
doors do not utilize any specific door system safety features. Yet, FRA 
found that all but one model of passenger cars with manual or powered 
sliding-type doors employed a flexible, rubber-like strip of varying 
widths on the leading edge of the door. This flexible strip runs from 
the floor to the ceiling along the edge of the door to seal the car 
interior from environmental conditions. Although not necessarily 
intended for a door system safety purpose, this flexible strip or seal 
on the edge of the door is pliable and bends, which aids in pulling an 
obstruction free from the door. In addition, FRA found that some power 
door systems added a door push-back feature intended to aid in freeing 
an obstruction in a door. The push-back feature allows someone to push 
back on a closing door so that the individual can open or partially 
open the door and clear an obstruction. However, not all passenger cars 
that have a flexible strip on the edge of the door have a door push-
back feature.
    Power door systems on passenger cars can also be outfitted with 
obstruction detection systems. Obstruction detection systems use 
sensors to determine when an exterior side door is being prevented from 
closing as intended. The system will cause the exterior side door to 
react to an obstruction by automatically stopping the door from closing 
or by reversing the movement of the door, similar to the functioning of 
elevator doors. Most obstruction detection systems require the exterior 
side door to actually physically impact the obstruction in order to 
detect it. These types of obstruction detection systems use a pressure-
sensitive edge on the leading edge of the exterior side door or door 
jamb, or both. If something is caught in the door, the sensitive edge 
will become compressed and cause the door to react to the obstruction 
by stopping the closing door or by reversing the movement of the door. 
Other obstruction detection systems employ a tilting switch that 
detects when the door has been bumped off balance by an obstruction and 
causes a reaction similar to doors employing a sensitive edge for 
obstruction detection.
    There are also systems that use more sophisticated technologies to 
detect obstructions. These advanced systems monitor motor amperage, or 
air pressure in passenger cars with powered electro-pneumatic exterior 
side doors. These systems detect an increase in the electric current or 
air pressure, which indicates to the door safety system that there is 
an obstruction in the exterior side doors. Other advanced obstruction 
detection systems do not actually require the exterior side doors to 
impact an obstruction in order to detect it. Instead, photo optics or 
laser light beams are employed to prevent the door from closing if 
something interrupts a light beam that runs along the path of the 
closing exterior side door.
    However, even when door obstruction detection systems were 
utilized, FRA found during its assessment that it was possible to 
become entangled in a powered exterior side door on numerous different 
models of equipment. In these cases, the door obstruction detection 
systems failed to detect either small obstructions (e.g., a human hand) 
or large obstructions (e.g., a wheelchair).
    FRA believes that while door obstruction detection systems reduce 
the risks to passenger safety and newer systems utilize more reliable 
technology, they do have limitations. Therefore, train crews need a 
clear understanding of the limitations of the safety features on the 
exterior side doors of the trains they are operating. When train crews 
do not possess a thorough understanding of the limitations of the 
safety features of the exterior side doors of their trains, passengers 
and train crews alike could face an increased risk of serious injury or 
death. Crews must realize the limits of the safety features of each 
powered door safety system for each type of passenger vehicle they 
operate.
8. Traction Inhibit
    As mentioned above, door control safety systems can be connected to 
a train's propulsion system. On these systems the status of powered 
exterior side doors is communicated through the trainline, and the door 
summary circuit is interlocked with the train's propulsion system. 
Therefore, when a powered exterior side door is open, the train is 
unable to produce tractive power and move. Similarly, if an exterior 
side door on a train is not completely closed and there is an 
obstruction in the door, the train will be inhibited from developing 
tractive power and departing the station. Only after all the exterior 
side doors are closed as intended, will the train be able to produce 
tractive power and leave the station.
    During its assessment, FRA found many different models of equipment 
in which the exterior side door safety systems were not connected to 
the propulsion system of the train. Consequently, these trains could 
produce tractive power whether or not the exterior side doors were 
opened or closed. If a passenger had become entangled in a door, it 
would have been mechanically possible for the passenger to be dragged 
by one of these trains, since no design feature would have inhibited 
such a train from developing tractive power and leaving the station.
    FRA also found that on many different models of passenger cars and 
locomotives used in passenger service that utilized a door obstruction 
system and traction inhibit, it was possible for an individual to 
become entangled in an exterior side door and yet the train could still 
produce tractive power. This unexpected condition was possible because 
the door obstruction system did not detect the obstruction and instead 
conveyed a message that all the exterior side doors were closed. 
Therefore, passenger and train crew safety would be enhanced if door 
safety systems on all new passenger cars were connected to the 
propulsion system and incorporated reliable technology in their door 
obstruction detection systems.
9. Malfunctioning Equipment and Door Lock-Out
    Due to the complexity of powered exterior side doors and their 
controls, car manufacturers have designed door systems to respond to 
equipment malfunctions. In the event of an exterior side door 
malfunction, each door can be individually isolated from the trainline 
circuit without affecting the rest of the train. Train crews refer to 
this as ``cutting out'' or ``locking-out'' a door. This is especially 
important if the door system is connected to the train's propulsion 
system, as one malfunctioning exterior side door that cannot close is 
designed to inhibit the development of tractive power for the entire 
train. Therefore, many passenger cars are equipped with exterior side 
door lock-out switches that can disconnect power to the malfunctioning 
exterior side door while still allowing the trainline circuit to 
complete so that the train can draw tractive power and move.
    During FRA's assessment, FRA observed train crewmembers who were 
unfamiliar with the method of isolating or locking-out a malfunctioning 
exterior side door. FRA found that, instead, train crews would often 
activate the door by-pass system. Such a practice presents a 
significant risk to safety. Properly

[[Page 16987]]

locking-out one malfunctioning exterior side door does maintain the 
integrity of the train's door safety system while still providing door 
obstruction protection and traction inhibit for all of the other 
exterior side doors on the train. However, overriding the door safety 
system through the door by-pass feature can undermine the safety 
features on all exterior side doors, including traction inhibit. 
Activating the door by-pass feature in this manner unnecessarily 
increases the possibility that a passenger or train crewmember could be 
caught in a door and dragged by a train.
10. Malfunctioning Equipment and Door By-Pass
    If a train crew cannot identify which of the exterior side doors is 
malfunctioning in its train, the train crew can utilize a door by-pass 
device that can override the door safety system in order to move the 
train. However, as noted above, activation of the door by-pass device 
on many types of equipment negates some or all of the exterior side 
door safety features.
    FRA found during its assessment that many passenger cars had 
exterior side door safety circuits that could become compromised by the 
unintentional activation of a door by-pass device. On these models of 
passenger cars, if a by-pass switch was activated anywhere on a 
passenger train it would place the entire train in door by-pass mode. 
This would in essence by-pass the entire train's door safety system, 
which presents a significant risk to passenger and crew safety. 
Elsewhere, FRA found that the door by-pass switch would only affect the 
exterior side doors of the train if it was activated in the controlling 
locomotive. Overall, FRA found that accidental activation of the door 
by-pass switch often happened without the knowledge of the train crew, 
whether the switch was located in the controlling locomotive cab or a 
trailing locomotive cab. Consequently, door by-pass devices should be 
sealed in an off position to mitigate the potential of an accidental 
activation of the door by-pass device.
    In the event of an en-route exterior side door malfunction, 
railroads must have a procedure for communicating to all train 
crewmembers that there is a defect in the train's exterior side doors, 
the door by-pass device has been activated, and the door safety system 
has been overridden.
11. Effects of Throttle Use on Powered Exterior Side Doors
    The locomotive throttle lever is used to control the locomotive's 
power. It can also be used to issue commands to the powered exterior 
side doors. As mentioned above, some exterior side doors are 
manufactured so that the movement of the locomotive throttle from a 
position of rest to motion automatically issues a command to close all 
of the powered exterior side doors.
    However, FRA's assessment found that passenger cars responded in an 
inconsistent manner to the application of a train's throttle. For some 
powered exterior side doors, the movement of the locomotive throttle 
caused them to close. For other door systems, the doors would stop 
closing and freeze if they were in motion when the throttle was 
applied, and yet other door systems were not at all affected by the 
position of the throttle. In addition, concerns associated with 
locomotive throttle movement were further exacerbated if the passenger 
train was in door by-pass mode when the throttle was applied. On these 
trains, the throttle movement, in combination with the door by-pass 
feature activation, negated some or all of the exterior side door 
obstruction safety features.
    A train's exterior side doors should be commanded to close only 
after the train crew determines it is safe to depart. If throttle 
movement can affect the functioning of a train's exterior side doors, 
then employee training is necessary to help ensure that the train crew 
understands the risks involved.
12. Mixed Consist Operation
    Railroads routinely operate passenger trains comprised of mixed 
consists or different models of passenger cars that can have 
incompatible door systems. Mixed consists can contain passenger cars 
with different types of exterior side doors, such as manual doors and 
powered doors, or different types of powered exterior side doors that 
are not compatible with each other's door safety system. When exterior 
side door systems are incompatible, they do not properly communicate 
trainline commands and are not part of a single door summary circuit. 
These door systems are usually incompatible due to the design of the 
individual passenger cars or because the door systems may utilize 
different control systems, wiring, or operating voltages, often a 
result of the varying ages of the different models of passenger cars 
used in a mixed consist.
    The operation of trains comprised of different types of passenger 
cars with incompatible exterior side door systems requires additional 
measures to help ensure passenger safety. For example, in a mixed 
consist train with manual and powered exterior side doors, the portion 
of the train with the manual doors requires extra effort by train 
crewmembers to ensure that the doors are closed. The operation of a 
mixed consist train comprised of passenger cars with different models 
or types of powered exterior side doors that are not compatible with 
each other's door safety system requires extra effort by train 
crewmembers as well. The different cars may not communicate door open 
and close commands throughout the length of the train. These door 
systems usually have different safety features; for example, a portion 
of the train could have exterior side doors equipped with a door 
obstruction detection system, while the remainder of the train's doors 
do not. The powered door system on a passenger car without a door 
obstruction system is limited or constrained in its ability to detect, 
annunciate, or release an obstruction in a door. FRA also found that in 
these mixed consist trains the door summary circuit did not account for 
all of the exterior side doors, due to incompatible equipment. The door 
status indicator would therefore be misleading as it would indicate the 
status for only part of the mixed consist train. As a result, FRA 
believes that there is an increased risk of becoming entangled in an 
exterior side door on a mixed consist train.
    Train crews may need to take extra measures due to the mixed 
consist configuration of the trains they operate. These extra measures 
should allow for the operation of mixed consist trains so that they 
provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that of a train 
operating with compatible exterior side door safety systems.
13. Operating Rules
    Passenger railroads have established sets of operating rules to 
provide instruction and guidance to employees on how they should act in 
given situations. Railroad operating rules relating to the functioning 
of passenger train exterior side door systems can vary broadly from 
railroad to railroad. For example, FRA found that some railroads' 
operating rules did not require a train's exterior side doors to be 
closed while the train was in motion between stations. Other railroads' 
rules did not define the safety limitations of each type of door safety 
system in the passenger cars their train crews operated, and sometimes 
the train crews were unaware of these limitations. Moreover, some 
railroads had operating rules addressing use of exterior side doors and 
station stops, and some did require crewmembers to make platform 
observations for train arrivals at and

[[Page 16988]]

departures from stations. However, often these rules did not instruct 
crewmembers to ensure that trains did not depart from stations until 
all passengers had successfully boarded or alighted from the trains. 
Finally, in some instances FRA found that operating rules did not 
address the additional steps necessary to provide continued passenger 
safety following activation of a safety override device, such as a door 
by-pass or no-motion by-pass switch.
    Railroad operating rules are fundamental tools to enhance overall 
railroad safety. Passenger train crews need a clear understanding of 
the risks to safety involved in the operation of exterior side doors. 
They must understand the limitations of the safety features of each 
exterior side door system for the equipment they operate. Such an 
understanding is especially critical when an exterior side door safety 
system fails and the crew must take action to provide for passenger 
safety until the system can be restored back to its designed level.

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

Subpart A--General

Section 238.5 Definitions
    FRA is proposing that this section be amended to add the following 
new definitions to this part: by-pass, door isolation lock, door 
summary circuit, end-of-train, exterior side door safety system, lock, 
no-motion system, and trainline door circuit. It is FRA's intention 
that these definitions clarify the meaning of significant terms as they 
are used in the text of this NPRM. These definitions will minimize the 
potential for misinterpretation of the proposed regulatory language. 
RSAC recommended that these definitions be added to this section, and 
FRA agrees with RSAC's recommendation. FRA invites comment on the 
content and usefulness of these proposed definitions.
    ``By-pass'' would mean a device designed to override a function. 
This term is used to describe devices that override various safety 
features on a passenger train. For example, a door by-pass is a by-pass 
feature that when activated overrides the door summary circuit. The 
door summary circuit provides an indication to the controlling cab of 
the train that all exterior side doors are closed as intended, or 
locked out with a door isolation lock, or both. In some instances, 
train crews must use a by-pass device when a passenger train's exterior 
side doors or its appurtenances fail en route, in order for the train 
to reach its destination.
    ``Door isolation lock'' would mean a cutout/lockout mechanism 
installed at each exterior side door panel to secure a door in the 
closed and latched position, provide a door-closed indication to the 
summary circuit, and remove power from the door motor or door motor 
controls. This term would be added for use in the definition of a door 
summary circuit and would help to clarify what potential information is 
being relayed to the controlling cab of a train by the door summary 
circuit.
    ``Door summary circuit'' would mean a trainline door circuit that 
provides an indication to the controlling cab of the train that all 
exterior side doors are closed as intended, or locked out with a door 
isolation lock, or both. This term would be added to inform the reader 
of the proposed regulatory language as to what this circuit does in 
relation to the operation of a passenger train and what information it 
provides the controlling cab of the train as to the exterior side 
doors.
    ``End-of-train'' would mean a feature typically used to determine 
the physical end of the train, or the last passenger car in the train, 
or both, for the door summary circuit. This term would be added to 
provide the reader of the proposed regulatory language information on 
what an end-of-train feature does in a passenger train.
    ``Exterior side door safety system'' would mean a system or 
subsystem of safety features that enable the safe operation of the 
exterior side doors of a passenger car or train. The exterior side door 
safety system includes appurtenances and components that control, 
operate, or display the status of the exterior side doors, and is 
interlocked with the traction power control. This term would be added 
to provide the reader of the proposed regulatory language information 
on what types of systems or subsystems of safety features make up an 
exterior side door safety system.
    ``No-motion system'' would mean a system on a train that detects 
the motion of the train. This system is normally integrated with the 
exterior side door safety system. The term would be added to describe 
what a no-motion system does.
    ``Trainline door circuit'' would mean a circuit used to convey door 
signals over the length of a train. This term would be added for use in 
the definition of door summary circuit.

Subpart B--Safety Planning and General Requirements

    While, FRA has taken particular care in organizing the various 
proposed requirements in this rule, FRA is inviting comment from the 
public on how the various proposed requirements in this rule are 
organized. It is FRA's intention that these proposed requirements be 
organized in a way that is easy for the regulated community to 
understand.
    In addition to requirements for passenger cars, please note that 
this rule proposes to apply certain requirements to locomotives used in 
passenger service. FRA invites comment on the approach the proposed 
rule takes to applying requirements to locomotives used in passenger 
service. FRA also welcomes any comment on any alternative approach for 
the proposed regulatory requirements in the final rule.
Section 238.131 Exterior Side Door Safety Systems--New Passenger Cars 
and Locomotives Used in Passenger Service
    FRA is proposing to add this new section to part 238. Each proposed 
subsection is addressed below by paragraph.
    Paragraph (a)(1). Proposed paragraph (a)(1) would require that all 
powered exterior side door safety systems on new rail passenger cars 
and connected door safety systems on new locomotives used in passenger 
service that are ordered on or after 120 days after the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, or placed in 
service for the first time on or after 790 days after the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, be built in 
accordance with APTA Standard PR-M-S-18-10, ``Standard for Powered 
Exterior Side Door System Design for New Passenger Cars.'' This APTA 
Standard was approved by APTA's Rail Standards Policy and Planning 
Committee on February 11, 2011. It was subsequently reviewed and 
recommended by the Task Force and the Working Group before finally 
being recommended by the full RSAC for use in this rulemaking. The 
Standard contains a set of minimum safety standards for powered 
exterior side door safety systems on new passenger rail cars and 
connected door safety systems on new locomotives that are used in 
passenger service. Passenger cars and passenger locomotives need to be 
able to communicate with each other to provide for the safe use and 
operation of exterior side doors in passenger cars. As a result, 
passenger locomotives must be connected or interlocked with the door 
safety systems.
    The Standard addresses design requirements and safety features that 
occur at three different levels: the individual door level, individual 
car

[[Page 16989]]

level, and the train level, which requires the train's door summary 
circuit to be interlocked with the propulsion system of the train's 
locomotives(s). FRA is proposing to incorporate this Standard by 
reference into part 238. If the standard is adopted into part 238 as 
proposed by FRA, then the provisions of the APTA Standard will be 
required by regulation for powered exterior side door safety systems on 
all new passenger cars and connected door safety systems on all new 
locomotives used in passenger service subject to this section. The 
implementation dates proposed in this subsection are consistent with 
other applicability dates imposed by FRA, and FRA believes they are 
achievable. A copy of the APTA Standard has been made part of the 
docket in this proceeding and is available for public inspection.
    Paragraph (a)(2). This paragraph would require that powered 
exterior side door safety systems on all new passenger cars and 
connected door safety systems on new locomotives used in passenger 
service be designed based on a Failure Modes, Effects, Criticality 
Analysis (FMECA). FRA proposes to require such door safety systems to 
be subject to a FMECA to ensure that door system manufacturers consider 
and address the failure modes of exterior side doors. While conducting 
an assessment of the door safety systems of various passenger 
railroads, FRA learned that there was great variability among different 
models of passenger cars as to how exterior side doors reacted to a 
system failure. For example, when there had been a loss of electricity 
to the door control circuit, some powered exterior side door systems 
responded by automatically closing the exterior side doors, while in 
other equipment the doors would stay open. FRA believes that subjecting 
these door safety systems to a FMECA will ensure that passenger car and 
locomotive manufacturers consider how these systems may fail so that 
they make informed decisions on the safest approach to their design.
    Paragraph (a)(3). This paragraph would require powered exterior 
side doors and door safety systems on passenger trains to contain an 
obstruction detection system. An obstruction detection system is 
intended to detect and react to both small and large obstructions in 
the powered exterior side doors. This new subsection is necessary in 
light of FRA's assessment of powered exterior side doors on various 
passenger train operations. In many instances during these assessments, 
FRA discovered that a passenger's arm or cane could be caught in a 
powered exterior side door of a passenger car without the door 
recognizing the obstruction. As a result of this failure, some 
passenger trains were able to complete the door summary circuit and 
receive tractive power to depart even though an obstruction was present 
in a powered exterior side door. These types of incidents have led to 
serious passenger injuries and even death. FRA also learned through its 
door assessments that while smaller obstructions could get caught in 
the exterior side doors of a train, some door systems were unable to 
identify large obstructions caught in a train's exterior side doors. 
For example, FRA learned that some passenger trains were able to 
generate tractive power even when a large object like a wheelchair or 
walker had become stuck in the exterior side doors. Passenger door 
systems that are unable to detect these larger obstructions pose 
substantial safety hazards to passengers with disabilities or other 
passengers who may need extra assistance to board or alight from a 
train.
    Through this proposed subsection, powered exterior side doors in 
all new passenger cars would be equipped with an obstruction detection 
system, and all new locomotives used in passenger service would have a 
connected system, intended to identify and release an obstruction while 
preventing the train from developing tractive power until the 
obstruction is released. As a result, boarding and alighting from 
passenger trains should be made safer.
    Paragraph (a)(4). This paragraph would require that the activation 
of a door by-pass feature in a passenger train not affect an exterior 
side door's obstruction detection system. Through its extensive 
assessment of safety features on exterior side doors in passenger 
trains, FRA discovered that many passenger door injuries occurred when 
trains were being operated in door by-pass mode. Operating a train in 
door by-pass mode can negate some or all of the safety features of the 
exterior side door safety system, including the obstruction detection 
system and door status indicator.
    FRA also discovered that some railroads had obstruction detection 
systems that were engineered into their passenger trains' exterior side 
doors, but did not use them and instead operated trains in door by-pass 
mode. By negating these important door safety features, the railroads 
created the potential for passengers to get caught in closing exterior 
side doors and dragged as the trains developed tractive power and 
departed from stations.
    Therefore, FRA is proposing to require that obstruction detection 
systems in new passenger cars and locomotives used in passenger service 
function as designed even if the train in which the equipment is being 
hauled is operated in door by-pass mode. This would ensure that 
passenger safety is not compromised by deactivating these safety 
features in the train's exterior side doors.
    Paragraph (a)(5). This paragraph would require the use of a door 
control panel key or some other secure device by the train crew to 
access the train's door control system. The train crew would need a key 
or other secure device to operate the door control panel in order to 
open or close the exterior powered side doors. FRA notes that this 
proposal is not intended to require passengers in an emergency 
situation to have access to the door control panel key in order to 
operate any manual override device for powered exterior side doors, as 
required by 49 CFR 238.112. Such manual override devices must be 
readily accessible to passengers in case of an emergency. Instead, this 
proposal is intended to reduce the risk that passengers in non-
emergency situations will gain access to the door control system and 
open the exterior side doors in order to prematurely exit a train while 
it is still in motion.
    Paragraph (a)(6). Proposed paragraph (a)(6) is related to proposed 
paragraph (a)(5). This paragraph would make clear that if the door 
control panel key or other similar device is removed from the door 
control panel, the powered exterior side doors on the train cannot be 
opened or closed from the door control panel. A door control panel key 
or other similar device would be required to operate the powered 
exterior side doors from the door control panel.
    This proposal would help to ensure that only the conductor or 
another qualified crewmember can open or close the exterior side doors 
from the door control panel. This would minimize the possibility that 
passengers would themselves open the exterior side doors in non-
emergency situations when a train is entering or departing a station. 
However, FRA notes that, in accordance with Sec.  238.112, powered 
exterior side doors will continue to be equipped with a manual override 
device to allow passengers to open the doors in emergency situations.
    Paragraph (a)(7). This proposed paragraph is intended to ensure 
that train throttle movement would not have any effect on the proper 
functioning of exterior side door safety systems in new passenger cars 
and connected door safety systems in new locomotives used

[[Page 16990]]

in passenger service. FRA is proposing this requirement after 
discovering through its assessments that certain passenger car door 
systems were designed so that the exterior side doors would 
automatically close when the train's throttle was applied. As FRA 
understands, the rationale behind such a design is that it is intended 
to provide an operational enhancement for the engineer to automatically 
command the exterior side doors to close when the throttle is applied. 
However, from FRA's observations during its door safety assessments, 
the exterior side doors on some railroads' trains would stop moving, 
and remain open while other exterior side doors would close, when the 
train's throttle was applied. This could result in doors being 
partially open while trains are in motion, thereby increasing the risk 
that passengers could fall out of trains and suffer injuries. Moreover, 
FRA also learned that powered exterior side doors on trains running in 
door-bypass mode reacted very differently when the throttle was 
applied. On these trains, the throttle movement, in combination with 
the door by-pass feature activation, negated some or all of the 
exterior side door obstruction safety features. Therefore, FRA is 
proposing that, for new passenger cars and locomotives used in 
passenger service, locomotive throttle movement should not open or 
close a passenger train's exterior side doors, or have any other affect 
on the proper functioning of the train's door safety system.
    Paragraph (b). This paragraph (b) would apply to new rail passenger 
cars, with either manual or powered exterior side doors, along with 
connected door safety systems on new locomotives used in passenger 
service, ordered on or after 120 days after the date of publication of 
the final rule in the Federal Register, or placed in service for the 
first time on or after 790 days after the date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register.
    Paragraph (b)(1). In general, this proposed subsection would 
require new passenger cars with manual or powered exterior side doors, 
along with new locomotives used in passenger service, to be designed 
with a door summary circuit to prohibit trains from developing tractive 
power if the exterior side doors are not closed. This subsection is 
necessary to prevent serious injuries from occurring when trains have 
their exterior side doors open while in motion.
    However, FRA is proposing an exception for train crew use. This 
requirement would not apply to an exterior side door that is under the 
direct physical control of a crewmember for his or her exclusive use 
when a train generates or is in the process of generating tractive 
power. This limited exception is necessary to help train crews make 
platform and other observations outside of the train. For example, 
train crews often open one exterior side door to ensure that the train 
is sitting properly along the station platform before opening all of 
the exterior side doors and allowing passengers to board and exit from 
the train.
    Paragraph (b)(2). This paragraph would require that manual and 
powered exterior side doors on new passenger cars be connected to 
interior and exterior door status indicators, and that new locomotives 
used in passenger service be compatible with such indicators. The 
exterior side doors would be connected to interior and exterior door 
status indicators, usually lights, which provide an indication to the 
train crew if a door is not closed. These indicators provide railroad 
personnel both inside the train and on the station platform a fast, 
easy way to visually identify whether an exterior side door is not 
closed as intended. As a result, FRA believes that these interior and 
exterior door status indicators would help train crews determine 
whether it is safe for trains to depart stations.
    Paragraph (b)(3). This proposed paragraph would require that all 
new passenger cars with manual or powered exterior side doors be 
connected to a door summary status indicator located in the train's 
operating cab and viewable from the engineer's normal operating 
position, and that all new locomotives used in passenger service would 
be equipped accordingly. When all the exterior passenger side doors on 
a train are closed, the door summary status indicator, usually a light, 
illuminates in the engineer's operating cab. As a result, the indicator 
provides an easy way for an engineer to know that all the exterior side 
doors have been closed as intended so that it is safe for the train to 
depart. If the indicator is not illuminated, the engineer knows that 
the exterior side doors are not closed and that the train's brakes 
should be maintained so the train does not move.
    Paragraph (b)(4). This paragraph would require that for all new 
passenger cars equipped with a door by-pass system and manual or 
powered exterior side doors, the door by-pass system would be 
functional only when activated from the controlling locomotive, and 
that all new locomotives used in passenger service would be designed 
accordingly. Putting a train in door by-pass mode allows the train to 
develop tractive power regardless of the status of the doors. During 
its various door assessments of passenger railroads, FRA found that for 
many models of equipment the entire passenger train could be put into 
door by-pass mode by activating one of several different door by-pass 
switches throughout the train consist. Moreover, FRA even found that 
by-pass switches could be activated without the knowledge of the train 
crew--a dangerous situation.
    By requiring that the door by-pass switch be capable of activation 
only in the controlling locomotive of a passenger train, engineers 
should always be aware of whether the door safety system has been 
overridden through the use of the door by-pass switch. In addition, 
having the switch be capable of activation only in the controlling 
locomotive of the train greatly minimizes the risk that a passenger may 
activate the device, whether inadvertently or not. Since this device 
affects vital safety features, FRA believes that all precautions should 
be taken to ensure that a train is put in door by-pass mode only after 
careful consideration by the train's crew.
    Paragraph (c). For the benefit of the regulated community, FRA is 
proposing this subsection to identify other sections in this part that 
include substantive door safety requirements. FRA invites comments on 
this paragraph as well as suggestions for alternative regulatory text 
to highlight exterior side door safety requirements in other sections 
of this part.
Section 238.133 Exterior Side Door Safety Systems--All Passenger Cars 
and Locomotives Used in Passenger Service
    FRA is proposing to add this new section to part 238. Each proposed 
subsection is addressed below by paragraph.
    Paragraph (a). Proposed paragraph (a) would require that all 
passenger train crews verify that all exterior side door by-pass 
devices that could affect the safe operation of the train are sealed in 
the non-by-pass position when taking control of the train. For example, 
from its assessments of various passenger railroads, FRA discovered 
that on some railroads the door by-pass switches in the cabs of 
trailing locomotives could place an entire train in door by-pass mode 
if activated anywhere on the train. FRA believes that all train crew 
members should understand when first taking control of a passenger 
train whether the exterior side doors of the train they are going to be 
operating are in door by-pass mode. However, when

[[Page 16991]]

there is face-to-face relief of another train crew, the train crew 
coming on-duty would not need to verify the status of the door by-pass 
devices by visual inspection. This exception would help railroad 
efficiency by not requiring on-coming train crews to verify whether 
their train is being operated in door by-pass status if they are 
directly notified by the out-going crew through face-to-face relief 
regarding the status of the train's door by-pass devices. When there is 
no direct face-to-face relief by the crew going off duty, the on-coming 
train crew is required to make their own verification of the status of 
their train's door by-pass devices. Nevertheless, in making this 
verification, proposed paragraph (a) would also allow railroads to 
develop a functional test to determine that the door summary status 
indicator is functioning as intended, instead of a visual inspection of 
each door by-pass device. Allowing qualified railroad personnel to 
conduct a functional test instead of a visual inspection of all door 
by-pass switches would make the verification process more efficient. 
However, the testing plan developed by the railroad to replace 
individual visual inspections must be adequate to determine that the 
door safety system is functioning as intended.
    Paragraph (b). Proposed paragraph (b) would require that passenger 
train crewmembers notify the railroad's designated authority pursuant 
to the railroad's defect reporting system if a door by-pass device that 
could affect the safe operation of the train is found unsealed during 
the train's daily operation. If the train crew can test the door safety 
system and determine that the door summary status indicator is 
functioning as intended, then the train can remain in service until the 
next forward repair point where a seal can be applied by a qualified 
maintenance person (QMP), as defined in Sec.  238.5, or its next 
calendar day inspection, whichever occurs first. If the crew cannot 
determine that the door summary status indicator is functioning as 
intended, then the train crew must follow the procedures outlined in 
proposed paragraph (c) of this section.
    Paragraph (c). This paragraph would require that, if it becomes 
necessary to activate a door by-pass device on an en route train, the 
train may continue to its destination terminal provided that the train 
crew conducts a safety briefing that includes a description of the 
location(s) where crewmembers will position themselves on the train in 
order to observe the boarding and alighting of passengers, notifies the 
railroad's designated authority that the train's door by-pass device 
has been activated, and adheres to the operating rules required by 
proposed Sec.  238.135 (``Operating practices relating to exterior side 
door safety systems''). After the train has reached its destination 
terminal, the train may continue in passenger service until the train's 
arrival at the next forward repair point or until its next calendar day 
inspection, whichever occurs first, provided that prior to moving the 
equipment with an active door by-pass device the railroad adheres to 
the requirements in proposed paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
    Paragraph (c)(1). Proposed paragraph (c)(1) would allow a passenger 
train with a door by-pass device activated to remain in service past 
its destination terminal, if an on-site QMP determines that it is safe 
to use the equipment in passenger service and repairs cannot be made at 
the time of inspection. If a QMP is not available, a determination to 
keep the equipment in service may be made based upon a description of 
the condition provided by an on-site qualified person (QP), as defined 
in Sec.  238.5, to a QMP off-site. This proposal would help ensure 
passenger safety by requiring a QMP to make the determination on 
whether it is safe to move the train, but still provide the railroad 
with sufficient flexibility to handle an activated door by-pass device.
    Paragraph (c)(2). This proposed paragraph would require that either 
the QP or QMP notify the crewmember in charge of the movement of the 
train that the door by-pass device has been activated, thereby 
rendering the train defective under the regulation. This notification 
requirement would ensure that the crewmember in charge of the train's 
movement knows that the train is operating with its door by-pass device 
activated and that some or all of the door safety features of the 
train's exterior side doors may not be properly functioning. In 
addition, a safety briefing must be held with the train's crew and 
include information such as the locations where train crewmembers will 
position themselves on the train in order to ensure that passengers 
board and alight from the train safely. This proposed safety briefing 
would help to ensure that the train operates with the same level of 
safety after the door by-pass device has been activated as it did 
before the device was activated.
    Paragraph (d). Proposed paragraph (d) would require each passenger 
railroad to maintain a record in the defect tracking system required by 
Sec.  238.19 of any door by-pass activation, unintended opening of a 
powered exterior side door, and subsequent repair(s) made to the 
passenger door safety system. While railroads do currently maintain 
records concerning the malfunction of exterior side doors and 
subsequent repairs, FRA is not aware that railroads maintain records in 
the same manner when a door by-pass device has been activated or when 
there has been an unintentional door opening. Collecting this 
information would provide useful data concerning test and maintenance 
intervals that are developed pursuant to this part, e.g., Sec.  238.107 
and subpart F. Like other records collected under Sec.  238.19, 
railroads would be required to make these records available to FRA for 
inspection upon request.
    Paragraph (e). This proposed paragraph is intended to prevent 
exterior side doors from being operated from a door control panel when 
the door key or other similar device has been removed. As evidenced by 
FRA's assessments of various passenger operations, this proposed 
language is necessary because some trains' door safety systems allowed 
the door control panel to remain energized after the door control panel 
key or similar device had been removed from the panel. When door 
control panels can still be operated after the specific door key or 
similar device has been removed, passengers can open the train's 
exterior side doors as simply as by pressing the door open button. FRA 
is concerned because passengers have opened exterior side doors before 
their trains have come to a complete stop at stations in order to exit 
the trains early. Additionally, some passengers have opened the 
exterior side doors to exit their trains while leaving stations because 
they had forgotten to exit while the trains were stopped at station 
platforms. Either of these scenarios could easily result in severe 
passenger injuries.
    As a result, this proposal would require the use of a door panel 
key or a similar device to energize or activate the door control panel. 
The door control panel key or device would be held in the possession of 
the train's crew. FRA does make clear that none of the proposed 
language in this subsection is meant to change any of the requirements 
for the accessibility and operation of manual override devices for 
exterior side doors, found in Sec.  238.112. This proposed requirement 
would not require passengers in an emergency situation to have access 
to the door control panel key in order to operate any manual override 
device for powered exterior side doors required by these sections. 
Passengers and crewmembers must still be able to utilize the manual 
override devices for exterior side doors without the use of a door key 
or other similar device.

[[Page 16992]]

    Paragraph (f). Proposed paragraph (f) would require that if an end-
of-train switch is used, then the switch must be secured in such a 
manner as to prevent unauthorized access. FRA discovered that in many 
models of passenger cars a simple switch was used to denote the end of 
the train. This switch was often in the vestibule area of the car and 
accessible to passengers, and FRA did find a switch that was activated 
in a car other than at the end of the train. Activation of the switch 
eliminates all passenger car exterior side doors beyond the activated 
switch from the door summary circuit, allowing the potential for a 
passenger in one of those cars to become entangled in an exterior side 
door and dragged when the train departs because the door safety 
features do not function. This proposed paragraph would help ensure 
that if a railroad uses end-of-train switches in its trains, the 
railroad takes sufficient care of the switches to prevent them from 
being tampered with or inadvertently activated by unauthorized users.
    Paragraph (g)(1). Proposed paragraph (g)(1) would require that all 
exterior side door safety system override devices that could adversely 
affect a train's door safety system be inactive and sealed in all 
passenger cars and locomotives in the train consist, if they are so 
equipped with such a device. This proposal would apply to cab cars and 
MU locomotives, as well as conventional locomotives. The proposed 
requirements of this paragraph would be subject to the provisions of 
proposed paragraph (c) of this section for a train in which it is 
necessary to activate a door by-pass device, so that the train may 
safely continue to its destination terminal.
    Paragraph (g)(2). Proposed paragraph (g)(2) is similar to the 
language in proposed paragraph (g)(1); however, this paragraph 
emphasizes that as part of the calendar day inspection, QMPs would 
verify that all exterior side door safety system override devices are 
inactive and sealed in all passenger cars and all locomotives in a 
passenger train's consist, including cab cars and MU locomotives, if 
they are so equipped with such devices. Passenger cars or locomotives 
that are found with unsealed or active exterior side door safety system 
override devices would be considered defective under the regulation and 
subject to the movement-for-repair provisions of this part. This 
proposed requirement would apply to all tiers of passenger cars and 
locomotives used in passenger service. FRA invites comment on this 
proposal.
Section 238.135 Operating Practices Relating to Exterior Side Door 
Safety Systems
    FRA is proposing to add this new section to part 238. Each proposed 
subsection is addressed below by paragraph.
    Paragraph (a). This proposed paragraph would require that each 
crewmember participate in a safety briefing that identifies each 
crewmember's responsibilities as they relate to the safe operation of 
the exterior side doors on the crewmember's train. The briefing would 
take place at the beginning of each crewmember's duty assignment prior 
to the departure of the train. This requirement would help to ensure 
that all the crewmembers involved in the operation of a passenger train 
understand their roles and responsibilities with regard to the safe 
operation and use of the exterior side doors.
    FRA is inviting comment from the railroad industry and the greater 
public on the manner in which this safety briefing should occur. FRA 
has no objection if the safety briefing is made part of other safety 
briefings or discussions involving the operation of the passenger 
train. FRA's intention is that each crewmember's role in the safe 
operation and use of the exterior side doors is clearly established.
    Paragraph (b). Proposed paragraph (b) would require that all 
passenger train exterior side doors and trap doors be closed when a 
train is in motion between stations. The exceptions to this proposed 
requirement are described in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2), below.
    Paragraph (b)(1). This proposed paragraph would allow a passenger 
train to depart or arrive at a station with an exterior side door or 
trap door open when a crewmember needs to observe the station platform 
(paragraph (b)(1)(i)) and the open door is attended by the crewmember 
(paragraph (b)(1)(ii)). For instance, observing the station platform is 
necessary when arriving at stations so that crewmembers can ascertain 
that their train is properly positioned along the platform before 
opening the exterior side doors. In addition, crewmembers may need to 
open an exterior side door on their train to facilitate station 
platform observations to help ensure the safety of late-boarding 
passengers for station departures. With a crewmember stationed at each 
open exterior side door or trap door when departing or arriving at a 
station, the train crew can better protect passengers from placing 
themselves in harm's way and more quickly react to an emergency 
situation occurring on the station platform.
    Paragraph (b)(2). This proposed paragraph would allow a passenger 
train to move between stations with its exterior side doors and trap 
doors open when a crewmember must perform on-ground functions. On-
ground functions include, but are not limited to, lining switches, 
making up or splitting the train, providing crossing protection, and 
inspecting the train. This exception is being proposed because the Door 
Safety Subgroup thought it would be too cumbersome and an undue 
hardship on passenger railroads to require them to operate their trains 
with their exterior side doors and trap doors closed when performing 
on-ground functions. For example, passenger train conductors often have 
to exit and reenter their trains several times when lining switches to 
establish the proper track route for their trains. However, FRA expects 
that crewmembers will close any such open exterior side door on their 
trains as soon as it is practical to do so after completing the 
necessary on-ground functions.
    FRA is inviting comment from the railroad industry and the greater 
public on the appropriateness of these exceptions, as well as if other 
exceptions should be provided.
    Paragraph (c). This proposed paragraph would require that, except 
as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, passenger railroads 
receive approval from FRA's Associate Administrator for Railroad 
Safety/Chief Safety Officer to operate passenger trains with their 
exterior side doors or trap doors, or both, open between stations. Any 
request to FRA must include: (1) A written justification explaining why 
the passenger railroad needs to operate its trains in this manner 
(paragraph (c)(2)(i)); and (2) a detailed hazard analysis conducted by 
the railroad analyzing the hazards of running its trains in this 
manner, including specific mitigations to reduce the safety risk to 
passengers and train crews. The request must also be signed by the 
chief executive officer (CEO), or equivalent, of the organization(s) 
making the request (paragraph (c)(3)). In addition, other documents and 
different types of information may need to be submitted to FRA in order 
to support granting the request. Passenger railroads must seek this 
special approval from FRA before operating trains with exterior side 
doors or trap doors, or both, open between stations, so that FRA can 
determine that passengers and train crews riding on such trains are 
adequately safeguarded against personal injury.
    Paragraph (d). This proposed paragraph would require railroads to

[[Page 16993]]

adopt and comply with operating rules on how to safely override a door 
summary circuit or a no-motion system, or both, in the event of an en 
route exterior side door failure or malfunction on a passenger train. 
Under the requirements of this proposed section, the railroads would 
have to provide these written rules to their employees and make them 
available for inspection by FRA. The written rules would have to 
include: (1) Instructions to crewmembers describing what conditions 
must be present in order to override the door summary circuit, or the 
no-motion system, or both (paragraph (d)(1)); and (2) steps crewmembers 
must take after the door summary circuit, or no-motion system, or both 
have been overridden, to help provide for continued passenger safety 
(paragraph (d)(2)). These proposed subsections are intended to make 
sure that a mechanism exists to communicate that a defect has occurred 
in a critical safety system on a passenger train and that passenger 
safety continues to be provided after the critical safety system has 
been overridden.
    FRA is proposing a three-year implementation period for the 
requirements proposed in this paragraph. FRA believes that this three-
year period would provide the railroads adequate time to develop and 
train their train crews on the operating rules, and minimize any cost.
    Finally, FRA invites comment on whether proposed Sec.  238.133(b) 
and (c) should be combined with proposed Sec.  238.135(d) in the final 
rule. To the extent Sec.  238.133(b) and (c) address operating 
practices, the provisions may be more suitable together in one section.
    Paragraph (e). This paragraph would require that each crewmember be 
trained on: (1) The requirements in this section, and (2) how to 
identify and isolate equipment with a malfunctioning exterior powered 
or manual side door. For example, FRA expects that this training would 
cover how a crewmember determines which exterior side door is 
malfunctioning. FRA believes that training employees is necessary to 
ensure that a passenger train's door safety systems are utilized to 
their designed level of safety. Employees operating exterior side doors 
on passenger trains and tasked with providing passenger safety must 
understand the safety risks involved in the use and operation of 
exterior side doors. Employees need to demonstrate knowledge of their 
trains' door safety systems, including how to continue the safe 
operation of malfunctioning equipment and the risks associated with 
operating such equipment, as part of each railroad's training and 
qualification designation program.
    FRA makes clear that it is proposing to apply these requirements to 
both manual and powered exterior side doors. FRA is also proposing a 
three-year implementation period for compliance with this requirement 
as proposed. FRA believes that this three-year period would afford the 
railroads adequate time to train their crewmembers and minimize any 
cost. FRA invites comment on this proposed paragraph.
    Paragraph (f). This proposed paragraph would require that each 
railroad periodically conduct operational (efficiency) tests and 
observations of its operating crewmembers and control center employees 
to determine each individual employee's proficiency with the side door 
safety procedures for both the railroad's exterior powered and manual 
passenger train side doors.
    FRA recognizes the important role control center employees play in 
ensuring the safe movement of trains. These employees should receive 
operational (efficiency) testing appropriate to their role in providing 
door operations support to train crews. For example, control center 
employees should understand the implications of a crew's activation of 
a door by-pass device. Due to additional safety precautions that must 
be taken by the crew, a train might need extra time at station 
platforms to allow for the safe boarding and alighting of passengers, 
which may affect the train's schedule adherence. Control center 
employees should be prepared to respond appropriately in directing 
train movements.
    As in paragraph (e), FRA makes clear that this paragraph would 
apply to both manual and powered exterior side doors. FRA is also 
proposing a three-year implementation period before requiring railroads 
to conduct operational (efficiency) tests and observations of its 
operating crewmembers and control center employees to determine each 
employee's knowledge of the railroad's powered and manual exterior side 
door safety procedures for its passenger trains. FRA believes this 
three-year implementation period would afford the railroads adequate 
time to train and then begin testing their crewmembers on exterior side 
door safety procedures, minimizing any expense. FRA invites comment on 
this proposed paragraph.
    Paragraph (g). This paragraph would require each railroad to adopt 
and comply with operating rules requiring its crewmembers to determine 
the status of their train's exterior side doors so their train may 
safely depart a station. In particular, these rules would require 
crewmembers to determine that there are no obstructions in their 
passenger train's exterior side doors before the train departs. This 
operating rule requirement is being proposed to safeguard against 
passengers becoming entangled in the exterior side doors of a train 
when boarding and alighting the train.
Section 238.137 Mixed Consist; Operating Equipment With Incompatible 
Exterior Side Door Systems
    FRA is proposing to add this new section to part 238. Each proposed 
subsection is addressed below by paragraph.
    Paragraph (a). Proposed paragraph (a) would require trains made up 
of equipment with incompatible exterior side door systems to be 
operated within the constraints of each door safety system in each unit 
of the train. As evidenced by FRA's safety assessments of passenger 
railroad door systems across the country, in many instances passenger 
railroads mix and match different models of passenger cars that have 
different door safety systems when they assemble individual trains. 
These trains are referred to as ``mixed consists'' and can contain 
passenger cars with different types of exterior side doors, such as 
manual and powered doors. They can also be comprised of passenger cars 
with different models or types of powered exterior side doors that are 
not compatible with each other's door safety system. Because the door 
safety systems on mixed consist trains are constrained in their ability 
to communicate the presence of an obstruction in a door, or the door's 
status otherwise, this proposed subsection would require train 
crewmembers to take extra steps to enhance passenger safety to a level 
at least equivalent to that of a train operating with compatible 
exterior side door systems. In this regard, FRA notes that in mixed 
consist trains with both manual and powered exterior side doors, the 
manual exterior side doors would require extra attention by crewmembers 
to ensure that they are closed and it is safe to depart.
    Paragraph (b). This proposed paragraph would require railroads to 
develop operating rules to provide for the safe use of passenger cars 
and locomotives used in passenger service with incompatible exterior 
side door safety systems when they are operated together in a train as 
a mixed consist. Implementation of these operating rules

[[Page 16994]]

is intended to ensure that the mixed consist train is operated with at 
least the same level of safety even though the door safety systems on 
the various cars are incompatible. These rules should take into 
consideration the constraints of the door systems of the equipment 
operated by the railroad. For example, the operation of a mixed consist 
train may require additional measures to help ensure passenger safety, 
such as operating rules on crew positioning or providing a second look 
at the station platform to determine that it is safe for the train to 
depart a station.

Appendix A to Part 238--Schedule of Civil Penalties

    This appendix contains a schedule of civil penalties for use in 
connection with this part. FRA intends to revise the schedule of civil 
penalties in issuing the final rule to reflect revisions made to this 
part. Because such penalty schedules are statements of agency policy, 
notice and comment are not required prior to their issuance. See 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Nevertheless, commenters are invited to submit 
suggestions to FRA describing the types of actions or omissions for 
each proposed regulatory section that would subject a person to the 
assessment of a civil penalty. Commenters are also invited to recommend 
what penalties may be appropriate, based upon the relative seriousness 
of each type of violation.

V. Regulatory Impact and Notices

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures

    This proposed rule has been evaluated in accordance with Executive 
Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive Order 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT policies and 
procedures. A regulatory evaluation has been prepared addressing the 
economic impact of the proposed rule over a 20-year period. The 
economic impacts of the proposed rule are estimated at well under $100 
million per year. This section summarizes the economic impacts of the 
proposed rule.
    The intent of the proposed regulation is to increase safety by 
reducing the injuries caused by the operation of a passenger train's 
exterior side doors (``doors''). The doors can cause injuries to 
passengers from striking or holding them as they board or alight from 
trains. These injuries are unintended consequences that result from 
normal train operations. Although most passenger trips occur without a 
door incident, the consequences of improper door operations can and 
have resulted in serious harm and even death. In November 2006, a 
passenger died after being caught in the doors of a departing NJT train 
at the Bradley Beach, NJ station.
    FRA is proposing to reduce door injuries in two ways. First, the 
proposed rule addresses the rules and procedures for operating the 
doors. The proposed rule requires railroads to have operating rules for 
their employees that emphasize understanding the capabilities and 
limits of the door safety systems installed on the passenger cars and 
locomotives used in passenger service that they operate. The overall 
intent of the operating rules requirement is that the train crew should 
be aware of the status of the door safety systems on their train, such 
as if the train is operating in by-pass mode (which overrides certain 
door safety features), if a door is locked-out because of a 
malfunction, or if they are working on trains that have cars with 
different door safety systems. Specific requirements include the need 
for the train crew to verify that the door by-pass devices are sealed 
on the train that they are operating, to report instances when a by-
pass device is found unsealed, and to understand crew responsibilities 
to safely operate the train when by-pass mode has been activated. The 
proposed rule also contains provisions to mitigate existing practices 
that may unintentionally increase the risk of door-caused injuries. For 
example, under the proposed rule, door control panels (used to open and 
close the doors) would be required to become and remain inactive if a 
door control key or similar secure device is removed from the panel. 
Also, if switches are used to denote the end of the train, then these 
switches would need to be secured. Securing the switches used to denote 
the end of the train would reduce the opportunity for part of the train 
to be cut-off from the summary circuit and be left unprotected by the 
door safety system (a situation which could occur if the end-of-train 
switches are activated at some location other than at the actual end of 
the train). Additionally, FRA is concerned about the inherent risk 
posed by a few railroads' practice of running trains with the doors 
open between stations. However, FRA would allow railroads the 
flexibility to continue the practice, but only by special approval 
supported by a hazard analysis. Other proposed requirements for 
operating rules task the crew with determining that the doors are free 
of obstructions so that the train may safely depart a station, and with 
procedures for safely operating trains that consist of mixed passenger 
cars and locomotives used in passenger service, such as cars with 
different door systems. For these operating rules as well as operating 
rules describing procedures to maintain safety when the train is in by-
pass mode, FRA would allow three years for implementing compliance. 
Passenger railroads would also have a three year period to train 
crewmembers in these operating rules before being required to conduct 
operational (efficiency) tests to determine that the employees 
understand the proposed operating rules.
    The second part of the proposed rule concerns requirements for 
doors on new passenger cars and connected locomotives used in passenger 
service. FRA is proposing to adopt an APTA standard containing the 
design requirements for door safety systems on these types of new 
passenger equipment that are ordered with powered doors. For example, 
new cars with powered doors would be required to have an obstruction 
detection system, a key or other secure device to activate (i.e., turn 
on) a door control panel, and have doors that are not closed or opened 
by moving the locomotive throttle control (i.e., the doors should be 
controlled by the crew instead of by the movement of the train). The 
APTA standard is structured in a hierarchical order, addressing the 
door safety features at the individual door level through the overall 
system level. The standard is structured this way to potentially 
prevent or mitigate unsafe door conditions at one of several levels. 
This structure also provides railroads flexibility in determining the 
most appropriate equipment design for their particular operations. 
Additionally, the proposed rule includes some minimum design standards 
for new passenger cars and connected locomotives used in passenger 
service ordered with both powered and manual doors. These types of new 
passenger equipment equipped with either powered or manual doors would 
need to have a door summary circuit that prevents the train from taking 
power and moving if a door is open. Other safety requirements that 
apply to new cars with either powered or manual doors are door status 
lights or indicators, a door summary status indicator or light that is 
easily viewable by the engineer, and by-pass devices that work only 
when activated from the operating cab of the train. The proposed rule 
clarifies that these requirements for passenger trains with manual or 
powered doors apply to both commuter and intercity passenger service 
railroads (but not to private equipment). The cost

[[Page 16995]]

to install additional door safety features on new cars should be less 
than retrofitting existing cars, as less labor would be needed to 
remove old equipment, and potentially fewer parts would be used. For 
example, a retrofit might require additional parts to adapt old 
equipment for use with new equipment. These safety features are all 
currently available.
    FRA has analyzed the economic impacts of this rule against a ``no 
action'' baseline. The no action baseline reflects the state of the 
world in the absence of this proposed rule. The estimated costs from 
the extra burden caused by the proposed rule over the 20-year period of 
analysis total $15.0 million undiscounted, with a present value 
calculated using a 7 percent discount rate (PV, 7%) of about $8.0 
million, and a present value calculated using a 3 percent discount rate 
(PV, 3%) of $11.2 million. The estimated quantified benefits over a 20-
year period total $81.9 million undiscounted, $42.4 million (PV, 7%), 
and $60.3 million (PV, 3%). These costs and benefits result in net 
positive benefits over 20 years of about $67.0 million undiscounted, 
$34.4 million (PV, 7%), and $49.1 million (PV, 3%).
    The proposed rule incurs relatively small costs and therefore has 
relatively high net benefits. Most of the initial burdens are expected 
from changes to railroad operating rules, and the design standards for 
door safety systems apply to new passenger trains where they can be 
installed cost-effectively. The largest contributor to costs is the 
crewmembers' task of verifying that the door by-pass devices on the 
train are sealed in the normal, non-by-pass mode. The quantified 
benefits result primarily from reduced injuries based on a count of 
door injures in the past (2001-2005), and the assumption that the 
proposed rule would be 50 percent effective in reducing similar 
injuries and fatalities in the future. The count of door injuries used 
the descriptive, narrative statements on accident reports to better 
identify door-caused injuries (yielding about 19 potentially avoided 
injuries per year on average). A count of door-caused injuries using 
more recent data from 2011 yielded 19 injuries per year, similar to the 
previous year results. There may be other additional benefits that were 
not quantified from the proposed rulemaking, such as fewer passenger 
claims for personal property damage. Also, as door incidents are often 
well-publicized in the media, reducing the number of door incidents 
will maintain and enhance the public's perception of safe passenger 
service, or goodwill toward passenger service. Furthermore, railroads 
for which the APTA standard may serve as an incentive to purchase new 
cars may as a result have reduced door system maintenance costs. For 
example, if older door systems that use electro-pneumatic doors are 
replaced with newer, more reliable powered door systems, maintenance 
costs could be expected to decrease.
    The costs and benefits are summarized in the tables Costs Summary 
and Benefits Summary, respectively.

                                              Table--Costs Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Proposed rule reference (and                                               Total present       Total present
     regulatory  evaluation          Cost category    Total undiscounted    value of costs      value of costs
           reference)                                        costs         discounted at 7%    discounted at 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238.133(a) (8.2(a)), By-Pass      Verify Door By-     $10,961,359.......  $5,419,580........  $7,908,974.
 Device Verification.              Pass Devices Are
                                   Sealed and Ensure
                                   Integrity of the
                                   Train.
238.133(a) (8.2(a)), Developing   As an Alternative,  $9,702............  $8,008............  $8,824.
 a Written Functional Test Plan.   Develop a Written
                                   Functional Test
                                   Plan to Comply
                                   with 238.131(a)
                                   By-Pass Device
                                   Verification.
238.133(b) (8.2(b)), Unsealed     Apply Seal to Door  $548,068..........  $279,979..........  $395,449.
 Door By-Pass Device.              By-Pass Devices
                                   when Found
                                   Unsealed, Report
                                   Defect.
238.133(c) (8.2(c)), En Route     Determine if Safe   $76,882...........  $40,156...........  $56,833.
 Failure.                          to Proceed with
                                   Door By-Pass
                                   Activated, and
                                   Hold Crew Safety
                                   Briefing.
238.133(d) (8.2(d)), Records....  Record the Door By- $12,848...........  $6,711............  $9,498.
                                   Pass Activation.
238.133(d) (8.2(d)), Records....  Record Unintended   $51,393...........  $26,843...........  $37,991.
                                   Door Openings.
238.133(e) (8.2(e)), Door         Average of          (0.5*$185,910) +    (0.5*$173,748) +    (0.5*$180,495) +
 Control Panels.                   Engineering and     (0.5*$26,515) =     (0.5*$23,897) =     (0.5*$25,334) =
                                   Operating Rule      $106,213.           $98,822.            $102,915.
                                   Solutions to
                                   Prevent
                                   Unauthorized
                                   Access to Door
                                   Control Panels.
238.133(f) (8.2(f)), End-of-      Secure End-of-      $204,024..........  $190,677..........  $198,082.
 Train.                            Train Switches,
                                   if Used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238.133(g)(1) (8.2(g)(1)),        Seal By-Pass           Accounted for in Sections 238.133(a), 238.133(b), and
 Exterior Side Door Safety         Devices, if so                            238.133(g)(2).
 System Override Devices.          Equipped.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238.133(g)(2) (8.2(g)(2)),        Verify Door By-     $78,235...........  $40,863...........  $57,833.
 Calendar Day Inspection.          Pass Devices
                                   Sealed; Cost for
                                   Events Requiring
                                   Additional
                                   Troubleshooting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 16996]]

 
238.135(a) (8.3(a)), Participate  Emphasize Crew       Can Combine with Other Safety Briefings, Minimal Marginal
 in Daily Safety/Job Briefing.     Responsibilities                              Cost.
                                   for Safe Door
                                   Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238.135(b), 235.135(c) (8.3(b),   Railroads that      $3,095............  $2,892............  $3,005.
 8.3(c)), Operate with the         File a Written
 Exterior Side Doors and Traps     Justification
 Closed when Traveling Between     with FRA
 Stations, and Special Approval    Requesting
 to do so.                         Special Approval
                                   to Operate with
                                   the Exterior Side
                                   Doors Open
                                   Between Stations.
238.135(d), 238.135(g),           Developing          $152,072..........  $105,179..........  $127,900.
 238.137(b) (8.3.1), Develop       Operating Rules
 Operating Rules, Mixed Consist.   for Overriding
                                   Door Safety
                                   Systems,
                                   Determining That
                                   Passengers are
                                   Clear of the
                                   Doors, and
                                   Operating a Train
                                   with Incompatible
                                   Door Safety
                                   Systems.
238.135(d) (8.3.1), Addn'l        Provide Written     Enter, Copy,        Enter, Copy,        Enter, Copy,
 Requirement to Provide Written    Operating Rules     Distribute Rules    Distribute =        Distribute =
 Operating Rules for By-Pass.      to Employees for    = $2,178, Read=     $1,439, Read =      $1,797, Read =
                                   Safely Overriding   $100,279, Total =   $65,706, Total =    $82,451, Total =
                                   Door Safety         $102,456.           $67,145.            $84,248.
                                   Systems, Allow
                                   Time for
                                   Employees to Read
                                   Operating Rules.
238.135(e) (8.3.2), Training....  Review and Revise   Review and Revise   Review and Revise   Review and Revise
                                   Existing Training   Training Plans =    Training Plans =    Training Plans =
                                   Plans for           $11,136, Perform    $8,334, Perform     $9,736, Perform
                                   Training on         Training =          Training =          Training =
                                   Exterior Side       $571,052, Total =   $378,669, Total =   $471,921, Total =
                                   Door Safety         $582,188.           $387,002.           $481,657.
                                   Systems and
                                   Operating Rules,
                                   Perform Training.
238.135(f) (8.3.2), Operational   Conduct             $114,007..........  $51,845...........  $79,752.
 (Efficiency) Tests and            Operational
 Observations.                     (Efficiency)
                                   Testing for
                                   Exterior Side
                                   Door Safety
                                   Procedures.
238.131(a) (8.4), New Passenger   Implement APTA      $300,000..........  $280,374..........  $291,262.
 Cars and Loco's Used in           Standard for
 Passenger Service, Safety         Powered Exterior
 Systems for Powered Exterior      Side Door Systems
 Side Doors.                       on New Passenger
                                   Cars and
                                   Connected Loco's
                                   Used in Passenger
                                   Service.
238.131(b) (8.5.1), Manual and    Implement Some      $1,682,368........  $1,010,207........  $1,344,694.
 Powered Door Standards for New    Safety Features
 Passenger Equipment.              for New Passenger
                                   Cars and Loco's
                                   Used in Passenger
                                   Service With
                                   Either Powered or
                                   Manual Exterior
                                   Side Doors.
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
    TOTAL.......................  ..................  $14,984,983.......  $8,007,284........  $11,188,914.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                 Table--Benefits Summary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Est. reduction in   Est. reduction in    Total value of
                                                      (VSL=$9.1 million)   Est. reduction in  injuries, monetary      fatalities,        reductions in
                      Rule year                        AIS level dollar   injuries, monetary     value at 50%      monetary value at     injuries and
                                                             value               value           effectiveness    50%  effectiveness      fatalities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...................................................            $297,465          $5,532,849          $2,766,425            $929,578          $3,696,003
2...................................................             300,648           5,592,051           2,796,025             939,525           3,735,550
3...................................................             303,865           5,651,886           2,825,943             949,578           3,775,520
4...................................................             307,116           5,712,361           2,856,180             959,738           3,815,919
5...................................................             310,402           5,773,483           2,886,742             970,007           3,856,749
6...................................................             313,724           5,835,260           2,917,630             980,386           3,898,016
7...................................................             317,080           5,897,697           2,948,848             990,876           3,939,725
8...................................................             320,473           5,960,802           2,980,401           1,001,479           3,981,880
9...................................................             323,902           6,024,583           3,012,291           1,012,195           4,024,486
10..................................................             327,368           6,089,046           3,044,523           1,023,025           4,067,548
11..................................................             330,871           6,154,199           3,077,099           1,033,972           4,111,071

[[Page 16997]]

 
12..................................................             334,411           6,220,048           3,110,024           1,045,035           4,155,059
13..................................................             337,989           6,286,603           3,143,301           1,056,217           4,199,518
14..................................................             341,606           6,353,870           3,176,935           1,067,518           4,244,453
15..................................................             345,261           6,421,856           3,210,928           1,078,941           4,289,869
16..................................................             348,955           6,490,570           3,245,285           1,090,486           4,335,770
17..................................................             352,689           6,560,019           3,280,010           1,102,154           4,382,163
18..................................................             356,463           6,630,211           3,315,106           1,113,947           4,429,052
19..................................................             360,277           6,701,154           3,350,577           1,125,866           4,476,443
20..................................................             364,132           6,772,857           3,386,428           1,137,913           4,524,341
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total undiscounted..............................  ..................  ..................          61,330,702          20,608,435          81,939,137
    Total PV @7%....................................  ..................  ..................          31,735,978          10,663,971          42,399,949
    Total PV @3%....................................  ..................  ..................          45,149,174          15,171,093          60,320,267
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Average estimated reduction in injuries = 18.6 injuries per year.
Average estimated reduction in fatalities = 0.20 fatalities per year.
Average Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) level for door injuries = 1.67
Value of a Statistical Life (VSL) = $9.1 million in base year 2012, increased at a rate of 1.07 percent annually, to equal $9.3 million in rule year 1.
PV = Present Value.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272; Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Assessment

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and 
Executive Order 13272 (67 FR 53461, Aug. 16, 2002) require agency 
review of proposed and final rules to assess their impacts on small 
entities. An agency must prepare an initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis (IRFA) unless it determines and certifies that a rule, if 
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. FRA has not determined whether 
this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Therefore, FRA is publishing this 
IRFA to aid the public in commenting on the potential small business 
impacts of the requirements in this NPRM. FRA invites all interested 
parties to submit data and information regarding the potential economic 
impact on small entities that would result from the adoption of the 
proposals in this NPRM. FRA will consider all information and comments 
received in the public comment process when making a determination 
regarding the economic impact on small entities in the final rule.
    FRA estimates that the total cost of the proposed rule for the 
railroad industry over a 20-year period will be $15.0 million 
(undiscounted)--$8.0 million (discounted at 7 percent), or $11.2 
million (discounted at 3 percent). Based on information currently 
available, FRA estimates that 1 percent or less of the total railroad 
costs associated with implementing the proposed rule would be borne by 
small entities.
    There are two railroads that would be considered small entities for 
purposes of this analysis and together they comprise about 7 percent of 
the railroads impacted directly by this proposed regulation. Thus, 7 
percent of the impacted railroads could be considered to be a 
substantial number of small entities in this potentially impacted 
sector. However, these two small entities represent a much smaller 
portion of the total railroad industry that is impacted by this 
proposed rule. This is because of the small number of trains operated 
annually, or the small number of employees employed by these two 
railroads, or both. In order to get a better understanding of the total 
costs for the railroad industry (which forms the basis for the 
estimates in this IRFA) or more cost detail on any specific 
requirement, please see the regulatory evaluation that FRA has placed 
in the docket for this rulemaking.
    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, an IRFA must 
contain:
     A description of the reasons why action by the agency is 
being considered.
     A succinct statement of the objectives of, and the legal 
basis for, the proposed rule.
     A description--and, where feasible, an estimate of the 
number--of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply.
     A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, 
and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an 
estimate of the classes of small entities that will be subject to the 
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for 
preparation of the report or record.
     Identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant 
Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the 
proposed rule.
1. Reasons for Considering Agency Action
    The primary goal of this rulemaking is to improve the safety of 
passengers and employees on intercity passenger and commuter trains, as 
they board and alight through the exterior side doors of passenger 
cars. For convenience, unless otherwise specified, ``doors'' in this 
analysis refers to the exterior side doors intended and normally used 
by passengers for boarding and alighting from the train. For most train 
operations, passengers use these pathways on and off the train without 
incidence. They generally take for granted that the doors will function 
safely. However, there have been some casualties that have occurred in 
the past, some of which had tragic consequences. These injuries and 
fatalities are unintended, harmful consequences to passengers and 
employees that result from normal train operations. The casualties 
represent a negative externality that could be eliminated or mitigated 
to reduce the risk of harm to passengers and employees.
    Most passengers and employees have an expectation that the train 
exterior side doors will function safely when boarding and alighting 
from the train. Therefore, passengers and employees may not properly 
assess the potential

[[Page 16998]]

safety risks of a door problem because door incidents are low-
frequency, but potentially high-consequence events. Passengers and 
employees may not have all the necessary information about how a 
train's exterior side doors will operate in case of a problem. This 
information gap affects how passengers and employees interact with the 
doors. For example, passengers may assume that passenger train exterior 
side doors will bounce back continuously when an obstruction prevents 
the doors from closing like most elevator doors do; however, not all 
passenger train cars are equipped with this safety feature. 
Additionally, employees might not know whether the exterior side doors 
on a train will open or close when there has been an interruption in 
power. Furthermore, for trains that use marker light switches to denote 
the end of the train, employees may not realize that activating these 
switches at a point other than the physical end of the train will 
complete the trainline door circuit at that car. This situation would 
effectively leave the passenger cars after the car with the marker 
lights switched on without any exterior side door safety features.
2. A Succinct Statement of the Objectives of, and the Legal Basis for, 
the Proposed Rule
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to improve railroad safety 
through proposed regulatory language that would establish new design 
standards, as well as operating practices relating to the use of safety 
devices that are a part of exterior side doors on passenger train cars. 
This NPRM proposes to incorporate by reference some of these standards 
from APTA standard PR-M-S-18-10 (``Standard for Powered Exterior Side 
Door System Design for New Passenger Cars'').
    The proposed rule prescribes minimum Federal safety standards 
relating to the design, operation, and use of passenger train side door 
safety systems. The proposed rule does not restrict railroads from 
adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent requirements not 
inconsistent with this part.
    In order to further FRA's ability to respond effectively to 
contemporary safety problems and hazards as they arise in the railroad 
industry, Congress enacted the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 
(formerly 45 U.S.C. 421, 431 et seq., now found primarily in chapter 
201 of title 49, U.S.C.), granting the Secretary rulemaking authority 
over all areas of railroad safety (49 U.S.C. 20103(a)) and conferring 
all powers necessary to detect and penalize violations of any rail 
safety law. This authority was subsequently delegated to the 
Administrator of FRA (49 CFR 1.89) (Until July 5, 1994, the Federal 
railroad safety statutes existed as separate acts found primarily in 
title 45, U.S.C; on that date, all of the acts were repealed, and their 
provisions were recodified into title 49, U.S.C.). Accordingly, FRA is 
using this (and other) authority to initiate a rulemaking that would 
establish new standards relating to passenger train door operations, 
enhancing standards codified in part 238, which was originally issued 
in May 1999 as part of FRA's implementation of rail passenger safety 
regulations required by section 215 of the Federal Railroad Safety 
Authorization Act of 1994 (49 U.S.C. 20133).
3. A Description of, and Where Feasible, an Estimate of the Number of 
Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rule Would Apply
    The ``universe'' of the entities considered in an IRFA generally 
includes only those small entities that can reasonably expect to be 
directly regulated by this proposed action. Small passenger railroads 
are the only types of small entities that may be affected directly by 
this proposed rule.
    ``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(3) as having the same 
meaning as ``small business concern'' under section 3 of the Small 
Business Act. This includes any small business concern that is 
independently owned and operated, and is not dominant in its field of 
operation. Section 601(4) likewise includes within the definition of 
``small entities'' not-for-profit enterprises that are independently 
owned and operated, and are not dominant in their field of operation.
    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) stipulates in its size 
standards that the largest a railroad business firm that is ``for 
profit'' may be and still be classified as a ``small entity'' is 1,500 
employees for ``Line Haul Operating Railroads'' and 500 employees for 
``Switching and Terminal Establishments.'' Additionally, 5 U.S.C. 
601(5) defines as ``small entities'' governments of cities, counties, 
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with 
populations less than 50,000.
    Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small 
entities in consultation with SBA and in conjunction with public 
comment. Pursuant to that authority, FRA has published a final 
statement of agency policy that formally establishes ``small entities'' 
or ``small businesses'' as being railroads, contractors, and hazardous 
materials shippers that meet the revenue requirements of a Class III 
railroad as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1, which is $20 million or less 
in inflation-adjusted annual revenues, and commuter railroads or small 
governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 50,000 or less. 
See 68 FR 24891, May 9, 2003, codified at appendix C to 49 CFR part 
209. The $20 million limit is based on the Surface Transportation 
Board's revenue threshold for a Class III railroad. Railroad revenue is 
adjusted for inflation by applying a revenue deflator formula in 
accordance with 49 CFR 1201.1-1. FRA is proposing to use this 
definition for this rulemaking. Any comments received pertinent to its 
use will be addressed in the final rule.

Passenger Railroads

    If the regulatory language proposed in this NPRM is adopted into a 
final rule, commuter and intercity passenger railroads would have to 
comply with all of the proposed part 238 provisions in this NPRM. 
However, the amount of effort to comply with the language proposed in 
this NPRM is commensurate with the size of the entity, the number of 
trains operated by the entity, the number of employees employed by the 
railroad, and the railroad's current operating rules in regards to the 
operation of the train's exterior side doors.
    There are two intercity passenger railroads, Amtrak and the Alaska 
Railroad Corporation. Neither can be considered a small entity. Amtrak 
is not considered to be a small railroad. The Alaska Railroad is a 
Class II railroad and also not considered to be a small railroad per 
the definition of small entity in this IRFA. The Alaska Railroad is 
owned by the State of Alaska, which has a population well in excess of 
50,000. Therefore, they will not be considered in the calculations in 
this IRFA.
    There are 28 commuter or other short-haul passenger railroad 
operations in the U.S. Most of these railroads are part of larger 
transit organizations that receive Federal funds and serve major 
metropolitan areas with populations greater than 50,000. However, two 
of these railroads do not fall in this category and are considered 
small entities: Saratoga & North Creek Railway (SNC), and the Hawkeye 
Express, which is operated by the Iowa Northern Railway Company (IANR). 
All other passenger railroad operations in the United States are part 
of larger governmental entities whose service jurisdictions exceed 
50,000 in population.

[[Page 16999]]

    In 2011, Hawkeye Express transported approximately 5,000 passengers 
per game over a 7-mile round-trip distance to and from University of 
Iowa (University) football games. Iowa Northern, which operates the 
Hawkeye Express, has approximately 100 employees and is primarily a 
freight operation totaling 184,385 freight train miles in 2010. The 
Hawkeye Express service is on a contractual arrangement with the 
University, a State of Iowa institution (the population of Iowa City, 
Iowa is approximately 69,000). Iowa Northern owns and operates the six 
bi-level passenger cars used for this small passenger operation which 
runs on average seven days over a calendar year. FRA expects that any 
costs imposed on the railroad by this regulation will be passed on to 
the University as part of the costs to operate the seasonal, game-day 
trains, and requests comments on this assumption.
    SNC began operation in the summer of 2011 and currently provides 
daily rail service over a 57-mile line between Saratoga Springs and 
North Creek, New York. The SNC is a Class III railroad (i.e., below the 
$20 million revenue threshold) and a limited liability company wholly 
owned by San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad (SLRG). SLRG is a Class III 
railroad and a subsidiary of Permian Basin Railways, Inc. (Permian). 
Permian is in turn owned by Iowa Pacific Holdings, LLC (IPH). The SNC 
primarily transports passengers to Saratoga Springs, tourists seeking 
to sightsee along the Hudson River, and travelers connecting to and 
from Amtrak service. The SNC is involved with the operation of 
passenger trains year round using conventional locomotives in the lead, 
typically pulling consists of passenger coaches and other cars such as 
baggage cars and dining cars.
    Additional service activity includes seasonal ski trains and 
special trains such as ``Thomas the Train.'' This railroad operates 
under a five-year contract with the local government and is planning to 
restart freight operations in the future. SNC has about 25 total 
employees, including about 7 engineers and conductors.
    The cost burden to these two small entities will be considerably 
less on average than that of the other 28 railroads. FRA estimates 
impacts on these two railroads could range on average between $900 and 
$1800 annually to comply with the proposed regulations if they are 
adopted.
    The Hawkeye Express provides service under contract to a state 
institution (i.e., the University). It may be able to pass some or all 
of the compliance cost on to that institution. As a result, the Hawkeye 
Express may not be significantly impacted by these proposed 
regulations.

Contractors

    Some passenger railroads use contractors to perform many different 
functions on their railroads. For some passenger railroads, contractors 
operate trains and perform other safety-related functions. For the 
purpose of assessing this proposed rule's impact, the pertinent 
contractors are all larger contractors who perform primary operating 
and maintenance functions for the passenger railroads. Conversely, 
smaller contractors perform ancillary functions to the primary 
operations. Larger contractors are typically large private companies 
such as Herzog or part of an international conglomerate such as Keolis 
or Veolia. These international conglomerates have substantial 
multidisciplinary workforces and are able to perform most to all of the 
operating functions that the passenger railroad requires. FRA seeks 
comment on these findings and conclusions.
4. A Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements of the Rule, Including an Estimate of the Class 
of Small Entities That Will Be Subject to the Requirements and the Type 
of Professional Skill Necessary for Preparation of the Report or Record
    There are reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance costs associated 
with this proposed regulation. The practices of some passenger 
railroads have been in compliance with the proposed requirements in 
this NPRM voluntarily for some time. For these affected small entities, 
the additional burden of the proposed requirements is marginal. The 
total 20-year cost of this proposed rulemaking is $15.0 million 
(undiscounted) of which FRA estimates one percent or less will be 
attributable to small entities. FRA estimates that the approximate 
total burden for small railroads for the 20-year period could range 
between $74,000 and $149,000 (undiscounted) depending on discount rates 
and the extent of costs relative to larger railroads. FRA believes this 
would not be a significant economic burden. For a thorough presentation 
of cost estimates please refer to the regulatory evaluation, which has 
been placed in the docket for this rulemaking. FRA expects that most of 
the skills necessary to comply with the proposed regulation would be 
possessed by operating crew employees as well as recordkeeping and 
reporting personnel.
    The nature of the operations of these two small entities would be 
indicative of lower over-all costs to these railroads. The Hawkeye 
Express has a very limited operation in both the number of days that 
the railroad operates and the total trips made by its trains. As a 
result, the costs for almost all of the proposed burdens on the Hawkeye 
Express are low. The SNC operates more trains and for more days than 
the Hawkeye Express, but still has a low number of cars and limited 
number of trips. This type of operation would keep the costs low if the 
proposed requirements are enacted.
    However, there will be potential new burdens for these two small 
railroads if the regulatory language in this NPRM is enacted. The 
regulatory evaluation estimates the proposed requirements in Sec.  
238.133(a) and (b) as being the largest cost for railroads under the 
proposed rule. However, neither of these railroads operate trains that 
use by-pass devices. Proposed Sec.  238.131 could also be very costly 
for railroads if adopted because it proposes that ``new'' passenger 
cars with exterior side doors, and ``new'' passenger locomotives with 
connected door safety systems, meet specified industry standards. 
However, this section would not have any impact on these two small 
entities because these two entities do not purchase or order new 
passenger cars or passenger locomotives. The proposed requirements in 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are all focused on new passenger 
cars and adopting the APTA standard for exterior, powered side door 
systems, as well as requirements for new passenger cars with powered or 
manual exterior side doors. Due to the limited operations of both 
entities, it is unlikely that these entities would purchase new 
passenger cars anytime in the near future. (For all railroads, proposed 
Sec.  238.131 applies to new rail passenger cars and locomotives used 
in passenger service ordered on or after 120 days after the publication 
of the final rule in the Federal Register, or placed into service for 
the first time on or after 790 days after the date of publication. This 
time period provides the railroads some time to reach compliance.) For 
proposed Sec.  238.135 the costs will vary for these two entities. For 
paragraphs (b) and (c) of Sec.  238.135, FRA does not anticipate any 
burden for these small entities because both of the railroads currently 
operate with their trains' exterior side doors closed between train 
stations. Paragraphs (d) and (g) of Sec.  238.135 are focused on the 
railroads having sufficient operating rules to ensure the safe 
operation of their trains' exterior side passenger doors. Paragraph (e) 
requires the

[[Page 17000]]

passenger train crewmembers be trained on the requirements of the 
proposed section. For most railroads this will be a new burden. 
Railroads would have to review their existing training plans. However, 
crewmembers responsible for door operations (i.e., the engineer and 
conductor) would have received some training on door operations as part 
of their professional training and certification programs. Thus the 
economic burdens for Sec.  238.135(b), (c) and (f), as well as Sec.  
238.137(a) and (b), are dependent on whether the current operating 
rules of the railroads covered by the proposed rule include the 
proposed door operation requirements. The proposed door safety features 
and their associated operating rules are not new or novel procedures, 
but currently exist. Most of the larger-volume passenger service 
railroads have some door operating rules; the smaller railroads may 
have less extensive door operating rules corresponding to the fewer 
types of equipment they run. For proposed Sec.  235.135(d), (e), and 
(f), and Sec.  238.137(b), FRA is allowing 1,095 days (3 years) after 
the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register for 
compliance. The cost of all these proposed requirements as relating to 
small business entities are estimated to be less than two percent of 
the total cost of the proposed rule.

Market and Competition Considerations

    The railroad industry has several significant barriers to entry, 
such as the need to own or otherwise obtain access to rights-of-way and 
the high capital expenditure needed to purchase a fleet, as well as 
track and equipment. Furthermore, the two railroads under consideration 
would only be competing with individual automobile traffic and serve as 
a service to get drivers out of their automobiles and off congested 
roadways. One of the two entities, Hawkeye Express, transports 
passengers to a stadium from distant parking lots. The SNC provides 
passenger train service to tourist and other destinations between 
Sarasota Springs and North Creek, New York. FRA is not aware of any bus 
service that currently exists that competes with either of these 
railroads. Thus, while this proposed rule would have an economic impact 
on all passenger railroads, it should not have an impact on the 
competitive position of small railroads. FRA requests comment on these 
findings and conclusions.
5. Identification, to the Extent Practicable, of All Relevant Federal 
Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
    FRA is not aware of any relevant Federal rule that duplicates, 
overlaps with, or conflicts with the proposed regulations in this NPRM; 
the proposed regulation in fact complements most FRA's other safety 
regulations for railroad operations, especially the safety of railroad 
passenger operations.
    FRA invites all interested parties to submit comments, data, and 
information demonstrating the potential economic impact on small 
entities that would result from the adoption of the proposed language 
in this NPRM. FRA will consider all comments received during the public 
comment period for this NPRM when making a final determination of the 
NPRM's economic impact on small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule are 
being submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The sections that 
contain the new information and current information collection 
requirements and the estimated time to fulfill each requirement are as 
follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Respondent         Total annual      Average time per      Total annual
           CFR Section                 universe            responses           response          burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
229.47--Emergency Brake Valve--   30 railroads......  30 markings.......  1 minute..........  1 hour.
 Marking Brake Pipe Valve as
 such.
--DMU, MU, Control Cab            30 railroads......  5 markings........  1 minute..........  .08 hour.
 Locomotives--Marking Emergency
 Brake Valve as such.
238.7--Waivers..................  30 railroads......  5 waivers.........  2 hours...........  10 hours.
238.15--Movement of passenger     30 railroads......  1,000 tags........  3 minutes.........  50 hours.
 equipment with power brake
 defect.
--Movement of passenger           30 railroads......  288 tags..........  3 minutes.........  14 hours.
 equipment--defective en route.
Conditional requirement--         30 railroads......  144 notices.......  3 minutes.........  7 hours.
 Notificat.
238.17--Limitations on movement   30 railroads......  200 tags..........  3 minutes.........  10 hours.
 of passenger equipment--defects
 found at calendar day insp. &
 on movement of passenger
 equipment--develops defects en
 route.
--Special requisites--movement--  30 railroads......  76 tags...........  3 minutes.........  4 hours.
 passenger equip.--saf. appl.
 defect.
--Crew member notifications.....  30 railroads......  38 radio            30 seconds........  .32 hour.
                                                       notifications.
238.21--Petitions for special     30 railroads......  1 petition........  16 hours..........  16 hours.
 approval of alternative
 standards.
--Petitions for special approval  30 railroads......  1 petition........  120 hours.........  120 hours.
 of alternative compliance.

[[Page 17001]]

 
--Petitions for special approval  30 railroads......  10 petitions......  40 hours..........  400 hours.
 of pre-revenue service
 acceptance testing plan.
--Comments on petitions.........  Public/RR Industry  4 comments........  1 hour............  4 hours.
238.103--Fire Safety--Procuring   2 new railroads...  2 analyses........  150 hours.........  300 hours.
 New Pass. Equipment--Fire
 Safety Analysis.
--Existing Equipment--Final Fire  30 railroads......  1 analysis........  40 hours..........  40 hours.
 Safety Analysis.
--Transferring existing           30 railroads/APTA.  3 analyses........  20 hours..........  60 hours.
 equipment--Revised Fire Safety
 Analysis.
238.107--Inspection/testing/      30 railroads......  12 reviews........  60 hours..........  720 hours.
 maintenance plans--Review by
 railroads.
238.109--Employee/Contractor      7,500 employees/    2,500 empl./100     1.33 hours........  3,458 hours.
 Tr.--Training empl.--Mech.        100 trainers.       trainers.
 Inspection.
--Recordkeeping--Employee/        30 railroads......  2,500 record......  3 minutes.........  125 hours.
 Contractor Current
 Qualifications.
238.111--Pre-revenue service      9 equipment         2 plans...........  16 hours..........  32 hours.
 acceptance testing plan:          manufacturers.
 Passenger equipment that has
 previously been used in service
 in the U.S.
--Passenger equipment that has    9 equipment         2 plans...........  192 hours.........  384 hours.
 not been previously used in       manufacturers.
 revenue service in the U.S.
--Subsequent Equipment Orders...  9 equipment         2 plans...........  60 hours..........  120 hours.
                                   manufacturers.
238.131--New Passenger Equipment  6 Car Builders....  3 FMECAs..........  4 hours...........  12 hours.
 w/Exterior Side Doors--FMECA
 Analysis for door safety system
 (New Requirement).
238.133--Exterior Side Door       30 railroads......  30 plans..........  4 hours...........  120 hours.
 Safety Systems--Functional Test
 Plan (New Requirement).
--Unsealed door bypass device--   30 railroads......  9,994               30 seconds........  84 hours.
 Crewmember notification to                            notifications.
 designated authority of
 unsealed door-by-pass device.
--Train crew safety briefing--    30 railroads......  300 briefings.....  2 minutes.........  10 hours.
 after activation of door-by-
 pass device.
--Train crew notification to      30 railroads......  300 notices.......  30 seconds........  3 hours.
 designated authority.
--Qualified Person (QP) or QMP    30 railroads......  300 decision......  4 minutes.........  20 hours.
 determination that repairs
 cannot be made and that it is
 safe to move equipment.
--QP or QMP notification to       30 railroads......  300 notices.......  30 seconds........  3 hours.
 train crew member in charge of
 train movement that door by-
 pass device has been activated.
--Train crew safety briefing--    30 railroads......  300 briefings.....  2 minutes.........  10 hours.
 regarding their position on
 train.
--Record of door by-pass          30 railroads......  300 records.......  2 minutes.........  10 hours.
 activation.
--Record of unintended door       30 railroads......  20 records........  2 hours...........  40 hours.
 opening.
--Record of unsealed door by      30 railroads......  20 records........  4 hours...........  80 hours.
 pass devices as part of
 calendar day inspection.

[[Page 17002]]

 
238.135--(New Requirements)--RR   30 railroads......  2 requests........  24 hours..........  48 hours.
 Request for Special Approval
 from FRA to operate passenger
 train w/exterior side doors or
 trap doors, or both, open.
--RR Written operating rule on    30 railroads......  30 operating rules  42 hours..........  1,260 hours.
 how to safely override a door
 summary circuit or no-motion
 system, or both.
--Copy of RR written operating    30 railroads......  10,000 copies.....  1 minute..........  167 hours.
 rules to employees.
--RR Employee Training in this    30 railroads......  3,383 tr.           30 minutes........  1,692 hours.
 section's requirements and how                        employees.
 to identify/isolate
 malfunctioning exterior powered
 or manual side door.
--Operational/efficiency tests    30 railroads......  3,383 tests.......  2 minutes.........  113 hours.
 of RR operating crewmembers and
 control center employees.
--RR Operating rule requiring     30 railroads......  30 operating rules  4 hours...........  120 hours.
 train crewmembers to determine
 status of their train's
 exterior side doors.
238.137--RR Operating rule to     10 railroads......  10 operating rules  4 hours...........  40 hours.
 provide for the safe use of
 equipment with incompatible
 exterior side door systems when
 used in a mixed consist (New
 Requirement).
238.213--Corner Posts--Plan to    30 railroads......  10 plans..........  40 hours..........  400 hours.
 meet section's corner post
 requirements for cab car or MU
 locomotives.
238.229--Safety Appliances --     30 railroads......  30 lists..........  1 hour............  30 hours.
 Welded safety appliances
 considered defective: lists.
--Lists Identifying Equip. w/     30 railroads......  30 lists..........  1 hour............  30 hours.
 Welded Saf. App.
--Defective Welded Saf.           30 railroads......  4 tags............  3 minutes.........  .20 hr.
 Appliance--Tags.
--Notification to Crewmembers     30 railroads......  2 notices.........  1 minute..........  .0333 hr.
 about Non-Compliant Equipment.
--Inspection plans..............  30 railroads......  30 plans..........  16 hours..........  480 hours.
--Inspection Personnel--Training  30 railroads......  60 workers........  4 hours...........  240 hours.
--Remedial action: Defect/crack   30 railroads......  1 record..........  2.25 hours........  2 hours.
 in weld--record.
--Petitions for special approval  30 railroads......  15 petitions......  4 hours...........  60 hours.
 of alternative compliance--
 impractical equipment design.
--Records of inspection/repair    30 railroads......  3,060 records.....  12 minutes........  612 hours.
 of welded safety appliance
 brackets/supports/Training.
238.230--Safety Appliances--New   30 railroads......  100 records.......  6 minutes.........  10 hours.
 Equipment--Inspection Record of
 Welded Equipment by Qualified
 Employee.
--Welded safety appliances:       30 railroads......  15 document.......  4 hours...........  60 hours.
 Documentation for equipment
 impractically designed to
 mechanically fasten safety
 appliance support.
238.231--Brake System--           30 railroads......  2,500 forms.......  21 minutes........  875 hours.
 Inspection and repair of hand/
 parking brake: Records.
--Procedures Verifying Hold of    30 railroads......  30 procedures.....  2 hours...........  60 hours.
 Hand/Parking Brakes.
238.237--Automated monitoring--   30 railroads......  3 documents.......  2 hours...........  6 hours.
 Documentation for alerter/
 deadman control timing.

[[Page 17003]]

 
--Defective alerter/deadman       30 railroads......  25 tags...........  3 minutes.........  1 hour.
 control: Tagging.
238.303--Exterior calendar day    30 railroads......  25 notices........  1 minute..........  1 hour.
 mechanical inspection of
 passenger equipment: Notice of
 previous inspection.
--Dynamic brakes not in           30 railroads......  50 tags...........  3 minutes.........  3 hours.
 operating mode: Tag.
--Conventional locomotives        30 railroads......  4 documents.......  3 minutes.........  3 hours.
 equipped with inoperative
 dynamic brakes: Tagging.
--MU passenger equipment found    30 railroads......  4 documents.......  2 hours...........  8 hours.
 with inoperative/ineffective
 air compressors at exterior
 calendar day inspection:
 Documents.
--Written notice to train crew    30 railroads......  100 notices.......  3 minutes.........  5 hours.
 about inoperative/ineffective
 air compressors.
--Records of inoperative air      30 railroads......  100 records.......  2 minutes.........  3 hours.
 compressors.
--Record of exterior calendar     30 railroads......  1,959,620 records.  10 minutes + 1      359,264 hours.
 day mechanical inspection.                                                minute.
238.305--Interior calendar day    30 railroads......  540 tags..........  1 minute..........  9 hours.
 mechanical inspection of
 passenger cars--Tagging of
 defective end/side doors.
--Records of interior calendar    30 railroads......  1,968,980 records.  5 minutes + 1       196,898 hours.
 day inspection.                                                           minute.
238.307--Periodic mechanical      30 railroads......  2 notices/          5 hours...........  10 hours.
 inspection of passenger cars                          notifications.
 and unpowered vehicles--
 Alternative inspection
 intervals: Notifications.
--Notice of seats/seat            30 railroads......  200 notices.......  2 minutes.........  7 hours.
 attachments broken or loose.
--Records of each periodic        30 railroads......  19,284 records....  200 hours/2         3,857,443 hours.
 mechanical inspection.                                                    minutes.
--Detailed documentation of       30 railroads......  5 documents.......  100 hours.........  500 hours.
 reliability assessments as
 basis for alternative
 inspection interval.
238.311--Single car test--        30 railroads......  50 tags...........  3 minutes.........  3 hours.
 Tagging to indicate need for
 single car test.
238.313--Class I Brake Test--     30 railroads......  15,600 records....  30 minutes........  7,800 hours.
 Record for additional
 inspection for passenger
 equipment that does not comply
 with Sec.   238.231(b)(1).
238.315--Class IA brake test--    30 railroads......  18,250 notices....  5 seconds.........  25 hours.
 Notice to train crew that test
 has been performed (verbal
 notice).
--Communicating Signal Tested     30 railroads......  365,000 tests.....  15 seconds........  1,521 hours.
 and Operating.
238.317--Class II brake test--    30 railroads......  365,000 test......  15 seconds........  1,521 hours.
 Communicating Signal Tested and
 Operating.
238.321--Out-of-service credit--  30 railroads......  1,250 notes.......  2 minutes.........  42 hours.
 Passenger Car: Out-of-use
 notation.
238.323--End of Train--           30 railroads......  30 modified         4 hours...........  120 hours.
 Provisions to denote end-of-                          operating rules.
 train so that all side doors
 are protected by door summary
 circuit.
238.445--Automated Monitoring--   1 railroad........  10,000 alerts.....  10 seconds........  28 hours.
 Performance monitoring:
 alerters/alarms.
--Monitoring system: Self-test    1 railroad........  21,900 notices....  20 seconds........  122 hours.
 feature: Notifications.

[[Page 17004]]

 
238.503--Inspection, testing,     1 railroad........  1 plan............  1,200 hours.......  1,200 hours.
 and maintenance requirements--
 Plans.
238.505--Program approval         Rail Industry.....  3 comments........  3 hours...........  9 hours.
 procedures--Submission of
 program/plans and Comments on
 programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions; 
searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed 
data; and reviewing the information. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 
3506(c)(2)(B), FRA solicits comments concerning: Whether these 
information collection requirements are necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of FRA, including whether the information 
has practical utility; the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of 
the information collection requirements; the quality, utility, and 
clarity of the information to be collected; and whether the burden of 
collection of information on those who are to respond, including 
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology, may be minimized. For information or a copy of 
the paperwork package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. Robert Brogan, 
Information Clearance Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, at 202-
493-6292, or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Records Management Officer, Federal 
Railroad Administration, at 202-493-6139.
    Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the 
collection of information requirements should direct them to Mr. Robert 
Brogan or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20590. Comments may also 
be submitted via email to Mr. Brogan at Robert.Brogan@dot.gov, or to 
Ms. Toone at Kim.Toone@dot.gov.
    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of 
information requirements contained in this proposed rule between 30 and 
60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. 
Therefore, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect 
if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. The final rule will 
respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection 
requirements contained in this proposal.
    FRA is not authorized to impose a penalty on persons for violating 
information collection requirements which do not display a current OMB 
control number, if required. FRA intends to obtain current OMB control 
numbers for any new information collection requirements resulting from 
this rulemaking action prior to the effective date of the final rule. 
The OMB control number, when assigned, will be announced by separate 
notice in the Federal Register.

D. Federalism Implications

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), 
requires FRA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by State and local officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies 
that have federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order 
to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency 
may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs and that is not required by 
statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to 
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local 
governments, or the agency consults with State and local government 
officials early in the process of developing the regulation. Where a 
regulation has federalism implications and preempts State law, the 
agency seeks to consult with State and local officials in the process 
of developing the regulation.
    This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. This 
proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on the States or their 
political subdivisions, and it will not affect the relationships 
between the Federal government and the States or their political 
subdivisions, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government. In addition, FRA has determined that 
this regulatory action will not impose substantial direct compliance 
costs on the States or their political subdivisions. Therefore, the 
consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not 
apply.
    However, the final rule arising from this rulemaking could have 
preemptive effect by operation of law under certain provisions of the 
Federal railroad safety statutes, specifically the former Federal 
Railroad Safety Act of 1970, repealed and recodified at 49 U.S.C. 
20106, and the former Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act (LIA) at 45 
U.S.C. 22-34, repealed and re-codified at 49 U.S.C. 20701-20703. 
Section 20106 provides that States may not adopt or continue in effect 
any law, regulation, or order related to railroad safety or security 
that covers the subject matter of a regulation prescribed or order 
issued by the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to railroad 
safety matters) or the Secretary of Homeland Security (with respect to 
railroad security matters), except when the State law, regulation, or 
order qualifies under the ``essentially local safety or security 
hazard'' exception to section 20106. Moreover, the former LIA has been 
interpreted by the Supreme Court as preempting the field concerning 
locomotive safety. See Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line R.R., 272 U.S. 605 
(1926).

E. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39, 19 U.S.C. 2501 et 
seq.) prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards or 
related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 
commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as 
safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also 
requires consideration of international standards and, where 
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    FRA has assessed the potential effect of this rulemaking on foreign 
commerce and believes that its requirements are consistent with the 
Trade Agreements Act. The requirements are safety standards, which, as 
noted, are not considered unnecessary obstacles to trade. Moreover, FRA 
has sought, to the

[[Page 17005]]

extent practicable, to state the requirements in terms of the 
performance desired, rather than in more narrow terms restricted to a 
particular design or system.

F. Environmental Impact

    FRA has evaluated this rule in accordance with its ``Procedures for 
Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures) (64 FR 28545, 
May 26, 1999) as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other environmental statutes, Executive Orders, 
and related regulatory requirements. FRA has determined that this 
proposed rule is not a major FRA action (requiring the preparation of 
an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment) because 
it is categorically excluded from detailed environmental review 
pursuant to section 4(c)(20) of FRA's Procedures. See 64 FR 28547 (May 
26, 1999).
    In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures, the 
agency has further concluded that no extraordinary circumstances exist 
with respect to this regulation that might trigger the need for a more 
detailed environmental review. As a result, FRA finds that this 
proposed rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the 
quality of the human environment.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Pursuant to section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency ``shall, unless 
otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory 
actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector 
(other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate 
requirements specifically set forth in law).'' Section 202 of the Act 
(2 U.S.C. 1532) further requires that ``before promulgating any general 
notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the 
promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may 
result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted 
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any 
final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was 
published, the agency shall prepare a written statement'' detailing the 
effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. 
This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure, in the 
aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more (as adjusted annually for inflation) 
in any one year, and thus preparation of such a statement is not 
required.

H. Energy Impact

    Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a 
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' See 
66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001. Under the Executive Order, a ``significant 
energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency (normally 
published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to 
lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including 
notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices 
of proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely 
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or 
use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action.
    FRA has evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with Executive 
Order 13211. FRA has determined that this proposed rule is not likely 
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or 
use of energy. Consequently, FRA has determined that this regulatory 
action is not a ``significant energy action'' within the meaning of the 
Executive Order.

I. Privacy Act

    FRA wishes to inform all potential commenters that anyone is able 
to search the electronic form of all comments received into any agency 
docket by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing 
the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor 
union, etc.). Please see the privacy notice at http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice. You may also review DOT's complete 
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 
2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 238

    Incorporation by reference, Passenger equipment, Railroad safety, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Proposed Rule

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA proposes to amend 
part 238 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 238--[AMENDED]

Subpart A--General

0
1. The authority citation for part 238 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20133, 20141, 20302-20303, 
20306, 20701-20702, 21301-21302, 21304; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 
CFR 1.89.

0
2. Section 238.5 is amended by adding in alphabetical order definitions 
of ``By-pass,'' ``Door isolation lock,'' ``Door summary circuit,'' 
``End-of-train,'' ``Exterior side door safety system,'' ``No-motion 
system,'' and ``Trainline door circuit'' to read as follows:


Sec.  238.5  Definitions.

* * * * *
    By-pass means a device designed to override a function.
* * * * *
    Door isolation lock means a cutout/lockout mechanism installed at 
each exterior side door panel to secure a door in the closed and 
latched position, provide a door-closed indication to the summary 
circuit, and remove power from the door motor or door motor controls.
    Door summary circuit means a trainline door circuit that provides 
an indication to the controlling cab of the train that all exterior 
side doors are closed as intended, or locked out with a door isolation 
lock, or both.
* * * * *
    End-of-train means a feature typically used to determine the 
physical end of the train, or the last passenger car in the train, or 
both, for the door summary circuit.
* * * * *
    Exterior side door safety system means a system or subsystem of 
safety features that enable the safe operation of the exterior side 
doors of a passenger car or train. The exterior side door safety system 
includes appurtenances and components that control, operate, and 
display the status of the exterior side doors, and is interlocked with 
the train's traction power control.
* * * * *
    No-motion system means a system on a train that detects the motion 
of the train.
* * * * *
    Trainline door circuit means a circuit used to convey door signals 
over the length of a train.
* * * * *

Subpart B--Safety Planning and General Requirements

0
3. Section 238.131 is added to subpart B read as follows:


Sec.  238.131  Exterior side door safety systems--new passenger cars 
and locomotives used in passenger service.

    (a) Safety systems for powered exterior side doors. All powered 
exterior

[[Page 17006]]

side door safety systems in passenger cars, and connected door safety 
systems in locomotives used in passenger service, that are ordered on 
or after [DATE 120 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE 
Federal Register], or placed in service for the first time on or after 
[DATE 790 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 
Register], shall:
    (1) Be built in accordance with APTA standard PR-M-S-18-10, 
``Standard for Powered Exterior Side Door System Design for New 
Passenger Cars,'' 2011. In particular, locomotives used in passenger 
service shall be connected or interlocked with the door summary circuit 
to prohibit the train from developing tractive power if an exterior 
side door in a passenger car other than a door under the direct 
physical control of a crewmember for his or her exclusive use, is not 
closed;
    (2) Be designed based on a Failure Modes, Effects, Criticality 
Analysis (FMECA);
    (3) Contain an obstruction detection system sufficient to detect 
and react to both small and large obstructions and allow the 
obstruction to be released when detected;
    (4) Be designed so that activation of a door by-pass feature does 
not affect the operation of the obstruction detection system;
    (5) Require a door control panel key or other secure device to 
activate a door control panel;
    (6) Not be operated from a door control panel when the door control 
panel key or other secure device is removed; and
    (7) Not be affected by the movement or position of the locomotive 
throttle. A train's throttle position shall neither open nor close the 
exterior side doors on the train.
    (b) Safety system for manual and powered exterior side doors. All 
manual and powered exterior side door systems in passenger cars, and 
connected door safety systems in locomotives used in passenger service, 
that are ordered on or after [DATE 120 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION 
OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], or placed in service for the 
first time on or after [DATE 790 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register] shall:
    (1) Be designed with a door summary circuit and shall be so 
connected or interlocked as to prohibit the train from developing 
tractive power if an exterior side door in a passenger car other than a 
door under the direct physical control of a crewmember for his or her 
exclusive use, is not closed;
    (2) Be connected to interior and exterior side door status 
indicators;
    (3) Be connected to a door summary status indicator that is readily 
viewable to the engineer from his or her normal position in the 
operating cab; and
    (4) If equipped with a door by-pass device, be designed so that the 
by-pass device functions only when activated from the operating cab of 
the train.
    (c) Additional requirements. In addition to the requirements of 
this section, requirements related to exterior side door safety on 
passenger trains are provided in Sec. Sec.  238.112, 238.133, 238.135, 
238.137, and 238.439.
0
4. Section 238.133 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  238.133  Exterior side door safety systems--all passenger cars 
and locomotives used in a passenger service.

    (a) By-pass device verification.
    (1) Visual inspection. Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(2) and 
(a)(3) of this section, a member of the crew of each passenger train 
must verify by observation that all door by-pass devices that can 
affect the safe operation of the train are sealed in the normal (non-
by-pass) position when taking control of the train.
    (2) Functional test. Instead of a visual inspection of the door by-
pass devices, the railroad may develop a plan to perform a functional 
test to determine that the door summary status indicator is functioning 
as intended. The functional test plan shall be made available for 
inspection by FRA.
    (3) Face-to-face relief. Crewmembers taking control of a train do 
not need to perform either a visual inspection or a functional test of 
the door by-pass devices in cases of face-to-face relief of another 
train crew and notification by that crew as to the functioning of the 
door by-pass devices.
    (b) Unsealed door by-pass device. A crewmember must notify the 
railroad's designated authority pursuant to the railroad's defect 
reporting system if a door by-pass device that could affect the safe 
operation of the train is found unsealed during the train's daily 
operation. If the train crew can test the door safety system and 
determine that the door summary status indicator is functioning as 
intended, the train can travel in service until the next forward repair 
point where a seal can be applied by a qualified maintenance person 
(QMP) or until its next calendar day inspection, whichever occurs 
first; if not, the train crew must follow the procedures outlined in 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) En route failure. If it becomes necessary to activate a door 
by-pass device, the train may continue to its destination terminal, 
provided that the train crew conducts a safety briefing that includes a 
description of the location(s) where crewmembers will position 
themselves on the train in order to observe the boarding and alighting 
of passengers, notifies the railroad's designated authority that the 
train's door by-pass device has been activated, and adheres to the 
operating rules required by Sec.  238.135. After the train has reached 
its destination terminal, the train may continue in passenger service 
until its arrival at the next forward repair point or its next calendar 
day inspection, whichever occurs first, provided that prior to movement 
of equipment with a door by-pass device activated:
    (1) An on-site QMP shall determine that repairs cannot be made at 
the time and it is safe to move the equipment in passenger service. If 
a QMP is not available on site, these determinations may be made based 
upon a description of the condition provided by an on-site qualified 
person (QP) to a QMP offsite; and
    (2) The QP or QMP shall notify the crewmember in charge of the 
movement of the train that the door by-pass device has been activated. 
A safety briefing must be held and shall include a description of the 
location(s) where crewmembers will position themselves on the train in 
order to observe the boarding and alighting of passengers.
    (d) Records. The railroad shall maintain a record of each door by-
pass activation and each unintended opening of a powered exterior side 
door, including any repair(s) made, in the defect tracking system as 
required by Sec.  238.19.
    (e) Door control panels. Exterior side doors shall not be capable 
of operation from a door control panel when the key or other similar 
device is removed.
    (f) End-of-train. If end-of-train switches are used, the switches 
shall be secured in a manner to prevent access by unauthorized 
personnel.
    (g)(1) Exterior side door safety system override devices. Exterior 
side door safety system override devices that can adversely affect the 
train's door safety system must be inactive and sealed in all passenger 
cars and locomotives in the train consist, including cab cars and MU 
locomotives, if they are so equipped with such a device.
    (2) Calendar day inspection. As part of the equipment's calendar 
day inspection, all exterior side door safety system override devices 
must be inactive and sealed in all passenger cars and all locomotives 
in the train consist, including cab cars and MU locomotives,

[[Page 17007]]

if they are so equipped with such a device.
0
5. Section 238.135 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  238.135  Operating practices relating to exterior side door 
safety systems.

    (a) At the beginning of his or her duty assignment prior to a 
train's departure, each crewmember must participate in a safety 
briefing that identifies each crewmember's responsibilities relating to 
the safe operation of the exterior side doors on the train.
    (b) All passenger train exterior side doors and trap doors must be 
closed when a train is in motion between stations except when:
    (1) The train is departing or arriving at a station if:
    (i) A crewmember needs to observe the station platform; and
    (ii) The open door is attended by the crewmember; or
    (2) A crewmember must perform on-ground functions, such as, but not 
limited to, lining switches, making up or splitting the train, 
providing crossing protection, or inspecting the train.
    (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, 
passenger railroads must receive special approval from FRA's Associate 
Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer to operate 
passenger trains with exterior side doors or trap doors, or both, open 
between stations.
    (2) Any request for special approval must include:
    (i) A written justification explaining the need to operate a 
passenger train with its exterior side doors or trap doors, or both, 
open between stations; and
    (ii) A detailed hazard analysis, including a description of 
specific measures to mitigate any added risk.
    (3) The request must be signed by the chief executive officer 
(CEO), or equivalent, of the organization(s) making the request.
    (d) No later than [DATE 1,095 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], each railroad shall adopt and 
comply with operating rules on how to safely override a door summary 
circuit or no-motion system, or both, in the event of an en route 
exterior side door failure or malfunction on a passenger train. 
Railroads shall provide these written rules to their employees and make 
them available for inspection by FRA. These written rules shall 
include:
    (1) Instructions to crewmembers describing what conditions must be 
present in order to override the door summary circuit or no-motion 
system, or both; and
    (2) Steps crewmembers must take after the door summary circuit, or 
no-motion system, or both have been overridden to help provide for 
continued passenger safety.
    (e) No later than [DATE 1,095 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], each passenger train crewmember 
must be trained on:
    (1) The requirements of this section; and
    (2) How to identify and isolate equipment with a malfunctioning 
exterior powered or manual side door.
    (f) Beginning [DATE 1,095 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL 
RULE IN THE Federal Register], each railroad shall periodically conduct 
operational (efficiency) tests and observations of its operating 
crewmembers and control center employees to determine each employee's 
knowledge of the railroad's powered and manual exterior side door 
safety procedures for its passenger trains.
    (g) No later than [DATE 1,095 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], each railroad shall adopt and 
comply with operating rules requiring train crewmembers to determine 
the status of their train's exterior side doors so that their train may 
safely depart a station. These rules shall require crewmembers to 
determine that there are no obstructions in their train's exterior side 
doors before the train departs.
    6. Section 238.137 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  238.137  Mixed consist; operating equipment with incompatible 
exterior side door systems.

    (a) A train made up of equipment with incompatible exterior side 
door systems shall be operated within the constraints of the door 
safety system in each unit of the train.
    (b) No later than [DATE 1,095 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], each railroad shall develop 
operating rules to provide for the safe use of equipment with 
incompatible exterior side door systems when utilized in a mixed 
consist.

Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-06482 Filed 3-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


