Rule: Passenger Train Emergency Systems Emergency Communication, Emergency Egress, and Rescue Access

Friday,
February 1, 2008
Part III
Department of
Transportation
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Parts 223 and 238

Passenger Train Emergency Systems;
Emergency Communication, Emergency
Egress, and Rescue Access; Final Rule
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:32 Jan 31, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01FER3.SGM 01FER3
6370 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION online instructions for submitting D. Establishment of the Passenger Safety
comments. Working Group
Federal Railroad Administration • Mail: Docket Management Facility, E. Establishment of the Emergency
U.S. Department of Transportation, Preparedness Task Force
49 CFR Parts 223 and 238 West Building Ground Floor, Room F. Development of the Notice of Proposed
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Rulemaking (NPRM)
[Docket No. FRA–2006–25273, Notice No. Washington, DC 20590–0001. G. Development of the Final Rule,
2] • Hand Delivery or Courier: Docket including Response to Written
Management Facility, U.S. Department Comments
RIN 2130–AB72
of Transportation, West Building III. Technical Background
Passenger Train Emergency Systems; Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 A. Change in the Composition of the
Emergency Communication, New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, Passenger Car Fleet
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, B. National Transportation Safety Board
Emergency Egress, and Rescue
Monday through Friday, except Federal (NTSB) Safety Recommendation on
Access
holidays. Windows
AGENCY: Federal Railroad • Fax: 202–493–2251. C. Need for Emergency Communication
Administration (FRA), Department of Instructions: For detailed instructions Systems
Transportation (DOT). on submitting petitions for D. Window Technology
ACTION: Final rule. reconsideration and additional E. American Public Transportation
information on the rulemaking process, Association’s (APTA) Standard for
SUMMARY: This final rule is intended to see the Public Participation heading of Emergency Evacuation Units
further the safety of passenger train the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section IV. General Overview of Requirements
occupants through both enhancements of this document. Note that all petitions A. Emergency Window Exits and Rescue
and additions to FRA’s existing for reconsideration received will be Access Windows
requirements for emergency systems on posted without change to http:// B. Emergency Communication Systems—
passenger trains. In this final rule, FRA www.regulations.gov, including any PA and Intercom Systems
is enhancing existing requirements for personal information provided. Please C. Emergency Roof Access
emergency window exits and see the Privacy Act heading below. D. Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance
establishing requirements for rescue Docket: For access to the docket to V. Section-by-Section Analysis
access windows for emergency read background documents, comments, VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices
responders to use to evacuate passenger or petitions for reconsideration A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
train occupants. FRA is also enhancing received, go to http:// Regulatory Policies and Procedures
www.regulations.gov anytime, or to the B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive
passenger train emergency system
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Order 13272
requirements by expanding the
Department of Transportation, West C. Paperwork Reduction Act
application of existing requirements that
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, D. Federalism Implications
are currently applicable only to
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., E. Environmental Impact
passenger trains operating at speeds in F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
excess of 125 mph (Tier II passenger Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except G. Energy Impact
trains) to cover passenger trains H. Trade Impact
operating at speeds at or below 125 mph Federal holidays. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. I. Privacy Act
(Tier I passenger trains) as well; in VII. List of Subjects
particular, these enhancements require FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
that Tier I passenger trains be equipped Brenda J. Moscoso, Office of Safety, I. Statutory Background
with public address (PA) and intercom Staff Director, Planning and Evaluation,
systems for emergency communication Mail Stop 25, Federal Railroad In September of 1994, the Secretary of
and that passenger cars provide Administration, 1200 New Jersey Transportation (Secretary) convened a
emergency roof access for use by Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 meeting of representatives from all
emergency responders. FRA is applying (telephone 202–493–6282); Daniel L. sectors of the rail industry with the goal
certain of the requirements to both Alpert, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief of enhancing rail safety. As one of the
existing and new passenger equipment, Counsel, Mail Stop 10, Federal Railroad initiatives arising from this Rail Safety
while other requirements apply to new Administration, 1200 New Jersey Summit, the Secretary announced that
passenger equipment only. Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 DOT would begin developing safety
(telephone 202–493–6026); or Anna standards for rail passenger equipment
EFFECTIVE DATE: The final rule is
Nassif Winkle, Trial Attorney, Office of over a five-year period. In November of
effective April 1, 2008. The 1994, Congress adopted the Secretary’s
incorporation by reference of a certain Chief Counsel, Mail Stop 10, Federal
Railroad Administration, 1200 New schedule for implementing rail
publication listed in the rule is passenger equipment safety regulations
approved by the Director of the Federal Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590 (telephone 202–493–6166). and included it in the Federal Railroad
Register as of April 1, 2008. Petitions for Safety Authorization Act of 1994 (the
reconsideration of this final rule must SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Act), Pub. L. No. 103–440, 108 Stat.
be received not later than March 17, Table of Contents for Supplementary 4619, 4623–4624 (November 2, 1994).
2008. Information Congress also authorized the Secretary
ADDRESSES: Any petition for I. Statutory Background to consult with various organizations
reconsideration should reference Docket II. Proceedings to Date involved in passenger train operations
A. Proceedings To Carry Out the Initial
No. FRA–2006–25273, Notice No. 2, and for purposes of prescribing and

Rulemaking Mandate
be submitted by any of the following B. Key Issues Identified for Future amending these regulations, as well as
methods: Rulemaking issuing orders pursuant to them. Section
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to C. Railroad Safety Advisory Committee 215 of the Act is codified at 49 U.S.C.
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the (RSAC) Overview 20133.
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 6371
II. Proceedings to Date for reconsideration, with the exception additional research, the gathering of
of those relating to fire safety. See 67 FR additional operating experience, or the
A. Proceedings To Carry Out the Initial
19970. Finally, on June 25, 2002, FRA development of industry standards, or
Rulemaking Mandate
completed its response to the petitions all three. One such issue concerned
The Secretary delegated these for reconsideration by publishing a expanding the application of emergency
rulemaking responsibilities to the response to the petitions for system requirements pertaining to Tier
Federal Railroad Administrator, see 49 reconsideration concerning the fire II passenger equipment to Tier I
CFR 1.49(m), and FRA formed the safety portion of the rule. See 67 FR passenger equipment as well. Another
Passenger Equipment Safety Standards 42892. (For more detailed information issue concerned specifying minimum
Working Group to provide FRA with on the petitions for reconsideration and numbers and locations of windows
advice in developing the regulations. On FRA’s response to them, please see intended for emergency responder
June 17, 1996, FRA published an these three rulemaking documents.) The access to passenger cars, as 49 CFR
advance notice of proposed rulemaking product of this rulemaking was codified 223.9(d)(2) addressed only marking and
(ANPRM) concerning the establishment primarily at 49 CFR part 238 and instruction requirements and did not
of comprehensive safety standards for secondarily at 49 CFR parts 216, 223, provide any express requirement that
railroad passenger equipment. See 61 229, 231, and 232. any rescue access windows be present.
FR 30672. The ANPRM provided Meanwhile, another rulemaking on FRA and interested industry members
background information on the need for passenger train emergency preparedness also began identifying other issues
such standards, offered preliminary produced a final rule codified at 49 CFR related to the new passenger equipment
ideas on approaching passenger safety part 239. See 63 FR 24629 (May 4, safety standards and the passenger train
issues, and presented questions on 1998). The rule addresses passenger emergency preparedness regulations.
various passenger safety topics. train emergencies of various kinds, FRA decided to address these issues
Following consideration of comments including security situations, and with the assistance of RSAC.
received on the ANPRM and advice requires the preparation, adoption, and
from FRA’s Passenger Equipment Safety implementation of emergency C. RSAC Overview
Standards Working Group, FRA preparedness plans by railroads In March 1996, FRA established
published an NPRM on September 23, connected with the operation of RSAC, which provides a forum for
1997, to establish comprehensive safety passenger trains. The emergency developing consensus recommendations
standards for railroad passenger preparedness plans must include to FRA’s Administrator on rulemakings
equipment. See 62 FR 49728. In elements such as communication, and other safety program issues. The
addition to requesting written comment employee training and qualification, Committee includes representation from
on the NPRM, FRA also solicited oral joint operations, tunnel safety, liaison all of the agency’s major customer
comment at a public hearing held on with emergency responders, on-board groups, including railroads, labor
November 21, 1997. FRA considered the emergency equipment, and passenger organizations, suppliers and
comments received on the NPRM and safety information. The rule requires manufacturers, and other interested
prepared a final rule establishing each affected railroad to instruct its parties. A list of member groups follows:
comprehensive safety standards for employees on the applicable provisions • American Association of Private
passenger equipment, which was of its plan, and the plan adopted by Railroad Car Owners (AAPRCO);
published on May 12, 1999. See 64 FR each railroad is subject to formal review • American Association of State
25540. and approval by FRA. The rule also Highway and Transportation Officials
After publication of the final rule, requires each railroad operating (AASHTO);
interested parties filed petitions seeking passenger train service to conduct • American Chemistry Council;
FRA’s reconsideration of certain emergency simulations to determine its • American Petroleum Institute;
requirements contained in the rule. capability to execute the emergency • APTA;
These petitions generally related to the preparedness plan under the variety of • American Short Line and Regional
following subject areas: structural emergency scenarios that could Railroad Association (ASLRRA);
design; fire safety; training; inspection, reasonably be expected to occur. • American Train Dispatchers
testing, and maintenance; and In addition, in promulgating the rule, Association;
movement of defective equipment. To FRA established specific requirements • Association of American Railroads
address the petitions, FRA grouped for passenger train emergency systems. (AAR);
issues together and published in the Among these are requirements that all • Association of Railway Museums;
Federal Register three sets of emergency window exits and all • Association of State Rail Safety
amendments to the final rule. Each set windows intended for rescue access by Managers (ASRSM);
of amendments summarized the petition • Brotherhood of Locomotive
emergency responders be marked and
requests at issue, explained what action, Engineers and Trainmen (BLET);
that instructions be provided for their • Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way
if any, FRA decided to take in response use; and also requirements that all door
to the issues raised, and described Employees Division;
exits intended for egress be lighted or • Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
FRA’s justifications for its decisions and marked, all door exits intended for
any action taken. Specifically, on July 3, (BRS);
rescue access by emergency responders • Chlorine Institute;
2000, FRA issued a response to the be marked, and that instructions be • Federal Transit Administration
petitions for reconsideration relating to provided for their use. (FTA)*;
the inspection, testing, and maintenance • Fertilizer Institute;
of passenger equipment, the movement B. Key Issues Identified for Future
Rulemaking • High Speed Ground Transportation
of defective passenger equipment, and Association (HSGTA);
other miscellaneous provisions related While FRA had completed these • Institute of Makers of Explosives;
to mechanical issues contained in the rulemakings, FRA had identified • International Association of
final rule. See 65 FR 41284. On April various issues for possible future Machinists and Aerospace Workers;
23, 2002, FRA responded to all rulemaking, including those to be • International Brotherhood of
remaining issues raised in the petitions addressed following the completion of Electrical Workers (IBEW);
• Labor Council for Latin American the agency’s regulatory goal, is soundly • September 9–10, 2003, in
Advancement*; supported, and is in accordance with Washington, DC;
• League of Railway Industry policy and legal requirements. Often, • November 6, 2003, in Philadelphia,
Women*; FRA varies in some respects from the PA;
• National Association of Railroad RSAC recommendation in developing • May 11, 2004, in Schaumburg, IL;
Passengers (NARP); the actual regulatory proposal or final • October 26–27, 2004 in Linthicum/
• National Association of Railway rule. Any such variations would be Baltimore, MD;
Business Women*; noted and explained in the rulemaking • March 9–10, 2005, in Ft.
• National Conference of Firemen & document issued by FRA. If the working Lauderdale, FL;
Oilers; group or RSAC is unable to reach • September 7, 2005 in Chicago, IL;
• National Railroad Construction and consensus on a recommendation for • March 21–22, 2006 in Ft.
Maintenance Association; action, FRA moves ahead to resolve the Lauderdale, FL;
• National Railroad Passenger issue through traditional rulemaking • September 12–13, 2006 in Orlando,
Corporation (Amtrak); proceedings. FL;
• NTSB *; • April 17–18, 2007 in Orlando, FL;
• Railway Supply Institute (RSI); D. Establishment of the Passenger Safety and
Indicates associate, non-voting Working Group • December 11, 2007 in Ft.
membership. On May 20, 2003, FRA presented, and Lauderdale, FL.
• Safe Travel America (STA); RSAC accepted, the task of reviewing At the meetings in Chicago and Ft.
• Secretaria de Comunicaciones y existing passenger equipment safety Lauderdale in 2005, FRA met with
Transporte*; needs and programs and recommending representatives of Tri-County Commuter
• Sheet Metal Workers International consideration of specific actions that Rail and Metra, respectively, and toured
Association (SMWIA); could be useful in advancing the safety their passenger equipment. The visits,
• Tourist Railway Association, Inc.; of rail passenger service. The RSAC which included demonstrations of
• Transport Canada*; established the Passenger Safety emergency system features, were open
• Transport Workers Union of Working Group (Working Group) to to all members of the Working Group,
America (TWU); handle this task and develop and FRA believes they have added to
• Transportation Communications recommendations for the full RSAC to the collective understanding of the
International Union/BRC (TCIU/BRC); consider. Members of the Working Group in identifying and addressing
• Transportation Security Group, in addition to FRA, include the passenger train emergency system
Administration (TSA)*; and following: issues.
• United Transportation Union • AAR, including members from
(UTU). E. Establishment of the Emergency
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), CSX Preparedness Task Force
* Indicates associate, non-voting Transportation, Inc., and Union Pacific
membership. Railroad Company; Due to the variety of issues involved,
When appropriate, FRA assigns a task • AAPRCO; at its November 2003 meeting the
to RSAC, and after consideration and • AASHTO; Working Group established four task
debate, RSAC may accept or reject the • Amtrak; forces—smaller groups to develop
task. If the task is accepted, RSAC • APTA, including members from recommendations on specific issues
establishes a working group that Bombardier, Inc., LDK Engineering, within each group’s particular area of
possesses the appropriate expertise and Herzog Transit Services, Inc., Long expertise. Members of the task forces
representation of interests to develop Island Rail Road (LIRR), Metro-North include various representatives from the
recommendations to FRA for action on Commuter Railroad Company (Metro- respective organizations that were part
the task. These recommendations are North), Northeast Illinois Regional of the larger Working Group. One of
developed by consensus. A working Commuter Railroad Corporation (Metra), these task forces was assigned the job of
group may establish one or more task Southern California Regional Rail identifying and developing issues and
forces to develop facts and options on Authority (Metrolink), and Southeastern recommendations specifically related to
a particular aspect of a given task. The Pennsylvania Transportation Authority the inspection, testing, and operation of
individual task force then provides that (SEPTA); passenger equipment as well as
information to the working group for • BLET; concerns related to the attachment of
consideration. If a working group comes • BRS; safety appliances on passenger
to unanimous consensus on • FTA; equipment. An NPRM on these topics
recommendations for action, the • HSGTA; was published on December 8, 2005 (see
package is presented to the full RSAC • IBEW; 70 FR 73069), and a final rule was
for a vote. If the proposal is accepted by • NARP; published on October 19, 2006 (see 71
• RSI;
a simple majority of RSAC, the proposal • SMWIA; FR 61835). Another of these task forces
is formally recommended to FRA. FRA • STA; was assigned the job of developing
then determines what action to take on • TCIU/BRC; recommendations related to window
the recommendation. Because FRA staff • TWU; and glazing integrity, structural
play an active role at the working group • UTU. crashworthiness, and the protection of
level in discussing the issues and Staff from DOT’s John A. Volpe occupants during accidents and
options and in drafting the language of National Transportation Systems Center incidents. This work of this task force
the consensus proposal, FRA is often (Volpe Center) attended all of the led to the publication of an NPRM
favorably inclined toward the RSAC meetings and contributed to the focused on enhancing the front-end
recommendation. However, FRA is in technical discussions. In addition, staff strength of cab cars and multiple-unit
no way bound to follow the from the NTSB met with the Working (MU) locomotives on August 1, 2007.
recommendation, and the agency Group when possible. The Working See 72 FR 42016. Another task force, the
exercises its independent judgment on Group has held ten meetings on the Emergency Preparedness Task Force
whether the recommended rule achieves following dates and locations: (Task Force), was established to identify
issues and develop recommendations • December 1–2, 2004, in San Diego, compliance with the proposal on rescue
related to emergency systems, CA; access windows. After reviewing the
procedures, and equipment. • February 16–17, 2005, in full RSAC’s recommendations, FRA
Specifically, the Task Force was charged Philadelphia, PA; agreed that the recommendations
with evaluating APTA’s standards for • April 19–20, 2005, in Cambridge, provided a sound basis for a proposed
emergency systems for their MA; rule and adopted the recommendations
incorporation by reference as Federal • August 2–3, 2005, in Cambridge, with generally minor changes for
standards and requirements. These MA; purposes of clarity and formatting in the
APTA standards are aimed at promoting • December 13–14, 2005, in Federal Register.
the ability of passenger car occupants to Baltimore, MD; The NPRM was published in the
reach, identify, and operate emergency • August 10, 2006, in Grapevine, TX; Federal Register on August 24, 2006
exits under various conditions. The • October 25–26, 2006, in (see 71 FR 50276), and FRA solicited
Task Force was also given the Philadelphia, PA; public comment on it. FRA specifically
responsibility of addressing a number of • December 6–7, 2006, in invited comment on a number of issues
other emergency systems issues and to Washington, DC; related to the proposed requirements for
• March 28–29, 2007, in Los Angeles, the purpose of developing the final rule,
recommend any research necessary to
CA; in addition to notifying the public of its
facilitate their resolution. Members of
• June 13–14, 2007, in San Francisco, option to submit written comments on
the Task Force, in addition to FRA,
CA; and the NPRM and to request a public, oral
include, or have included, the • October 17–18, 2007, in Arlington,
following: hearing on the NPRM.
VA.
• Amtrak; At meetings in Los Angeles, G. Development of the Final Rule,
• APTA, including members from including Response to Written
Cambridge, Washington, New York, San
Bombardier, Ellcon National, Go Comments
Diego, Philadelphia, and San Francisco,
Transit, Interfleet, Jacobs Civil
FRA met with representatives of This final rule is the product of FRA’s
Engineering, Jessup Manufacturing
Metrolink, MBTA, Amtrak, LIRR, review, consideration, and acceptance
Company, Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc., LDK
Coaster, SEPTA, and Caltrans, of the recommendations of the Task
Engineering, LIRR, LTK, Luminator,
respectively, and toured their passenger Force, Working Group, and full RSAC,
Maryland Transit Administration,
equipment. The visits were open to all and of the written comments on which
Massachusetts Bay Transportation
members of the Task Force and they are based. FRA received two
Authority (MBTA), Metrolink, Metro-
included demonstration of emergency written comments in response to the
North, Northern Indiana Commuter
system features. As in the case of the publication of the NPRM: one from the
Transit District (NICTD), SEPTA, San
Working Group visits, FRA believes NTSB; the other from Caltrans. The
Diego Northern Commuter Railroad
they have added to the collective NTSB indicated that the NPRM was
(Coaster), Permalight, PO’s Ability USA,
understanding of the Task Force in consistent with the intent of its safety
Inc., Prolink, Transit Design Group
identifying and addressing passenger recommendation to FRA relevant to
(TDG),Transit Safety Management
train emergency system issues for not these emergency systems, and expressed
(TSM), Translite, STV Inc., and Visual
only this rulemaking, but for future support for the proposed emergency
Marking Systems, Inc.;
rulemakings as well. communication system and emergency
• BLET;
• California Department of roof access requirements. Caltrans’
F. Development of the NPRM
Transportation (Caltrans); comments related to the requirement for
The NPRM was developed to address staggering the location of emergency
• FTA;
a number of the concerns raised and window exits to the extent practical and
• NARP;
• RSI, including Globe Transportation issues discussed during the various to the proposed requirement for
Graphics; Task Force and Working Group inspecting emergency roof access
• TWU; and meetings. Minutes of each of these markings. As explained further below,
• UTU. meetings have been made part of the after discussing the comments with the
While not voting members of the Task docket in this proceeding and are Task Force, the Task Force made
Force, representatives from the NTSB available for public inspection. The consensus recommendations to resolve
and from TSA, of the U.S. Department Working Group reached full consensus Caltrans’ two concerns by clarifying in
of Homeland Security (DHS), attended on all the regulatory provisions this preamble the requirement for
certain of the meetings and contributed contained in the NPRM at its meetings staggering, and by granting Caltrans’
to the discussions of the Task Force. In in March and September 2005. After the request to extend the interval between
addition, staff from the Volpe Center March 2005 meeting, the Working inspections for roof access markings to
attended all of the meetings and Group presented its recommendations a maximum of 368 days, instead of the
contributed to the technical discussions to the full RSAC for concurrence at its 184 days that FRA had proposed. FRA
through their comments and meeting in May 2005. All of the agrees with the underlying rationale for
presentations and by setting up various members of the full RSAC in attendance these recommendations and has
lighting, marking, and signage at its May 2005 meeting accepted the modified the final rule accordingly. FRA
demonstrations. regulatory recommendations submitted did not receive a request for a public,
The Task Force has held 15 meetings by the Working Group. Thus, the oral hearing on the NPRM, and none
on the following dates and locations: Working Group’s recommendations was held.
• February 25–26, 2004, in Los became the full RSAC’s Throughout the preamble discussion
Angeles, CA; recommendations to FRA. In October of this final rule, FRA refers to
• April 14–15, 2004, in Cambridge, 2005, the full RSAC also recommended comments, views, suggestions, or
MA; that FRA adopt a further recommendations made by members of
• July 7–8, 2004, in Washington, DC; recommendation from the Working the Task Force, Working Group, and full
• September 13–14, 2004, in New Group at its September 2005 meeting— RSAC, as they are identified or
York, NY; that FRA grant additional time for contained in the minutes of their
meetings. FRA does so to show the minimize station dwell time, railroads locations of windows intended for
origin of certain issues and the nature of have turned to multi-level passenger emergency responder access to
discussions concerning those issues at cars with intermediate seating levels to passenger cars, as 49 CFR 223.9(d)(2)
the Task Force, Working Group, and full meet much of the increased demand for addressed only marking and instruction
RSAC level. FRA believes this serves to service, to the extent that vertical requirements and did not provide any
illuminate factors that it has weighed in clearances permit their operation. express requirement that any such
making its regulatory decisions, as well In light of the growing use of multi- rescue access windows be present. A
as the logic behind those decisions. The level passenger cars with intermediate second prominent issue concerned
reader should keep in mind, of course, seating levels, this final rule helps to specifying minimum numbers and
that only the full RSAC makes address the need to provide more locations of emergency window exits on
recommendations to FRA and that it is explicit emergency system safety any level of a multi-level passenger
the consensus recommendation of the standards for these passenger cars. car—not just on main levels, as then
full RSAC on which FRA is acting. B. NTSB Safety Recommendation on provided in 49 CFR 238.113(a)(1).
However, as noted above, FRA is in no FRA informed the NTSB that it was
Windows
way bound to follow the reviewing and considering the necessity
recommendation, and the agency On April 23, 2002, a BNSF freight of making amendments to its safety
exercises its independent judgment on train collided head on with a standing standards for passenger trains through
whether the recommended rule achieves Metrolink passenger train near the RSAC process and that these and
the agency’s regulatory goal, is soundly Placentia, CA, resulting in two fatalities other passenger safety issues would be
supported, and is in accordance with and numerous injuries on the Metrolink presented to the Working Group and the
policy and legal requirements. train. Though not a contributing factor Task Force for their consideration.
to the fatalities or injuries, the force of Therefore, FRA asked that the NTSB
III. Technical Background the collision blocked the rear end door classify Safety Recommendation R–03–
Trends in new passenger car orders, and also blocked the rear stairway 21 as ‘‘Open—Acceptable Response,’’
experience with passenger train linking the upper and lower seating pending the results of this effort. (The
accidents, concern about emergency levels to the seating area on the NTSB classification ‘‘Open—Acceptable
communication, and technological intermediate level at the rear of the Response’’ means a ‘‘[r]esponse by
advances in emergency systems Metrolink cab car. Although passengers recipient indicates a planned action that
provided the main impetus for these in that intermediate level seating area would comply with the safety
enhancements and additions to FRA’s did exit through an emergency window, recommendation when completed.’’) By
standards for passenger train emergency no windows on the intermediate level letter dated June 2, 2004, the NTSB
systems, as highlighted below. had been designated for rescue access, formally classified the recommendation
and consequently no instructions for as FRA requested.
A. Change in the Composition of the emergency responders to gain access to The Task Force reviewed the NTSB’s
Passenger Car Fleet the intermediate level through a recommendation and the related issues
While FRA was developing the window had been posted. Concerned that FRA presented to it and agreed to
Passenger Equipment Safety Standards with the extent of Federal requirements address emergency window exits and
and the Passenger Train Emergency relating to rescuing passengers from the rescue access windows on a broad basis,
Preparedness regulations in the 1990s, intermediate level of a multi-level with the goal that windows for
the operation of multi-level passenger passenger car, the NTSB issued Safety emergency egress and rescue access
cars having two seating levels for Recommendation R–03–21 to FRA on would be available on every level of a
passengers (i.e., bi-level cars) was November 6, 2003. Safety passenger car in the event that a
common. However, the operation of Recommendation R–03–21 provides in stairway or interior door is
multi-level passenger cars having three full as follows: compromised and access to the primary
seating levels for passengers (i.e., cars Revise the language of 49 Code of Federal means of exit (doors) is blocked. To this
with intermediate (or mezzanine) Regulations 238.113(a)(1) to reflect that end, the Task Force agreed to develop
seating levels) was not as prevalent in appropriate exterior instructional signage requirements for emergency window
the U.S. as it is today. As a result, in describing the emergency removal procedure exits on non-main levels of multi-level
those rulemakings there was less focus be required at emergency windows on all passenger cars, and rescue access
on the need for applying emergency levels of a multiple-level passenger railcar. windows on all levels of these cars, thus
system safety standards to intermediate In a February 20, 2004 letter to the addressing requirements for every
seating levels of multi-level passenger NTSB, FRA noted that its existing seating level of a passenger car.
cars. regulations do require that windows
Since that time, the composition of intended for emergency responder C. Need for Emergency Communication
the Nation’s commuter rail fleet has access on every level of a multi-level Systems
changed. Multi-level passenger cars passenger car be clearly marked and that Traditionally, conductors and
with passenger seating in intermediate clear and understandable instructions assistant conductors have been relied
levels have become more prevalent and for their removal be posted at or near upon to relay information to passengers
now account for over 15 percent of all the windows on the car’s exterior. See in both normal and emergency
passenger cars. The intermediate seating 49 CFR 223.9(d)(2). FRA also sent a situations through face-to-face
levels in these multi-level passenger letter to passenger railroads to make this communication or by use of the PA
cars are normally located at the far ends clear in the event there was any system. However, with smaller crew
of the cars and are connected to the confusion about these requirements. sizes, passengers may not be able to tell
upper and lower seating levels by stairs. Nevertheless, the NTSB’s the crew about a medical emergency,
Exterior side doors are also often located recommendation highlighted the fact report a fire on board the train, or
toward the ends of these cars to that several related concerns were not provide notification of other safety
facilitate boarding and de-boarding. specifically addressed in FRA’s issues as quickly as may be necessary.
Given the constraint posed by station regulations. One of these concerns was For instance, a passenger in the last car
platform lengths and the desire to specifying minimum numbers and of a train needing to report an
emergency situation could potentially emergency communication systems for enhancements and additions to
have to walk the entire length of the Tier II passenger equipment (trains emergency systems should be explored
train to communicate with the operating at speeds exceeding 125 mph, both to reduce the risk of a terrorist
conductor (assuming the crew is but not exceeding 150 mph), there are attack to passenger trains, to minimize
composed of an engineer and only one no requirements that Tier I passenger the consequences of such an attack if it
conductor). Further, if the conductor cars be equipped with any emergency occurs, and to promote passenger train
became incapacitated, passengers would communication system. In that safety overall.
need to communicate directly with the rulemaking, concern had been raised
about the practicability of applying such D. Window Technology
engineer.
FRA also notes that the NTSB’s report requirements to Tier I passenger A ‘‘zip-strip’’ is a strip of rubber
on its investigation of the February 9, equipment because of the gasketing that holds a window panel in
1996 collision near Secaucus, NJ, that interoperability of such equipment and place and is capable of being pulled, or
involved two New Jersey Transit Rail the possible incompatibility of pried and then pulled, like a zipper
Operations (NJTR) trains and resulted in communications equipment in a Tier I from the panel that it holds. Zip-strips
three fatalities and numerous injuries, passenger train. See 64 FR 25540, 25641 have been used for window removal for
touches on the importance of emergency (May 12, 1999). Nevertheless, most some time. Yet, the introduction of
communication systems to prevent existing passenger cars are equipped windows using zips-strips on both faces
panic and further injuries. According to with PA systems, and intercom systems of the same window has allowed
the NTSB report of the accident are common in new passenger cars. railroads to designate for rescue access
investigation, FRA notes that, while there are many those windows that are best suited for
possible ways for an emergency that purpose, without impacting the
[a]lthough the train crews said that they
went from car to car instructing passengers situation to arise on a passenger train, selection of emergency window exits or
to remain seated, passengers said that they an emergency system may be useful in compromising compliance with safety
were not told about the severity of the many situations, regardless of the origin glazing requirements. Before this
situation and were concerned about a of the emergency. In this regard, technology was available, railroads that
possible fire or being struck by an oncoming emergency communication systems used zip-strips for window removal had
train. They therefore left the train and provide the added benefit of conveying
wandered around the tracks waiting for to decide which windows would be
information about security threats and designated for emergency egress and
guidance, potentially posing a greater hazard handling security concerns. According
because of the leaking fuel from train 1107. which would be designated for rescue
to TSA, terrorists have considered access, as there was only one zip-strip
No crewmember used the public address
system to communicate with passengers. By attacks on subways and trains in the available to open. Equipping cars with
using the public address system, all U.S., and TSA has found that passenger more rescue access windows with zip-
passengers would have received the same railroads and subways in the U.S. are strips meant having fewer emergency
message in less time than it would have particularly high-consequence targets in window exits, all things being equal,
taken the NJT employees to walk from car to terms of potential loss of life and
car.
even though it would be preferable to
economic disruption. DHS, including
have more emergency window exits
The report also stated: TSA, as well as DOT’s FRA and FTA
than rescue access windows as
have been actively engaged in
Information about the possibility of a fire occupants should normally begin to
or a collision with an oncoming train could
responding to the threat of terrorism to
self-evacuate via emergency window
have been provided to passengers over the our Nation’s rail system, and have
exits before emergency responders
public address system to address their undertaken numerous initiatives to
arrive to assist. Whereas railroads could
concerns and prevent them from leaving the advance the safety and security of
generally designate any window for
train. The Safety Board concludes that the railroad passengers, railroad employees,
lack of public announcements addressing the rescue access by providing instructions
and the public as a whole. Consistent
passengers’ concerns caused them to act with this response, the ability of for removal using tools normally
independently, evacuate the train, and passengers to timely report suspicious available to emergency responders to
wander along the tracks, thus potentially items and suspicious activity onboard pop out a window, such as a sledge
contributing to the dangerous conditions at hammer or a fire axe, some railroads
the collision site.
passenger trains to appropriate
personnel increases the likelihood of prefer to equip windows with exterior
NTSB/RAR–97/01, at p. 27. detecting terrorist planning activity or zips-strips for rescue access because
In 1998, APTA recognized the an attempted attack and thwarting it, or they allow for window removal with
importance of emergency at least disrupting it and minimizing its less effort.
communication systems when it issued consequences. This would also be In the NPRM, FRA did not propose
APTA SS–PS–001–98, ‘‘Standard for facilitated by the ability of the train that the rule require the use of zip-strips
Passenger Railroad Emergency crew to timely communicate emergency for rescue access windows.
Communications,’’ noting that the information and instructions to Nevertheless, FRA did propose to
establishment and execution of passengers in response to a security recognize ‘‘dual-function windows,’’
communications among train crews, threat. which serve as both emergency exit and
operations control personnel, and train FRA also notes that emergency system rescue access windows, through the use
passengers are of the utmost importance requirements for such features as of zip-strips on both faces of the
under normal circumstances. According emergency window exits and emergency window. FRA has adopted this proposal
to the APTA standard, during lighting, which were not specifically in the final rule. As explained below,
emergency situations such developed to address security threats, ‘‘dual-function windows’’ afford
communications take on added may play a critical role in minimizing railroads additional flexibility in the
importance in the task of assuring the the consequences of a terrorist attack location of their windows in that
safety of all involved. onboard a passenger train. The safety railroads are not required to find
While the Passenger Equipment and security functions that passenger locations for emergency window exits
Safety Standards issued in 1999 by FRA train emergency systems may serve distinct from the locations specified for
contain requirements for two-way make them vital, and further rescue access windows, and vice-versa.
E. APTA’s Standard for Emergency required to provide exit paths for certain permit rapid and easy removal during
Evacuation Units rare accident scenarios. It was also an emergency without the use of a tool
As FRA noted in the preamble to the questioned whether egress rates through or other implement; and that
final rule promulgating the Passenger windows could be half as great as conspicuous photo-luminescent
Equipment Safety Standards, FRA has through single-leaf doors, as implied by marking of the windows, as well as
had under consideration a performance the standard. instructions for their use, be provided.
standard for emergency evacuation The Task Force reviewed the APTA FRA’s regulations had also required that
similar to that used in commercial standard and recommended the windows intended for rescue access be
aviation where a sufficient number of continuation of evacuation test marked with retroreflective material,
emergency exits must be provided to experiments and research to establish and that instructions for their use also
evacuate the maximum passenger load relative exit flow rates using different be provided. However, FRA’s
in a specified time for various types of types of exits at distinct locations in the regulations did not require any
car, prior to considering adoption of the minimum number of rescue access
emergency situations. See 64 FR 25550.
APTA standard into FRA’s standards. windows for passenger cars.
FRA further noted that it would
To this end, the Volpe Center conducted One of the basic principles underlying
evaluate whether an APTA performance the final rule’s requirements for both
standard for emergency egress, then a series of test experiments on
commuter rail car evacuation in August emergency window exits and rescue
under development in APTA’s PRESS access windows has been to locate these
Task Force, should be incorporated into 2005, and in April and May 2006, in
Boston, MA, with the cooperation of the windows in such a manner that
FRA’s standards. 64 FR 25551. FRA’s passengers would be able to exit from,
intent is that such a performance MBTA. Test experiments were
conducted under normal and emergency and emergency responders would be
standard would serve to supplement, as able to gain direct access to, each
necessary, FRA’s minimum lighting conditions, and evaluated three
different ways of evacuating a car: passenger compartment without
requirements for emergency window requiring that they first go to another
exits and door exits. Directly into an adjoining car; to a high
platform using one or more side doors; level of a car or through an interior
In 1999, APTA issued APTA SS–PS– door. Optimally, there would be a
003–98, ‘‘Standard for Emergency and to a simulated, low platform using
side doors with stairways. A report, sufficient number of windows for
Evacuation Units for Rail Passenger passengers to exit from, and for
Cars.’’ This standard assigns to doors which is in the process of being
finalized, will document the results of emergency responders to get access to,
and window exits a numerical value, the following: (i) Every level with
referred to as an ‘‘emergency evacuation these test experiments. (Due to safety
concerns, it is not anticipated that test passenger seating of a multi-level
unit’’ (EEU), that is intended to correlate passenger railcar; (ii) both sides of the
to the speed and ease of passenger experiments will be conducted using
windows as a means of emergency passenger railcar, in the event of a
egress. Each emergency window exit is derailment where the exits on one side
assigned an EEU of 1, and each door leaf egress.) FRA does note that the
emergency evacuation approach are compromised; and (iii) each end
an EEU of 2. The standard defines the (half) of the passenger railcar, in the
‘‘usable exit path’’ (UXP) as the number underlying the requirements in this
final rule is consistent with the basic event that one end is crushed or the
of emergency window and door exits exits on that end are otherwise rendered
that can be used by passengers after an approach taken in developing APTA’s
standard, as the requirements do take inaccessible or inoperable. A constraint
incident that requires emergency egress for both new and existing intermediate
from the vehicle, and provides that the into consideration both car
configuration and occupant capacity. levels of multi-level passenger car
UXP be calculated as ‘‘the sum of EEUs designs is that there is limited space for
for one side of the car less 50% of car IV. General Overview of Requirements side windows due to the presence of
end doors.’’ The APTA standard also bathrooms, equipment closets, and side
requires railroads to assign to each new A. Emergency Window Exits and Rescue
Access Windows door exits. Thus, the Task Force
passenger car a ‘‘capacity exit factor’’ recommended making the requirements
(CXF), which is a value equal to the Among the most prominent issues flexible and consistent with existing car
seating capacity of the car divided by 17 identified for consideration by the designs and, in certain cases, providing
and rounded up to the next whole Working Group were those involving for exceptions. The exceptions for new
number, and to designate a sufficient emergency window exits and rescue equipment are limited to situations that
number of exits to achieve a total EEU access windows and how these arise from the need to provide
value equal to or larger than the CXF or windows relate to the emergency accessible accommodations under the
the UXP. systems requirements overall. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Although the basic approach to Emergency window exits are intended (ADA) in compartments where there are
establishing egress requirements based to supplement door exits, which serve no more than four seats and a suitable
on car configuration and occupant as the preferred means of egress in an alternative is provided. The Task Force
capacity was widely accepted, during emergency situation, and provide an recommended greater flexibility for
development of the APTA standard alternative means of emergency egress existing equipment to avoid costly
several organizations raised issues in life-threatening situations, should window installations where none had
regarding the methodology for assigning doors be rendered inaccessible or previously existed (e.g., relocating an
EEU values to exits. For instance, Volpe inoperable. Prior to this rulemaking electrical closet so that a space large
Center staff suggested that point values FRA’s regulations had required that enough to accommodate a new window
for windows be reduced to numbers that each single-level car and each main could be cut into the side of the car).
are approximately in proportion to level of a multi-level passenger car have During Task Force discussions, it
estimated passenger flow rates as a minimum of four emergency window became apparent that the phrase ‘‘rapid
compared with low-platform doors exits, either in a staggered configuration and easy’’ in the emergency window
without steps, and that upper-level where practical or with one exit located exit regulation was being interpreted in
windows receive no credit toward the in each side of each end, on each level; different ways by commuter railroads
minimum EEU criterion but still be that these windows be designed to and car manufacturers. Some believed
that only the removal of the gasket had The principal reason for requiring only all passenger cars should, at a
to be rapid and easy; however, FRA two windows for rescue access is that minimum, have functioning PA
clarified that while FRA may have cited rescue access windows are the third systems. A PA system allows the train
examples of gaskets that were becoming means of egress in the overall crew to keep their passengers informed
stuck and were therefore not removable emergency evacuation approach, in in an emergency situation and provide
in a rapid and easy fashion, the central which door exits serve as the first instructions to them in a timely manner.
goal of this provision is to create an (preferred) means of egress and In particular, the train crew can provide
opening that could be used for egress, emergency window exits serve as the instructions to passengers not to take an
which necessarily includes removal of second. Rescue access windows have action that could place them in any
the window panel as well. If the this tertiary role because they would be greater danger, such as instructing them,
removal of the gasket is rapid and easy, used as a means of last resort when as appropriate, to remain on the train
but the removal of the window panel is passengers cannot evacuate themselves and not endanger themselves by
not, the opening becomes less useful in and require aid from emergency unnecessarily evacuating the train on
an emergency situation, or in some responders. The design of window their own.
cases, effectively non-existent. Several gaskets also affects how many rescue The Task Force also agreed that
members of the Task Force also access windows can be placed in a car, emergency communication systems in
expressed their concern that the phrase especially on levels where there is all new passenger cars should include
‘‘rapid and easy’’ was too subjective and limited space for windows. For intercom systems that would enable
not quantifiable. They requested that instance, on certain types of cars, zip- passengers to quickly communicate in
FRA adopt a more measurable strips installed to facilitate rapid and emergency situations with the train
performance-based standard instead. easy removal of a window can be placed crew. During the discussions in
Yet, various proposals to do so based on either on the interior or the exterior of developing the NPRM concerning
a specific allotment of time to open the the car, but not on both. In this case, if whether to require intercom systems on
window were not adopted, as consensus FRA were to require four rescue access Tier I passenger equipment, some Task
was not reached on how that time windows, then a railroad that has cars Force members expressed concern that
would be determined. Variables such as with additional emergency window if intercom systems were added at each
a person’s height, weight, strength, and exits (i.e., beyond the minimum of four end of a car, were conspicuously
awareness of emergency exit operation per main level) would likely just replace marked, and had instructions provided
and procedures all could affect the ease some of its emergency window exits for their use, passengers may use them
of opening a window. For example, a with rescue access windows, resulting in non-emergency situations. Amtrak
railroad maintenance employee who in fewer emergency window exits, and and various commuter railroads that
installs emergency window exits or is thereby limiting the more preferred operate cars with intercom systems
otherwise trained on their use should be means of egress. For the above reasons, indicated that they have successfully
able to open a window more quickly as well as for the cost of retrofitting implemented measures to deter misuse,
than many passengers would be able to existing equipment, flexibility for however, such as by placing the
do. While there was general agreement locating rescue access windows in side intercom transmission button under a
that a time-performance standard doors was added for existing equipment. protective covering (which also prevents
should be based on the time taken by a FRA did not propose, and the final accidental operation by a passenger
representative sample of people to open rule does not make, any change to leaning against it) and by marking it
the window, the Task Force was not in existing requirements for emergency ‘‘FOR EMERGENCY USE ONLY’’.
a position to specify that sample. window exits in sleeping compartments The emergency communication
Although unsuccessful at reaching or similar private compartments. Yet, in system requirements in this final rule
consensus on an actual measure of establishing requirements for minimum generally reflect current practice for Tier
‘‘rapid and easy,’’ the Task Force was numbers of rescue access windows in I passenger equipment operating with
able to agree that promoting ‘‘rapid and passenger cars, FRA is requiring that PA and intercom systems and existing
easy’’ removal of emergency windows is each sleeping compartment or similar requirements for Tier II passenger
desirable. A combination of interior car private compartment in a passenger car equipment. FRA understands that those
fixtures, such as headrests and luggage have a rescue access window. FRA Tier I passenger cars that currently do
racks, as well as larger and heavier believes that this new requirement is not have PA systems are scheduled to be
windows, can create a situation where consistent with current practice. retired from service before the
the most effective and efficient method requirement to have PA systems on
B. Emergency Communication
for removing a window is not existing Tier I passenger equipment
Systems—PA and Intercom Systems
immediately apparent. As a step becomes effective.
towards promoting rapid and easy While the Passenger Equipment
Safety Standards issued in 1999 by FRA C. Emergency Roof Access Locations
removal of the window and to address
the situation of particular concern, the contain requirements for two-way (i.e., Emergency roof access locations (i.e.,
Task Force recommended requiring that crew-to-passenger and passenger-to- roof hatches or structural weak points)
instructions specifically take into crew) emergency communication can be especially useful in emergency
account potential hindrances. The systems for Tier II passenger equipment, situations where passenger cars have
instructions may be in written or FRA did not require that Tier I rolled onto their sides following certain
pictorial format, since including passenger cars be equipped with any collision and derailment scenarios. In
pictorials depicting the window emergency communication system. such situations, doors, which are the
removal method as part of the Nevertheless, most existing passenger preferred means of egress and access
instructions can be extremely helpful. cars are equipped with PA systems, and under normal circumstances, may be
As for rescue access windows, the after discussing the benefits of PA rendered inoperable due to structural
Task Force generally recommended systems in light of the challenge and damage to the door or the door pocket,
requiring two windows on each level of expense of retrofitting older, existing or become extremely difficult to use
a passenger car for rescue access (versus passenger equipment with limited because the car is no longer upright.
four as is required for emergency exit). service life, the Task Force agreed that Moreover, although emergency
responders may be able to enter a car with those below and will be referenced window exits and windows intended for
that is on its side via a rescue access as appropriate. rescue access, and also required that
window, the removal of an injured instructions be provided for their use.
Amendments to 49 CFR Part 223, Safety
occupant through a side window in However, the requirements applied only
Glazing Standards—Locomotives,
such circumstances would likewise be to ‘‘each railroad providing passenger
Passenger Cars and Cabooses
difficult or complicated, especially train service,’’ a class of train service
depending upon the condition of the Subpart A—General purposefully narrower than the general
occupant. application section in part 223. See
FRA’s 1999 final rule on Passenger Section 223.5 Definitions § 223.9. Because FRA has addressed
Equipment Safety Standards required This section, which contains a set of marking and instruction requirements
emergency roof access locations for Tier definitions of terms used in part 223, for such windows in this train service
II passenger equipment, but not for Tier has been modified to clarify the in part 238, and because the
I passenger equipment. The Task Force definition of one term and to remove the requirements of § 223.9(d) did not apply
examined both these requirements and definitions of two terms that are no to other equipment covered by part 223,
the APTA PRESS recommended longer used in the part because of the they have been removed from part 223,
practice RP–C&S–001–98, removal of § 223.9(d)(2). along with the corresponding definition
‘‘Recommended Practice for Passenger The definition of ‘‘emergency of ‘‘emergency responder’’ and
Equipment Roof Emergency Access,’’ in window’’ has been revised in this ‘‘passenger train service.’’ Further,
recommending that emergency roof section, as well as in § 238.5 of this removal of § 223.9(d) avoids creating
access requirements be applied to Tier chapter, to clarify that the purpose of an any confusion due to duplication of the
I passenger equipment. FRA adopted the emergency window is egress, and thus marking and instruction requirements in
Task Force’s recommendation and, in an emergency window needs to be two different parts of the CFR,
general, is requiring that each new removable only from the inside of a especially since the marking
passenger car (both Tier I and Tier II) passenger car. Accordingly, FRA has requirements in part 238 that have been
have a minimum of two emergency roof revised the definition of ‘‘emergency adopted by FRA vary somewhat from
access locations. Existing Tier I window’’ to mean the segment of a side- the ones that were contained in
passenger cars are not subject to the facing glazing panel that has been § 223.9(d). Nevertheless, § 223.8 will
requirements, while existing Tier II designed to permit rapid and easy continue to alert the reader to additional
passenger cars continue to be subject to removal from inside a passenger car in requirements for emergency window
existing requirements. For further an emergency situation. FRA has also exits for ‘‘passenger equipment’’ in part
discussion and explanation of the removed the definitions ‘‘emergency 238, as defined in that part.
requirements, including the treatment of responder’’ and ‘‘passenger train However, because the ‘‘application’’
Tier II power cars, please see the service’’ in accordance with the removal section of part 223 is broader than that
Section-by-Section Analysis of this of § 223.9(d)(2), the only section in part of part 238, FRA has been mindful not
preamble at Section V. 223 that referenced these terms. The to alter the application of those part 223
definition ‘‘emergency responder’’ has requirements unaffected by the May 4,
D. Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance
been moved to part 238 of this chapter. 1998 amendments. Part 238 does not
This final rule amends §§ 238.17, apply to ‘‘tourist, scenic, historic, or
238.303, and 238.305 (which contain Subpart B—Specific Requirements excursion operations, whether on or off
standards for movement of passenger Section 223.9 Requirements for New the general railroad system of
equipment with other than power brake or Rebuilt Equipment transportation,’’ see § 238.3(c)(3);
defects, for inspection of passenger whereas, part 223 does not apply to
equipment, and for repair of passenger In the discussion of § 223.5, FRA has ‘‘locomotives, passenger cars and
equipment) by adding requirements for noted that the definition of ‘‘emergency cabooses that are historical or
the inspection, testing, maintenance and window’’ has been amended to clarify antiquated equipment’’ and are also
repair of emergency communication that the purpose of the windows is ‘‘used only for excursion, educational,
systems, emergency roof access points, egress, and thus such a window would recreational purposes or private
and rescue access markings. To allow need to be removable only from the transportation purposes,’’ see
railroads sufficient time to repair the inside of a passenger car. Section § 223.3(b)(3). As a result of this, for
equipment with minimal disruption to 223.9(c) required ‘‘at least four example, tourist equipment that is
normal operations, however, flexibility emergency opening windows.’’ As the covered by part 223 because the
is provided for operating equipment in term ‘‘emergency opening window’’ was equipment is not historical or
passenger service with certain not specifically defined—but had been antiquated and is required to be
noncompliant conditions. In affording understood to mean ‘‘emergency equipped with certified glazing in all
this flexibility, the final rule requires window’’—FRA has modified the rule windows pursuant to § 223.9(c) or
the railroad to adhere to specified text in § 223.9(c) to require ‘‘at least four 223.15(c), is still required to have four
procedures for the safe operation of the emergency windows’’ and restructured emergency windows (emergency
equipment. the section in order to provide more window exits), despite its exclusion
clarity. from the part 238 requirements.
V. Section-by-Section Analysis FRA has removed § 223.9(d) and
This section-by-section analysis merged the requirements previously Appendix B to Part 223—Schedule of
explains the provisions of the final rule contained therein into §§ 238.113 and Civil Penalties
and any changes made from the 2006 238.114 of part 238. The requirements This appendix contains a schedule of
NPRM. Of course, a number of the in § 223.9(d) had been added by FRA’s civil penalties to be used in connection
issues and provisions involving this rule May 4, 1998 final rule on Passenger with this part. Because such penalty
have been discussed and addressed in Train Emergency Preparedness. See 63 schedules are statements of agency
detail in the preceding discussions. FR 24629, 24643. The Passenger Train policy, notice and comment are not
Accordingly, the preceding discussions Emergency Preparedness final rule required prior to their issuance. See 5
should be considered in conjunction required the marking of both emergency U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Nevertheless, FRA
invited comment on the penalty FRA has added the definition of ‘‘intermediate level,’’ as discussed
schedule, but no comment was received. ‘‘intercom’’ to mean a device through above, and has also defined ‘‘main
FRA has amended the penalty which voice communication can be level’’ as a level of a passenger car that
schedule. As discussed above, FRA has transmitted and received. A contains a passenger compartment
merged the requirements of § 223.9(d) transmission unit normally has a button, whose length is equal to or greater than
into §§ 238.113 and 238.114. which has to be pressed to begin half the length of the car. This definition
Accordingly, FRA has modified the transmission or notify the crew on the establishes a more direct relationship
schedule of civil penalties in appendix receiving end of the intention to between the number of occupants on a
B to part 223 by removing the entries for communicate using the system. An level of a car and the number of
paragraphs (d)(1)(i), (d)(1)(ii), (d)(2)(i), intercom may be a telephone apparatus. emergency window exits required on
and (d)(2)(ii) of § 223.9 and the FRA has also added the definition of that level. The longer a level is, the
associated penalties. FRA has also ‘‘intercom system’’ (or more seats and exterior side windows it
revised footnote 1 to clarify the use of ‘‘intercommunication system’’) to mean is able to accommodate. Since passenger
penalty codes in the penalty schedule. a two-way, voice communication cars are normally about 85 to 90 feet in
system. This system allows a passenger length, a main level in such a car would
Amendments to 49 CFR Part 238, to communicate with a crewmember, be a level that contains a passenger
Passenger Equipment Safety Standards typically by pressing a button, or lifting compartment whose length is
Subpart A—General a telephone handset, or both. approximately 42.5 feet or more.
FRA has added the definition of Accordingly, there should be sufficient
Section 238.5 Definitions ‘‘intermediate level’’ to mean a level of space for the required number of
This section, which contains a set of a multi-level passenger car that is used emergency window exits on a main
definitions of terms used in part 238, for passenger seating and is normally level of a passenger car, whether or not
has been modified to include definitions located between two main levels. An there is a bathroom, kitchen, or
of terms used in modifications to part intermediate level normally contains equipment closet located on the same
238. two, separate seating areas, one at each level.
end of the car, and is normally FRA has added the definition of ‘‘PA
FRA has added the definition of
connected to each main level by stairs. system’’ or ‘‘public address system’’ to
‘‘dual-function window’’ to mean a
The term ‘‘intermediate level’’ is mean a one-way, voice communication
window that is intended to serve as both
intended to distinguish a level used for system. Such a system is used by train
an emergency window exit and a rescue
passenger seating of a multi-level crew members to make announcements
access window. This term generally
passenger car from a ‘‘main level’’ of to passengers in both normal and
refers to a window that has a zip-strip,
such a car, as FRA has applied different emergency situations. Crew members
which is a strip in a window gasket that
requirements to the different passenger may use the PA system to make routine
can be pulled from end to end to unlock
seating levels. Please see the discussion station announcements as well as to
the gasket and thus release the glazing,
of ‘‘main level,’’ below. communicate information regarding
on both faces, so that it can be opened Previously, the regulatory text of part unusual occurrences, such as
from both the inside of the car and the 238 did not define the term ‘‘main unexpected delays and emergencies. If a
outside. (This definition also covers level,’’ as used in § 238.113. However, person requires immediate medical
other methods of opening the same in the preamble to the April 23, 2002 attention, the crew may also use the PA
window from both the inside of the car final rule, FRA explained that the term system to request assistance from
and the outside.) The term has been ‘‘main level’’ was intended to exclude a someone onboard with medical training.
added because it is referenced in level of a car that is ‘‘principally used Some PA systems have speakers located
§ 238.114(a)(5) as an exception to the for passage between the door exits and on the exterior of cars that are used to
requirements on the location of rescue passenger seating areas, or between make announcements to persons in the
access windows set forth in § 238.114. seating areas,’’ and noted that such an vicinity of the train (e.g., passengers on
Dual-function windows installed to area is not ‘‘principally used for a station platform).
meet the minimum requirements seating’’ and includes a stairwell FRA has added the definition of
contained in § 238.113 are not required landing. See 67 FR 19973. This ‘‘passenger compartment’’ to mean an
to meet the § 238.114 rescue access distinction raised some concerns with area of a passenger car that consists of
window location requirements, in order respect to intermediate levels because a seating area and any vestibule that is
to recognize that a railroad that installs their designation as main levels would connected to the seating area by an open
four compliant emergency window exits hinge upon an interpretation of passageway. If a door separates the
that are the dual-function type has also ‘‘principally used’’ for passenger seating area from the vestibule, the
installed twice the number of rescue seating. Some Task Force members vestibule is not part of the passenger
access windows required. believed that these levels were compartment. See Figure 1c to subpart
FRA has revised the definition of principally used for passenger seating B. This definition was necessary to
‘‘emergency window’’ to clarify that the because passengers who are seated there solidify the concept that passengers
purpose of an emergency window is are spending more time on that level should not have to go through an
egress, and thus such a window needs than the passengers who simply use that interior door, which could get jammed,
to be removable only from the inside of level to reach the upper level (or lower or to another level in order to reach an
a passenger car. Accordingly, FRA has level). Others believed that the emergency window exit, and likewise,
amended the definition to mean the intermediate level was principally used emergency responders should be able to
segment of a side-facing glazing panel for passage between levels because there directly access passengers in need of aid
that has been designed to permit rapid was a greater volume of passengers in each such compartment.
and easy removal from inside a passing through that level to reach the Consistent with the amendments to
passenger car in an emergency situation. upper level (or passing through to reach part 223, discussed above, FRA has
FRA has also revised the definition of the lower level, or both) than there were defined ‘‘rescue access window’’ as a
this term in § 223.5 for consistency and passengers seated on that level. In light side-facing exterior window intended
clarity. of the concerns raised, FRA has defined for use by emergency responders to gain
access to passengers in an emergency light rays back to the light source and the specific provisions added to the
situation. In some passenger cars, all that conforms to the specifications for exterior calendar day mechanical
windows may be capable of serving as Type I Sheeting, as specified in ASTM inspection in § 238.303(e)(18) regarding
both emergency window exits and International’s (ASTM) Standard D rescue-access-related markings, signage,
rescue access windows. However, a 4956–07, ‘‘Standard Specification for and instructions. Section 238.303(e)(18)
railroad may choose not to designate Retroreflective Sheeting for Traffic requires that all rescue-access-related
one or more of these windows for rescue Control.’’ ASTM International defines exterior markings, signage, and
access for various reasons, including the Type I Sheeting as ‘‘medium-intensity instructions required by § 238.114
presence of a third-rail shoe that could retroreflective sheeting referred to as (rescue access windows) and
pose an electrocution hazard, or a high ‘engineering grade’ and typically § 239.107(a)(2) (door exits intended for
seatback next to the window that may enclosed lens glass-bead sheeting,’’ and emergency access) be in place and, as
pose a potential hindrance to window FRA has incorporated the ASTM applicable, conspicuous, and/or legible,
removal for windows that are designed definition by reference. This newly and that certain conditions be met for
to open by being pushed into the car. added definition is consistent with the continued use of the cars with defective
Some rescue access windows are definition and requirements for markings, signage, or instructions. As
designed with a zip-strip to release the retroreflective material markings for these provisions contain specific
window panel from its frame. In some doors, windows, and roof locations requirements related to the continued
cars, side-facing glazing systems are intended for rescue access contained in use in passenger service of passenger
designed so that there is a zip-strip on APTA Standard SS–PS–002–98, Rev. 3, cars found with defective rescue access
only one side of the window panel. It is ‘‘Standard for Emergency Signage for signs, markings, or instructions,
common for railroads to install such Egress/Access of Passenger Rail recognition of these specific limitations
systems with a zip-strip on the exterior Equipment.’’ (As discussed further in is included in both paragraphs (b) and
of the car for rescue access use, and also the Section-by-Section Analysis, (c) of this section. The requirements in
have one in the interior of the car for Revision 3 of this Standard was § 238.303(e)(18) and the conditions for
emergency egress use. However, to the authorized by APTA on October 7, continued use of passenger equipment
extent that there may be only one zip- 2007.) FRA notes that this APTA with non-complying conditions are
strip for a single glazing system, the standard also requires that the discussed in detail, below.
railroad must decide whether to place retroreflective material be tested In the NPRM, FRA noted that it was
the zip-strip on the exterior of the car according to ASTM’s Standard E 810– considering moving the emergency exit
for use in rescue access, or in the 03, ‘‘Standard Test Method for marking requirements contained in
interior of the car for use in emergency Coefficient of Retroreflective Sheeting § 239.107(a) into part 238, and FRA
egress. Utilizing the Coplanar Geometry.’’ invited comment on whether FRA
Although use of zip-strips in rescue FRA has added the definition of should do so in the final rule. FRA
access windows is common, FRA makes ‘‘seating area’’ to mean an area of a explained that since § 239.107(a)
clear that they are not required. The passenger car that normally contains contains requirements for door exit
adopted definition is a performance passenger seating. An area with no marking, signage, and operating
standard, and a rescue access window actual seats but with anchors for instructions, the requirements of that
may be opened by other means, such as securing wheelchairs is considered a section may more logically be situated
by shattering the window (if glass) or by seating area. in the very sections containing
popping the window out by applying FRA notes that the term ‘‘vestibule’’ is requirements for door exits in part 238,
force at one corner. defined in part 238 to mean an area of
namely, §§ 238.235 and 238.439.
Throughout the discussion of rescue a passenger car that normally does not
However, no comment was received on
access windows, Task Force members contain seating and is used in passing
repeatedly emphasized, as the definition this matter, and the Task Force advised
from the seating area to the side exit
reflects, that these windows are that it is not necessary to move these
doors. Although FRA has not revised
intended for use by emergency requirements into part 238 at this time.
the definition of ‘‘vestibule,’’ FRA
responders to gain access to passengers The Task Force noted that it would be
makes clear that for purposes of part
in an emergency situation. In the advisable to consider incorporating by
238, a vestibule may be located
process of reviewing the definitions in reference the APTA standard containing
anywhere along a car. The location of a
parts 223, 238, and 239 in composing more specific requirements for
vestibule is not restricted to the far ends
the NPRM and this final rule, FRA emergency exit markings in a future
of a car but may be elsewhere, such as
noted that the term ‘‘emergency rulemaking, instead of making non-
in the middle of the car. As a result,
responder’’ was defined in parts 223 substantive changes concerning where
what some in the passenger rail industry
and 239, but not in part 238. As the these requirements are currently stated
commonly refer to as an entranceway,
adopted part 238 definition of ‘‘rescue in the CFR. FRA agreed with the Task
by virtue of where it is located in a car,
access window’’ includes the term Force’s recommendation, and has left
it is considered a vestibule for purposes
‘‘emergency responder,’’ FRA believed it the rule unchanged in this regard at this
of this part.
was appropriate to add the definition of time.
‘‘emergency responder’’ to part 238. The Section 238.17 Movement of Passenger
Subpart B—Safety Planning and
term has been defined to mean a Equipment With Other Than Power
General Requirements
member of a police or fire department, Brake Defects
or other organization involved with This section contains the Section 238.113 Emergency Window
public safety charged with providing or requirements related to the movement of Exits
coordinating emergency services, who passenger equipment with a condition Prior to this final rule, this section
responds to a passenger train not in compliance with part 238, contained requirements for emergency
emergency. excluding a power brake defect, without window exits in single-level passenger
FRA has added the definition of civil penalty liability under this part. cars and in main levels of multi-level
‘‘retroreflective material’’ to mean a FRA has modified paragraphs (b) and (c) passenger cars only. Again, emergency
material that is capable of reflecting of this section to include a reference to window exits are intended to
supplement door exits, which are emergency window exits that are not in location would be crowded. Having
normally the preferred means of egress a staggered configuration, but rather examined Caltrans’ California and
in an emergency situation. Emergency ‘‘located symmetrically on each side of Surfliner cars, and considered the
windows provide an alternative means the vehicle’’—i.e., on both sides directly number of emergency window exits
of emergency egress should doors be across from each other. Caltrans also present in each car, FRA believes that
rendered inoperable or inaccessible. stated that the cars have eight the cars are in compliance with the
They also provide an additional means emergency window exits in the upper location requirements for emergency
of egress in life-threatening situations level, twice as many emergency window window exits.
requiring very rapid exit, such as a fire exits than it believed were required FRA does not believe it necessary to
on board or submergence of the car in under the rule. Nevertheless, Caltrans modify the final rule, however,
a body of water. expressed concern that the emergency especially since factors other than the
To ensure that emergency window window exit configuration was not number of emergency window exits
exit requirements apply to every level compliant with the requirement for need to be taken into account in
with passenger seating, FRA has revised staggering their location where deciding whether it is practical to
this section expressly to include practical, and requested that the rule stagger their location. Instead, FRA is
emergency window exit requirements make clear that for cars where the providing the following examples of
for any level with passenger seating in number of emergency window exits instances where it may not be practical
a multi-level passenger car. FRA has exceeds the minimum required for each to stagger the location of emergency
also revised this section to require that side and each half of the car, the window exits. For example, if a car has
emergency window exit operating staggering of the emergency window a symmetrical seating arrangement that
instructions specifically address the exit locations is not required. includes face-to-face seating with tables
presence of interior fixtures that may Caltrans also stated in its comments or workstations in between, a railroad
hinder the removal of the window that its Surfliner cars, which are also bi- may decide to configure emergency
panel, to facilitate its rapid and easy level, have 23 emergency window exits window exits symmetrically with
removal. on the upper level of each and at least respect to the longitudinal centerline of
Paragraph (a). Paragraph (a), which four on the lower level of each car. In the car. Face-to-face seating
applies to both new and existing effect, every window frame in such cars arrangements usually provide sufficient
passenger cars, has been modified to contains an emergency window exit. As clear space for locating emergency
specify requirements for the number a result, Caltrans expressed concern that window exits such that they are free of
and location of emergency window exits it would possibly have to eliminate
obstruction or potential hindrance by
on any level with passenger seating in emergency window exits in order to
high seatbacks and thus may be more
a passenger car. The requirements for located them in a staggered
single-level passenger cars in paragraph rapid and easy to operate in an
configuration.
(a)(1), and for main levels of multi-level FRA referred these comments to the emergency situation. Railroads may also
passenger cars in paragraph (a)(2), have Task Force for discussion and its decide not to stagger emergency
largely remained unchanged from the recommendation. FRA expressed its window exits to avoid creating
May 12, 1999, final rule in which they views on Caltrans’ comments and the potentially hazardous situations such as
were adopted (64 FR 25540, 25673). Task Force agreed that Caltrans’ cars would exist if an emergency window
Under the 1999 final rule, single-level were in compliance with the emergency exit were located immediately above a
passenger cars were required to have a window exit location requirements and third-rail shoe that could pose an
minimum of four emergency window that no change in the rule text is electrocution hazard. In other instances,
exits, located ‘‘either in a staggered necessary. The Task Force also agreed the presence of a rescue access window
configuration where practical or with with FRA’s recommendation that, that does not also serve as an emergency
one located in each end of each side of instead of modifying the rule, the window exit, the size of a window, or
each level.’’ FRA has slightly modified preamble to this final rule clarify the a combination of these, could make
this language by replacing the word intent and application of the emergency staggering the location of emergency
‘‘end’’ with ‘‘end (half)’’ to clarify that window exit location requirements. window exits not practical.
the term ‘‘end’’ does not refer to the FRA emphasizes that a railroad is not To illustrate the requirements of
extreme forward and rear ends of a car, required to stagger the location of paragraph (a)(2), FRA has added Figure
but merely the front and rear halves of emergency window exits when it is not 1, as referenced above. FRA had invited
the car. See Figure 1 to subpart B. practical to do so. Further, FRA makes comment in the NPRM on whether this
Additionally, the text has been clear that the requirement to stagger and other figures proposed in the NPRM
reorganized to emphasize that a window their location is principally a concern in for inclusion in part 238 would be
is required in each end (half) of each a situation where only the minimum helpful in understanding the
side of the car and that, if practical, the number of emergency window exits is requirements of this part, and, if so,
windows are also to be in a staggered present so as to maximize the rate of whether any additional figures should
configuration. This clarification egress. That is, train occupants would be included. FRA also noted that the
removes any ambiguity in the former not otherwise have to crowd the same proposed figures, which were not drawn
rule text that wrongly suggested that one two areas to escape out of a window to scale, represented possible ways of
could choose to simply stagger the where the minimum number of complying with the proposed
location of the windows without regard emergency window exits are paired requirements and should not be
to having one window in each side of across from one another, i.e., paired construed as depicting the only way to
each end. symmetrically with respect to the comply. While no written comments
FRA notes that Caltrans submitted a longitudinal centerline of the car. Yet, were received on this issue, both the
comment on the requirement that the where more than the minimum number Task Force and the Working Group
emergency window exits be in a of required emergency window exits are recommended that FRA retain these
staggered configuration, where practical. present, train occupants have more figures in the final rule. FRA has
In its comments, Caltrans stated that its window exits to escape through, and decided to include the figures in the
California cars, which are bi-level, have there is less concern that any one final rule as proposed.
Paragraph (a)(3) contains the new window exit or a side door exit on passenger cars already have windows in
requirements for emergency window another level or in a vestibule area that each side of an intermediate-level
exits on non-main levels with seating is separated from the seating area by an seating area, these windows are not
areas of multi-level passenger cars, interior door. Similarly, the provision is necessarily emergency window exits.
including intermediate (or mezzanine) intended to address situations in which Consequently, some time would be
seating levels. The general intent of the a passenger car rolls onto its side as a needed to change out the existing
paragraph is to have at least one result of a collision, derailment, or other windows with emergency window exits
emergency window exit that is accident, by providing that at least one or otherwise retrofit the windows with
accessible to passengers in each side of of these emergency window exits be pull-handles and make any other
a passenger seating area without required in each side of the passenger modification necessary so that the
requiring the passengers to move to car, except as provided below. See windows would meet the requirements
another level of the car or pass through Figures 2, 2a, and 2b to subpart B. for emergency window exits. The final
a door. This will help ensure that, if a This provision also permits an rule takes this concern into account, and
car rolls onto its side or if there is a emergency window exit to be located otherwise affords railroads sufficient
hazard on one side of the train, an within an exterior side door in the time to come into compliance,
emergency window exit on the opposite passenger compartment of a non-main regardless of the state of the existing
side will be available to passengers and level, if it is not ‘‘practical’’ to place the windows, by not making the
crew members for emergency egress. window exit in the side of the seating requirement applicable until 18 months
Nevertheless, as further discussed area. It should be noted that, by after publication of the final rule.
below, a constraint for intermediate definition, a side door is not considered
Paragraph (a)(3)(ii) contains an
levels of both new and existing multi- to be located within the ‘‘passenger
exception for non-main levels of both
level passenger car designs is limited compartment’’ if an interior door
new and existing multi-level passenger
space due to the presence of bathrooms, separates the seating area from the area
cars. It requires only one emergency
equipment closets, and side door exits. where the side door is located. The
window exit in a seating area in a
Accordingly, the requirements for the provision requires that there be an open
passenger compartment with no more
number and location of emergency passageway between the seating area
than four seats, if it would not be
window exits in paragraph (a)(3) and the vestibule, in such a
practical to place an emergency window
provide flexibility for, and are circumstance. Use of the word
exit in a side of the passenger
consistent with, existing passenger car ‘‘practical’’ allows railroads and car
builders some discretion regarding the compartment due to the need to provide
designs.
FRA notes that in light of adding the location of an emergency window exit accessible accommodations under the
new definition of ‘‘main level,’’ some in a non-main level of a car. For ADA and a suitable, alternate
passenger cars will no longer have main instance, this provision could be used to arrangement for emergency egress is
levels. Such cars will thus be subject to address situations where a window in a provided. This exception would address
the requirements for other levels with door in the same passenger concerns involving multi-level
seating areas contained in paragraph compartment may be better suited for passenger cars serving passenger
(a)(3). For instance, none of the levels in emergency egress than one in the stations with high-platforms, such as on
a gallery-style car (a multi-level seating area. In some cars, removal of the Northeast Corridor. Because all
passenger car with a full-height, the windows in the seating area may be passengers enter these cars on the
enclosed vestibule in the center) meet hindered by seatbacks or other fixtures, intermediate level, and disabled
this definition of a ‘‘main level.’’ Yet, while windows in the exterior side passengers are not able to access
each of the four, separate seating areas doors could potentially be more easily accommodations on another level of the
in such a car is subject to the emergency and rapidly removed. Since there would cars, any accommodations provided to
window exit number and location still be two accessible side windows in passengers are located on the
requirements adopted in paragraph a passenger compartment, one on each intermediate level. The final rule
(a)(3). Further, the requirements of side, there is no limitation on the recognizes this fact, and the exception
paragraph (a)(3) are consistent with the number of seats that may be in the applies to both existing and new
number and location of emergency compartment. Moreover, the door itself passenger cars. However, the exception
windows on existing gallery-style is a means of emergency egress that, if is limited to situations that arise from
passenger cars, will not impact current operable, would allow more rapid and the need to provide accessible
operations, and will not diminish the safe egress than exiting through a accommodations under the ADA, as
effect of FRA’s existing requirements. window. Nevertheless, because having well as limited to those seating areas in
Paragraph (a)(3)(i) of the final rule, two emergency exits at the very same passenger compartments where there
which applies to both new and existing location could result in both exits being are no more than four seats and where
passenger cars on or after August 1, rendered inoperable (as by car crush) or a suitable alternate arrangement for
2009, generally requires that non-main inaccessible (as by fire), FRA decided egress is provided. Use of the word
levels that are used for passenger seating not to allow the unrestricted placement ‘‘practical’’ in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) is
have at least two emergency window of emergency window exits in side intended to extend flexibility to car
exits that are accessible to passengers in doors. FRA makes clear that, all things builders to locate an electrical locker or
each seating area without requiring the being equal, emergency window exits other equipment closet in a side of an
passengers to move to another level of should be placed in a location separate intermediate level at one end of a
the car or pass through an interior door. from side door exits. See Figure 2b to passenger car without being required to
This provision is intended to address subpart B; compare to Figure 2a to place an emergency window exit in the
situations in which stairways could subpart B. same side at that location, provided the
become structurally deformed and In determining the appropriate placement of the locker or closet is
interior doors could be rendered applicability date for the requirement to related to placement of ADA-accessible
inoperable as a result of a collision, have emergency window exits in non- accommodations in the intermediate
derailment, or other accident, main levels of multi-level passenger level at the other end of the car. The
obstructing access to an emergency cars, it was noted that, while some limitation concerning the maximum
number of seats in the passenger should be noted that it is designed to be emergency window exit. The rule
compartment is consistent with the polycarbonate, rather than glass, making clarifies that, for purposes of this
maximum number of seats in existing it significantly lighter, and thus easier to paragraph, a kitchen, locomotive cab, or
designs for cars that are being remove than a glass panel. Further, the bathroom—whether public or private—
manufactured with emergency window opening created by removing the panel is not considered a ‘‘private
exits in only one side of each passenger is large enough for a person to pass compartment,’’ however. In particular, a
compartment in an intermediate level. through it relatively quickly. bathroom is not considered a ‘‘private
In requiring that a suitable, alternate Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) requires compartment’’ for purposes of this
arrangement for emergency egress be passenger cars that were both ordered requirement because a bathroom should
provided, such an arrangement must not prior to April 1, 2009 and placed in normally be located either in a sleeping
require the use of a tool or implement service prior to April 1, 2011 to have a compartment or in a passenger
to operate, and must be comparable to minimum of only one emergency compartment, both of which are subject
an emergency window exit in terms of window exit in a non-main level seating to emergency window exit
being rapid and easy to use. As part of area in a passenger compartment with requirements. As a result, a passenger
the Task Force’s discussion during the no more than eight seats, if it is not should have access to an emergency
development of the NPRM, Kawasaki ‘‘practicable’’ to place a window exit in window exit upon exiting a bathroom.
presented a car design with a seating a side of the passenger compartment Paragraph (b). As part of the revision
area separated from a vestibule by an (due to the presence of a structure such and reorganization of this section,
interior door and an alternate as a bathroom, electrical locker, or paragraph (b) contains the same
arrangement for emergency egress to kitchen). This exception is broader than requirements for ease of operability of
address having a distinct emergency the one in paragraph (a)(3)(ii), as it emergency window exits that were
window exit on only one side of the applies to non-main levels with more stated in former paragraph (a)(3) of the
seating area. (A copy of this design has seats and is not dependent on providing regulation. The only modification is that
been placed in the docket for this accessible accommodations under the the applicability date of November 8,
rulemaking.) The interior door is ADA. However, it does not apply to new 1999, which was stated in the
designed with a removable window cars. New car designs must take into introductory text of paragraph (a), has
panel (with pull-handles on both sides) consideration the need to provide an been added directly to this paragraph
to allow passengers access to the emergency window exit in each side of (b). FRA notes that the Task Force
vestibule in the event the door itself a passenger compartment. considered alternatives to the existing
were inoperable. Further, once a Use of the word ‘‘practicable’’ limits standard for the ease of operating
passenger accesses the vestibule, there railroad discretion so that a car subject emergency window exits—one that
are two exterior side doors in the to this paragraph is required to have an would be capable of more objective
vestibule, one on each side, that each emergency window exit in a side of a quantification. One such alternative that
contain an emergency window exit. As seating area, if a window suitable for was considered involved specifying a
a result, in this design, a means of such use is already located there. maximum pull-force for removing
exiting the car from the side that lacks Nevertheless, FRA notes that a railroad window gaskets and glazing, but the
the distinct emergency window exit is is under no obligation to install a Task Force found it difficult to specify
available to passengers. window in a side of a passenger a uniform standard that would account
A combination of several factors compartment for purposes of providing for varying operating environments and
makes this type of arrangement depicted an emergency window exit under this weather conditions. Further discussion
by Kawasaki a suitable, alternate paragraph, if an emergency window exit relating to the requirements of
arrangement for emergency egress. First, is located in either (i) the other side of paragraph (b) is found below in the
the alternate emergency exit location the same compartment or (ii) an exterior paragraph discussing the requirements
provides a measure of redundancy, i.e., side door located in the same side of the for marking emergency window exits.
a safety factor, in that there are an compartment. Cutting through a side Paragraph (c). Consistent with the
exterior side door and an emergency panel in an existing passenger car to reorganization and revision of this
window exit in the same door. The install an emergency window exit is not section, FRA has moved existing
door, if operable, allows passengers and required. requirements for the dimensions of
crewmembers to exit more Requirements for cars with sleeping emergency window exits from former
expeditiously than through a window. compartments or similar private paragraph (b) to paragraph (c). The
In the event that this door is rendered compartments have been clarified and applicability date of the dimension
inoperable, a window meeting the moved from former paragraph (a)(2) to requirements is unchanged from former
minimum dimension requirements in new paragraph (a)(4). Each level of a paragraph (b); thus, the requirements
paragraph (c) is available. To the extent passenger car with a sleeping continue to apply to each passenger car
that both the door and its window are compartment or a similar private ordered on or after September 8, 2000,
inaccessible or inoperable, and the side compartment intended to be occupied or first placed in service on or after
door exit on the opposite side of the by a passenger or train crewmember September 9, 2002. FRA has slightly
vestibule is also inaccessible or continues to be required to have at least modified the requirements to allow an
inoperable, the exterior side door exits one emergency window exit in each emergency window exit with an
in the adjacent car’s vestibule are then such compartment. A private seating unobstructed opening of at least 24
next in sequence for use, since this car area (such as found on certain European inches horizontally by 26 inches
design has no end-frame doors trains or on some antiquated American vertically to be located within an
separating adjoining cars. In fact, should trains) is a private compartment. FRA exterior side door, in accordance with
the end of the car become uncoupled notes that, in a passenger car with only the requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of
from the adjacent car, the vestibule sleeping compartments, if all the this section, as discussed above. FRA
would be open at the end, allowing sleeping compartment doors are locked, makes clear that, for purposes of
passengers direct access to the outside. passengers in a compartment without an determining compliance with the
Regarding the removable panel in the egress window would not be able to get emergency window exit dimension
interior door leading to the vestibule, it into another compartment to use an requirements, the dimensions of the
unobstructed opening are measured in the lead locomotive. In what has been desirable, a testing requirement may
after the emergency window exit has the Nation’s deadliest passenger train discourage railroads from retaining
been opened. For example, the accident in over 50 years, train these window exits at all.
transparent area of the window for occupants needed to evacuate as quickly The Task Force considered these
viewing use by passengers or train crew as possible from cars filling with water, issues and, for passenger cars ordered
members may be several inches smaller potentially making the number of on or after September 8, 2000, or placed
than the opening created once the window exits more critical than their in service for the first time on or after
window is removed, and that would be precise dimensions. (FRA is not September 9, 2002, recommended
acceptable, as long as the opening suggesting that the cars lacked a allowing railroads to designate as
satisfies the dimension requirements. sufficient number of exits; nor is FRA ‘‘additional’’ emergency window exits
The 1999 Passenger Equipment Safety suggesting that their exits’ dimensions those windows that provide an
Standards final rule required that an were too small. FRA is citing this unobstructed opening that is smaller
emergency window exit in a passenger incident to show that circumstances can than 24 inches vertically by 26 inches
car ordered on or after September 8, exist where there may be extreme horizontally but that would still be
2000, or placed in service for the first urgency to exit a passenger car.) suitable for use in an emergency. The
time on or after September 9, 2002, have FRA invited comment on the issue of Task Force further recommended that
an unobstructed opening with minimum window exits in passenger cars ordered such ‘‘additional’’ emergency window
dimensions of 26 inches horizontally by on or after September 8, 2000, or placed exits be marked for emergency exit,
24 inches vertically. Prior to the in service for the first time on or after have instructions provided for their use,
promulgation of this requirement, FRA September 9, 2002, that have window and be tested in the same manner as the
had not specified the dimensions of exits not meeting the minimum emergency window exits designated for
emergency window exits. As a result, in dimension requirements. FRA purposes of complying with the
the August 2006 NPRM, FRA stated that specifically invited comment on minimum number requirements of this
a window exit in such a passenger car whether these window exits should be section 238.113.
that does not create an unobstructed removed—i.e., replaced with
FRA agrees with the recommendation
opening meeting these minimum conventional windows—and, to the
of the Task Force and has revised
dimension requirements may not be extent that they should not be removed,
paragraph (c) accordingly. There are
considered an ‘‘emergency window whether any instructional marking on
now two exceptions to the requirements
exit’’ for purposes of this section and these windows should be permitted.
may not be marked as an ‘‘emergency Since these windows could be used for concerning dimensions, and they are
window exit.’’ See 71 FR 50288. Yet, emergency egress if they are not contained in newly added paragraphs
FRA noted that it did not believe it removed, FRA also invited comment as (c)(1) and (c)(2). The first exception,
necessary to modify or remove such a to whether they should have to be tested which was originally proposed in the
window exit, provided the passenger car periodically to ensure that they operate NPRM as part of the text of paragraph
containing the window exit is otherwise properly. FRA noted that railroads are (c), is that an emergency window exit
in compliance with all applicable currently required to test emergency located within an exterior side door in
emergency window exit requirements. window exits no less frequently than accordance with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of
Id. every 180 days using commonly this section, may have an unobstructed
For example, FRA is aware of window accepted sampling techniques to opening with minimum dimensions of
exits that are not capable of creating determine how many windows to test. 24 inches horizontally by 26 inches
openings of the required dimensions See § 239.107 of this chapter. In general, vertically, rather than 26 inches by 24
because of the presence of seatbacks that these sampling techniques require that inches. The second exception addresses
do not manually recline and may, the greater the percentage of window the dimensions of ‘‘additional’’
therefore, obstruct passage through the exits that a railroad finds defective in a emergency window exits. It provides
window of a stretcher or an emergency sample, the greater the percentage of that any additional emergency window
responder with a self-contained windows that the railroad has to test in exit, beyond the minimum number
breathing apparatus but not necessarily total (i.e., the number of windows that required by paragraph (a) of this section,
a passenger or crewmember. Certain need to be tested is adjusted upward that has been designated for emergency
emergency window exit designations when defects are found). Specifically, use by the railroad need not comply
appear to have been made sampling should be conducted to meet with the minimum dimension
independently of interior seat a 95-percent confidence level that no requirements in paragraph (c) of this
configurations, and this has resulted in defective units remain and be in accord section, but must otherwise comply
the expense of relocating emergency with either Military Standard MIL– with all applicable emergency window
window exit locations post-delivery. STD–105(E), ‘‘Sampling for Attributes,’’ exit requirements. Under this new
However, FRA does not intend to or American National Standards section, there is no obligation for a
discourage a railroad from retaining Institute (ANSI)/ASQC Z1.4–1993, railroad to designate any such
these additional window exits in its ‘‘Sampling Procedures for Inspections ‘‘additional’’ emergency window exits
passenger cars, even if they would not by Attributes.’’ (FRA notes that MIL– not meeting the minimum dimension
create openings of the required STD–105(E) was formally cancelled by requirements, in the same way that
dimensions, out of the agency’s concern the U.S. Department of Defense on there is no obligation for a railroad to
for circumstances such as those present February 27, 1995. The cancellation have more than the minimum number of
in the derailment of an Amtrak train notice stated that future acquisitions emergency window exits that comply
near Mobile, AL, in September 1993. should refer to acceptable non- with the dimension requirements.
There, after a barge had struck and Government standard sampling Nevertheless, when a railroad does seek
displaced a railroad bridge, an Amtrak procedures and tables for inspection by to have in its passenger cars more than
train traversing the bridge derailed and attributes, such as ANSI/ASQZ Z1.4– the minimum number of emergency
fell into a bayou, drowning 42 1993.) window exits, FRA encourages the
passengers and two crewmembers, and FRA also noted that, although testing railroad to follow the dimension
killing three other crewmembers located these window exits would appear requirements for those additional
window exits as well, all things being § 223.9(d)(1) have been to moved to exits be ‘‘clear and legible.’’ FRA has
equal. paragraph (d) of this section and modified this requirement by replacing
In those circumstances where any modified. Paragraph (d) requires that the word ‘‘clear’’ with the word
additional emergency window exit each emergency window exit be ‘‘understandable,’’ so that railroads are
cannot meet the dimension conspicuously marked with required to post ‘‘legible and
requirements, namely in the case of an luminescent material on the inside of understandable’’ operating instructions.
existing passenger car where the seating each car, and that legible and Use of the word ‘‘clear’’ in former
configuration causes a seatback to understandable operating instructions, § 223.9(d) had created some confusion
obstruct part of the opening, but the including instructions for removing the since it can have more than one
window exit is still considered suitable window panel, be posted at or near each meaning, and FRA believes this
for use in an emergency to exit the car, such window exit. amendment eliminates any further
the railroad may designate it as an Notably, paragraph (d) specifically confusion.
‘‘additional’’ emergency window exit. requires that emergency window exit Finally, FRA notes that existing
FRA notes that while a railroad will operating instructions address potential requirements in parts 223 and 239 for
most often designate an additional hindrances to removal of the window the marking of emergency exits, as well
emergency window exit by marking it panel due to the presence of fixtures in as existing requirements in part 238 for
for use, designation could also occur by the car. As discussed above, FRA the marking of emergency
design (i.e., if a pull handle is present) became aware that the phrase ‘‘rapid communications transmission points,
or by written or verbal notice to and easy’’ in the requirement for specify the use of luminescent
passengers as part of the railroad’s emergency window exit ease of materials. (Door exits intended for
passenger safety awareness program. operability was not being interpreted emergency egress may also be lighted, in
FRA chose not to adopt a similar uniformly. Central to the issue was the accordance with § 239.107(a)(1).) Part
exception to the dimension actual removal of the window panel in 238 defines ‘‘luminescent material’’ as
requirements for rescue access windows light of the weight of the window panel material that absorbs light energy when
because the additional rescue access and the presence of interior fixtures ambient levels of light are high and
windows are not likely to be as useful near the window. It is not uncommon emits this stored energy when ambient
in an emergency situation requiring for a seatback to be located adjacent to levels of light are low, making the
immediate evacuation (e.g., to escape an emergency window exit and for a material appear to glow in the dark. See
water, smoke or fire) as additional luggage rack to be located above the § 238.5. Paragraph (d) continues to
emergency window exits. This also exit. Even if the seatback does not affect require that luminescent material be
helps to ensure that there will be no compliance with the dimensions used to mark emergency window exits.
confusion as to whether or not the required for an unobstructed opening However, as further discussed below,
rescue access window is of the (especially in the case of a large window the Task Force has considered
appropriate size to accommodate an panel), it could, together with the incorporating an APTA standard that
emergency responder equipped with presence of the luggage rack, hinder would establish specific criteria for this
breathing equipment and a standard- removal of the window. This material, including how bright the
sized stretcher. To the extent that combination of fixtures could create a material must be and how long the
emergency responders use emergency situation where the most effective and material must stay luminescent.
window exits to evacuate passengers efficient method for operating an FRA’s requirements to mark
(e.g., if a responder chose to enter emergency window exit would not be emergency window exits and other
through an already-opened emergency immediately apparent to a passenger, emergency exits originated with FRA
window exit rather than going through especially if the window were large and Emergency Order No. 20. See 61 FR
the process of pulling open a rescue heavy. As a result, to promote the rapid 6876, (Feb. 22, 1996); and 61 FR 8703
access window), FRA expects that the and easy removal of the window panel, (Mar. 5, 1996). Among its provisions,
training made available to emergency the Task Force recommended requiring the emergency order required that ‘‘no
responders on affected railroads would that emergency window exit operating later than April 20, 1996, commuter and
include discussion on the fact that some instructions specifically take into intercity passenger railroads ensure that
of these window openings may have account such potential hindrances. each emergency exit location is marked
smaller dimensions than those required Accordingly, if removal of a window inside the car for passenger and crew
for the minimum number of emergency (whether it is one of the minimum information.’’ In an effort to respond to
window exits specified in paragraph (a). number required or an ‘‘additional’’ this requirement as effectively as
At the same time, the Task Force also emergency window exit) may be possible within the short timeframe
recognized that emergency responders hindered by the presence of a seatback, required, affected railroads began to
are well-trained and should be able to headrest, luggage rack, or other fixture, install photo-luminescent emergency
determine whether a window opening is the instructions must state the method exit markings that were available at the
large enough to accommodate a for allowing rapid and easy removal of time. Many railroads installed signs
stretcher. the window panel, taking into account made of zinc-sulfide, which were
Paragraph (d). As the final part of the the fixture(s). This particular portion of capable of providing luminance only for
reorganization and revision of this the instructions may be in written or a period of less than 10 minutes in
section, paragraph (d) has been added pictorial format to provide railroads the many cases. Subsequently, photo-
and contains the requirements for flexibility to convey the appropriate luminescent sign technology evolved,
marking emergency window exits, as information to passengers, especially and other materials began to be used,
well as providing operating instructions since a picture (pictogram) or pictures such as strontium-aluminate, which is
for their use. Marking and operating (pictograms) may potentially convey the capable of providing high levels of
instruction requirements for emergency information more readily than written luminance for much longer periods.
window exits were formerly contained instructions. Prices for such signage also decreased,
in § 223.9(d)(1) of this chapter, and were FRA also notes that former making the cost of such ‘‘high-
referenced in paragraph (c) of this § 223.9(d)(1) required that the operating performance, photo-luminescent’’
section. The requirements in instructions for emergency window (HPPL) signs comparable to that of the
signs installed initially. Thus, in 1999, required by the APTA standard; and (2) window directly into every passenger
APTA issued APTA SS–PS–002–98, sufficiently accurate off-axis compartment on every level of a
‘‘Standard for Emergency Signage for illuminance measurements cannot be passenger car, in the event that a
Egress/Access of Passenger Rail taken without the use of light meters stairway or interior door is
Equipment,’’ requiring the use of HPPL especially designed to take such compromised and exterior doors are
materials for all newly-installed, passive measurements—certain commonly blocked.
emergency-exit signs and for the retrofit available light meters are not designed Paragraph (a). Paragraph (a) contains
of existing cars at their remanufacture. for such a purpose. requirements specifying the minimum
According to Revision 2 of this APTA FRA notes that the Task Force number and location of rescue access
standard, issued in 2003, following a separately proposed revisions to the windows. These requirements apply on
charge of five foot-candles for one hour, APTA standard to (1) allow flexibility or after the effective date of the final
installed photo-luminescent markings for use of different types of charging rule to all passenger cars, except for
had to emit not less than a minimum of light sources, (2) require that new HPPL certain, existing single-level cars. As
7.5 milli-candela per square meter (7.5 signs meet the same luminance noted above, although FRA’s original
mcd/m2) for 90 minutes after removal of requirements with lower charging light regulations did not specifically require
the charging source. The APTA standard levels, (3) allow alternative testing any minimum number of rescue access
set the duration period of 90 minutes to criteria using meters that do not windows for passenger cars, they
correspond with the 90-minute duration measure off-axis illuminance accurately, continue to require that windows that
requirement for emergency lighting (4) grandfather signs that are likely to are intended for rescue access be
contained in § 238.115 for new perform as intended for 60 minutes, and marked and that instructions be
passenger cars, which affords a (5) in small areas, to allow lower levels provided for their operation. See
reasonable amount of time for of luminance or use of larger signs to § 223.9(d)(2).
passengers and crew members to wait compensate for even lower light levels. Paragraph (a)(1) contains the number
for the arrival of emergency responders The Task Force advised that and location requirements for rescue
to remote accident sites. Depending on requirements in the APTA standard for access windows in single-level
the circumstances, it could take more HPPL were very detailed and complex passenger cars. FRA is requiring that
than an hour for crewmembers to and not readily transferable directly into each single-level passenger car have a
evaluate an emergency situation, this final rule. Therefore, the Task Force minimum of two rescue access
coordinate with the control center and recommended incorporating such windows. At least one rescue access
emergency responders, notify requirements by reference into the CFR window must be located in each side of
passengers of the appropriate action(s) through a separate rulemaking, after the the car, entirely within 15 feet of the
standard had been revised and centerline of the car, or entirely within
to take, and if necessary, begin to
authorized by APTA. These would 71⁄2 feet of the centerline if the car does
evacuate the train. In conditions of
include various other sign and marking not exceed 45 feet in length. As
darkness, a brighter sign is more easily
requirements, including those discussed above, the Task Force
recognizable and facilitates
addressing size, color, and contrast. recommended requiring two windows
identification of emergency exits.
FRA agreed with the Task Force’s for rescue access (versus four, as is
As noted, the Task Force has focused recommendation, and has not modified required for emergency exit) mainly
on revisions to this APTA standard for this final rule with respect to this issue. because rescue access windows are the
purposes of incorporating it into FRA’s As discussed earlier, the standard was third means of egress in the overall
regulations. FRA considered revised and thereafter authorized by emergency systems approach, with
incorporating elements of the APTA APTA on October 7, 2007. The standard doors and emergency windows being
standard into this final rule so that is now designated as APTA SS–PS–002– the first and second means of emergency
emergency exit signs and intercom 98, Rev. 3, ‘‘Standard for Emergency exit, respectively.
markings in passenger cars would be Signage for Egress/Access of Passenger Rescue access windows in a single-
required to be made of HPPL material, Rail Equipment.’’ FRA intends to use level passenger car are required to be
and FRA invited comment on doing so. this standard in a separate rulemaking located ‘‘as close to the center of the car
See 71 FR 50289. Although no written that will add to and enhance FRA’s as possible,’’ unlike emergency window
comments were received, the Task Force marking and signage requirements for exits which should be in a staggered
discussed at length issues associated passenger train emergency systems. configuration to the extent practical. See
with the development of HPPL material Figure 1a to subpart B; see also Figures
component requirements. One of the Section 238.114 Rescue Access 1b and 1c to subpart B. Staggering the
most difficult issues the Task Force Windows location of emergency window exits is
addressed was the extent to which such FRA has established a new section intended to (i) ensure that a window
requirements should apply to photo- that contains requirements for rescue exit is available for egress in the event
luminescent signs and markings already access windows for both new and that one end of the car is deformed by
installed in passenger cars. Task Force existing passenger cars. As discussed in placing window exits throughout the
members were particularly concerned detail above, this new section was car; (ii) optimize the rate of egress, as
that lighting levels in enclosed vestibule prompted in part by the April 23, 2002 passengers have less distance to move to
areas in existing cars were not bright collision involving a Metrolink reach a window exit; and (iii) avoid
enough to charge photo-luminescent passenger train near Placentia, CA, and congestion that could occur if the
signs already in place such that they the ensuing NTSB Safety window exits were all located adjacent
could meet the level of luminance Recommendation (R–03–21) to FRA, to or directly opposite one another.
required by the APTA standard. Field which illustrated the potential Since, in general, a minimum of only
studies and laboratory tests revealed importance of having rescue access one rescue access window per side, per
two issues: (1) In many cases, the levels windows on each level of a passenger level of a single-level passenger car is
of light in vestibules and other small car. The general intent of the provision required, the best way to ensure that a
areas were inadequate for photo- is to provide a means of rescue access window is available for access in the
luminescent signs to perform as by emergency responders through a event that either end of the car is
deformed is to locate the window in the the location requirement would be met retrofit without disrupting train service.
center portion of the car, which is by having a rescue access window In the interim, emergency responders
generally less vulnerable to significant available on each side of each end of the will continue to rely on the manual door
deformation in the event of a collision same passenger compartment, including releases to open the side doors for
involving either end of the car. in exterior side doors. An exception was rescue access purposes should the need
Congestion should likely not be an issue crafted that permits the location of the arise.
for rescue access window usage in a rescue access windows in four exterior In paragraph (a)(2), FRA has adopted
situation requiring emergency side doors. It was approved by the Task minimum requirements for the number
evacuation as most car occupants Force, Working Group, and the full and location of rescue access windows
physically able to do so would likely RSAC, and has been adopted by FRA in in main levels of multi-level passenger
have begun to self-evacuate through this final rule. Moreover, as proposed in cars. Each main level in a multi-level
doors and emergency window exits the NPRM, the final rule permits these passenger car is subject to the same,
prior to the arrival of emergency windows to be located farther than 15 minimum requirements provided for
responders. feet from the car’s centerline, provided single-level passenger cars in paragraph
To ensure that railroads have that there is at least one such window (a)(1) of this section.
sufficient flexibility to select those in each side of each end (half) of the In paragraph (a)(3), FRA has adopted
window locations best suited for rescue same passenger compartment—a minimum requirements for the number
access, a 30-foot section along the center minimum of four rescue access and location of rescue access windows
of a typical 85- to 90-foot-long passenger windows, overall. FRA believes that in non-main levels of multi-level
car has been designated for their effectively requiring a minimum of four passenger cars with seating areas. These
location. This flexibility allows rescue access windows, instead of two, requirements and exceptions for non-
railroads to take into consideration the is appropriate for granting flexibility for main levels with passenger seating are
location of external hazards (such as installing rescue access windows on also the same as those for emergency
third-rail shoes); potential hindrances existing equipment in side doors. window exits on non-main levels with
created by interior fixtures for those Paragraph (a)(1)(ii) states the number passenger seating. Specifically,
rescue access windows intended to be and location requirements for rescue paragraph (a)(3)(i) requires that any non-
opened by being pushed inward into the access windows for single-level main level used for passenger seating in
passenger compartment; the location of passenger cars that were ordered prior a multi-level passenger car have at least
emergency window exits in passenger to September 8, 2000, and placed in two rescue access windows in each
cars without dual-function windows; service prior to September 9, 2002, if seating area to permit emergency
and other factors that a railroad may equipped with manual door releases for responders to reach occupants without
deem relevant. For passenger cars not at least two exterior side doors (or door requiring movement through an interior
longer than 45 feet, approximately half leaves) in diagonally-opposite quadrants door or to another level of the car. At
the length of a standard passenger car, of the cars. The manual door release least one rescue access window must be
railroads have the flexibility to select a must be capable of releasing the door (or located in each side of the seating area.
rescue access window from among door leaf) to permit it to be opened A rescue access window can be located
approximately three windows along a without power from outside the car, be within an exterior side door in the
15-foot section in the center of the car. located adjacent to the door (or door passenger compartment if it is not
If the seating level is obstructed by an leaf) which it controls, and be designed practical to place the rescue access
interior door or otherwise partitioned and maintained so that an emergency window in the side of the seating area.
into separate seating areas, the responder could access the release from See Figure 2a to subpart B; compare to
regulation requires that each separate outside the car without requiring the Figure 2b to subpart B.
seating area have at least one rescue use of a tool or other implement. The Paragraph (a)(3)(ii) requires only one
access window in each side of the requirements of paragraph (a)(1)(ii) rescue access window in a seating area
seating area, located as near to the become effective August 1, 2010. FRA in a passenger compartment of a non-
center of the car as practical. This decided to make these requirements main level if it is not practical to place
requirement is consistent with the applicable not until 18 months after a rescue access window in a side of the
general objective of having at least one publication of this final rule, in part passenger compartment due to the need
rescue access window on each side of a because the passenger cars subject to to provide accessible accommodations
passenger seating area or passenger this provision have safety features not under the ADA; there are no more than
compartment. Nevertheless, FRA is not otherwise required for cars of their four seats in the seating area; and a
aware of any such single-level car in age—i.e., manual releases capable of suitable, alternate arrangement for
current operation in the United States to opening side doors from outside of the rescue access is provided. The rationale
which this requirement would apply. cars. Section 238.235(b) contains for this exception is the same as the one
FRA notes that on some single-level requirements for manual door releases, for emergency window exits in non-
passenger cars, polycarbonate windows but only applies to passenger cars main levels of multi-level passenger cars
are installed in a channel in the window ordered on or after September 8, 2000, in § 238.113(a)(3)(ii), as discussed
mask, which is itself installed in the car or placed in service for the first time on above.
body with the frame compressed over or after September 9, 2002. Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) requires that
the window to secure it. Removal of the This paragraph also addresses those passenger cars both ordered prior to
window would require removal of the passenger cars equipped with April 1, 2009 and placed in service prior
frame, which would be very difficult in compressed frame window systems in to April 1, 2011 have only one rescue
an emergency situation. In addition, it which rescue access windows will need access window in a seating area in a
would be costly for these cars to be to be retrofitted in the four side doors passenger compartment of a non-main
retrofitted with glass windows (so that by replacing the polycarbonate glazing level if it is not practicable to place a
they could be shattered) or with zip- with glass that can be broken to gain rescue access window in a side of the
strip systems to literally un-zip the access into the car. The 18-month passenger compartment (due to the
window panel from its frame and implementation period allows for the presence of a structure such as a
gasketing. On this type of equipment, time necessary to plan and carry out the bathroom, electrical locker, or kitchen)
and there are no more than eight seats rulemaking, the proposed language in immediate evacuation (e.g., to escape
in the seating area. For more the NPRM and the text of this final rule water, smoke, or fire) as additional
background on this provision, please see are intended to mean the same thing emergency window exits. The
the related discussion above for with respect to the speed at which the requirement for minimum dimensions
emergency window exits in such seating rescue access windows must be capable also helps ensure that there will be no
areas. of being removed. confusion as to whether or not the
In paragraph (a)(4), FRA has adopted FRA makes clear that the adopted window is of the appropriate size to
minimum requirements for the number performance requirement for removing accommodate a responder equipped
and location of rescue access windows windows ‘‘without unreasonable delay’’ with breathing equipment and a
for passengers cars with a sleeping is intended to be less stringent than the standard-sized stretcher.
compartment or similar private performance requirement of ‘‘rapid and Paragraph (d). As discussed above,
compartment. Each level of a passenger easy’’ that is specified for removing FRA has modified the requirements for
car with a sleeping compartment or a emergency window exits in § 238.113. rescue access window marking and
similar private compartment intended to For example, using a sledge hammer to operating instructions, which were
be occupied by passengers or train shatter a glass window would be formerly contained in § 223.9(d)(2), and
crewmembers is now required to have a considered removal without has moved them here to paragraph (d).
minimum of one rescue access window unreasonable delay. Windows that are Formerly, each rescue access window
in each such compartment. For not made of glass may also be designed was required to be ‘‘marked with a
purposes of this paragraph, a bathroom, to be removed without unreasonable retroreflective, unique, and easily
kitchen, and locomotive cab are not delay by an emergency responder, recognizable symbol or other clear’’
considered a ‘‘compartment.’’ These through use of an axe, sledge hammer, marking. FRA has restated these
requirements reflect current practice. or similar large impact tool to strike the requirements to make clear that rescue
Amtrak cars with sleeping window at an appropriate point so that access windows must be marked with
compartments are already equipped the window panel will push inward. retroreflective material. Second, FRA
with a window in each such Paragraph (c). Paragraph (c) contains makes clear that a unique and easily
compartment that is capable of being the requirements for the dimensions of recognizable symbol, sign, or other
used for both emergency egress and rescue access windows. Each rescue conspicuous marking must be used to
rescue access. access window in a passenger car, identify each rescue access window.
Paragraph (a)(5) addresses the use of including a sleeping car, ordered on or FRA has replaced the word ‘‘clear’’ in
dual-function windows as rescue access after April 1, 2009, or placed in service the former requirements with the word
windows. If on any level of a passenger for the first time on or after April 1, ‘‘conspicuous’’ and has added the word
car the emergency window exits 2011, is required to have an ‘‘sign’’ as another example of a
installed to meet the minimum unobstructed opening with minimum conspicuous marking. The revisions
requirements of § 238.113 are intended dimensions of 26 inches horizontally by make clear that use of retroreflective
to function as rescue access windows, 24 inches vertically. If the rescue access material to mark a rescue access
the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) window is located within an exterior window is a distinct requirement in
through (a)(4) of this section for the side door, in accordance with the itself that was adopted to enable
number and location of rescue access requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of emergency responders to quickly
windows are met for that level. Under this section, it is permitted to have an identify rescue access windows under
this provision, four rescue access unobstructed opening with minimum conditions of darkness by shining a
windows are required for cars with dimensions of 24 inches horizontally by flashlight on a car. Second, the revisions
dual-function windows that do not have 26 inches vertically. FRA makes clear make clear that the window must also
at least one rescue access window in that a seatback is not considered an be marked by a unique and easily
each side within 15 feet of the obstruction if it can be moved away recognized symbol, a sign (such as
centerline of the car. from the window opening without ‘‘RESCUE ACCESS’’), or other
Paragraph (b). Paragraph (b) contains requiring the use of a tool or other conspicuous marking (such as
the requirements for the ease of implement. The dimensions for rescue delineation of the window by means of
operability of rescue access windows. access window unobstructed openings a contrasting color). Both requirements
The requirements apply on or after are the same as those for emergency could be met by the same marking.
April 1, 2008, and require that each window exit unobstructed openings. FRA also notes that the regulations
rescue access window be capable of Accordingly, FRA’s reasoning for formerly required that each railroad post
being removed without unreasonable proposing and adopting these minimum ‘‘clear and understandable’’ window
delay by an emergency responder using dimensions for emergency window exits access instructions either at each rescue
either a provided external mechanism, applies here to rescue access windows. access window or at each end of the car.
or tools or implements that are These minimum dimensions are FRA has replaced the word ‘‘clear’’ with
commonly available to the responder in intended to allow an emergency the word ‘‘legible,’’ so that railroads are
a passenger train emergency, such as a responder equipped with a self- required to post ‘‘legible and
sledge hammer or a pry bar. In the contained breathing apparatus to pass understandable’’ operating instructions.
NPRM, FRA had proposed the same through the window, as well as allow a Use of the word ‘‘clear’’ in § 223.9(d)
requirement except for the train occupant to be carried through the had created some confusion, since it
terminological difference that each window on a standard-sized stretcher. could have more than one meaning, and
rescue access window be capable of As noted in the earlier discussion FRA believes the amendment eliminates
being removed ‘‘without undue delay.’’ concerning emergency window exits, any further confusion. FRA has also
In the final rule, FRA has decided to use FRA chose not to adopt a similar modified the requirements so that it is
the words ‘‘without unreasonable exception to the dimension no longer permissible to have window
delay,’’ however, in order to avoid any requirements for rescue access windows access instructions solely at the end of
confusion with other uses of ‘‘without because the additional rescue access the car. Instead, legible and
undue delay’’ in FRA’s regulations. windows are not likely to be as useful understandable rescue access window
Nevertheless, for the purposes of this in an emergency situation requiring instructions, including instructions for
removing the window, are required to the former requirements for Tier II have PA systems are scheduled to be
be posted at or near each rescue access passenger equipment. retired before 2012 and thus would be
window. FRA agreed with the Task In the NPRM, FRA had originally removed from service before the
Force that rescue access efforts could be proposed to designate this section as requirement would apply. FRA notes
unduly delayed by posting rescue access § 238.117 and redesignate § 238.117 that APTA’s PRESS Task Force is
window operating instructions at the (Protection against personal injury) as currently evaluating the feasibility of a
end of a car, potentially more than 40 § 238.121. See 71 FR 50276, 50304. FRA wireless, two-way communication
feet away from the rescue access had believed that such a redesignation system that would function
window to which the instructions would help keep the emergency system independently of the train line, i.e., not
apply. requirements together in section rely on the train line for power. The
As noted above in the discussion of numbering sequence for the benefit of wireless system is intended to provide
emergency window exits, the Task the user. However, concern has been a means of two-way communication in
Force has focused on revisions to APTA raised that redesignating original the event that the train line is broken,
SS–PS–002–98, Rev. 2, ‘‘Standard for sections of the May 12, 1999 Passenger as may occur as a result of certain
Emergency Signage for Egress/Access of Equipment Safety Standards rule could collisions or derailments. However, FRA
Passenger Rail Equipment,’’ in order to cause unnecessary confusion, and FRA makes clear that it is not currently
recommend whether some or all of its has decided against the proposed adopting a requirement in this section
contents should be incorporated into redesignation. FRA has chosen instead that the communication system be
FRA’s regulations. This APTA standard to designate this section as § 238.121. wireless; communication through use of
also contains detailed criteria for This new designation has no effect on a train line is still permitted.
marking rescue access windows, the substance of the emergency Paragraph (a)(2) contains
including the use of retroreflective communication requirements. requirements for new Tier I and all Tier
material. FRA invited comment on Paragraph (a). Paragraph (a) contains II passenger cars. As is stated for
whether the criteria in the APTA requirements for PA systems for both existing Tier I passenger cars in
standard or in draft revisions to this existing and new Tier I and Tier II paragraph (a)(1), this paragraph requires
standard for marking rescue access passenger cars. Most passenger cars that each Tier I passenger car ordered on
windows were appropriate for use in the used in commuter and intercity service or after April 1, 2008, or placed in
final rule. See 71 FR 50292. While no are equipped with PA systems that train service for the first time on or after April
written comments were received on this crews often use to notify passengers of 1, 2010, and all Tier II passenger cars be
issue, both the Task Force and the the nature and expected duration of equipped with a PA system that
Working Group recommended that FRA delays. If a person requires immediate provides a means for a crewmember to
add the criteria to the final rule. FRA medical attention, the crew may also communicate to all train passengers in
agrees and has added a definition of use the PA system to request assistance an emergency situation. In addition, PA
‘‘retroreflective material’’ that from someone onboard with medical systems in new Tier I and all Tier II
incorporates by reference criteria from training. Railroad representatives on the passenger cars are required to provide a
ASTM’s Standard D 4956–07 for Type I Task Force noted that PA systems are means for a crewmember to
Sheeting. See the discussion in § 238.5. particularly beneficial in the immediate communicate in an emergency situation
This newly added definition is aftermath of an accident to provide to persons in the immediate vicinity of
consistent with the definition and instructions for appropriate passenger the train (e.g., on the station platform).
requirements for retroreflective action. In light of a security threat or These requirements include the basic
markings for rescue access windows other emergency situation requiring features of PA systems installed in most
that are contained in Revision 3 of the rapid evacuation of an area, crews may recently-manufactured Tier I passenger
APTA standard. also use the PA system to instruct cars and in all existing Tier II passenger
In order to maintain optimum passengers to deboard as quickly as trains.
retroreflective properties of the base possible. If there is a hazard on one end Finally, it should be noted that the PA
material, any retroreflective markings of the train or one side of the train, system may be part of the same system
that have ink or pigment applied should crews may use the PA system to notify as the intercom system. A shared
utilize a translucent or semi-translucent passengers of the hazard and direct configuration is quite common on cars
ink, as per the manufacturer’s them to use the appropriate exit route(s) equipped with both PA and intercom
instructions. A clear coat that protects that would avoid or minimize their systems.
against ultra-violet light may be added exposure to the hazard. Of course, all Paragraph (b). Paragraph (b) contains
to the markings to prevent fading. things being equal, the safest place for the requirements for intercom systems.
Retroreflectivity requirements shall be passengers is to remain onboard the Traditionally, conductors and assistant
met if protective coatings or other train. Deboarding could aggravate an conductors have been relied upon to
materials for the enhancement of emergency situation, particularly if relay information to passengers in both
marking durability are used. passengers step onto the right-of-way on normal and emergency situations
their own without direction from a crew through face-to-face interaction or by
Section 238.121 Emergency member. Accordingly, the crew must use of a PA system. However, with
Communication have the means to provide passengers smaller crew sizes, such face-to-face
This new section establishes with appropriate instructions as soon as communication may not be possible for
emergency communication possible. passengers attempting to quickly
requirements for Tier I passenger Paragraph (a)(1) requires that on or communicate to the crew a medical
equipment and replaces the previous after January 1, 2012, each Tier I emergency, safety concern, or security
emergency communication system passenger car be equipped with a PA threat requiring immediate attention.
requirements in § 238.437 for Tier II system that provides a means for a For instance, a passenger in the last car
passenger equipment. Overall, the crewmember to communicate to all train of a train who needs to communicate a
adopted requirements generally reflect passengers in an emergency situation. safety or security threat to a
current practice for Tier I passenger FRA understands that existing Tier I crewmember could potentially have to
equipment and generally carry forward passenger cars that currently do not walk the entire length of the train to do
so (assuming the crew is composed of locations at each end of the cars. See 67 operating instructions, however, are not
an engineer and one conductor, who in FR 19986. Amtrak further noted that the required to be luminescent. Some Task
this circumstance would be in the first intercoms would be difficult to install at Force members indicated that the
car at the time). Furthermore, if the the non-vestibule ends of the cars. As instructions may be easier to read when
conductor were incapacitated, these trainsets were in development in not luminescent.
passengers would need to communicate advance of both the then-proposed and As noted in the discussion concerning
with the engineer. The Task Force final rules, FRA made an exception for emergency window exit signage, above,
therefore recommended and FRA all cars ordered prior to May 12, 1999, APTA SS–PS–002–98, ‘‘Standard for
decided that emergency communication and this final rule carries forward this Emergency Signage for Egress/Access of
systems in new passenger cars must exception. Passenger Rail Equipment,’’ contains
include intercom systems to enable Some Task Force members were specific criteria for luminescent
passengers to quickly communicate concerned that making the intercoms markings. The Task Force has focused
emergency situations to the train crew. accessible to passengers without on revisions to this APTA standard in
These requirements reflect common requiring the use of a tool or other order to recommend whether to
intercom system configurations for new implement could lead to misuse that incorporate some or all of its contents
passenger cars. could unnecessarily distract the train into part 238 by reference and thereby
Specifically, paragraph (b)(1) contains operator. However, representatives from require that luminescent markings for
the intercom system requirements for Amtrak and various commuter railroads intercoms comply with the standard as
new Tier I and all Tier II passenger cars. that operate cars with intercom systems it relates to luminescent markings.
Each Tier I passenger car ordered on or indicated that they have successfully APTA PRESS has also indicated that
after April 1, 2008, or placed in service implemented measures to deter misuse. they intend to revise APTA SS–PS–001–
for the first time on or after April 1, For instance, on some passenger cars, 98, ‘‘Standard for Passenger Railroad
2010, and all Tier II passenger cars are the intercom transmission device is Emergency Communications,’’ to
required to be equipped with an located in a safety compartment include more specific requirements for
intercom system that provides a means designated and marked for emergency marking emergency communication
for passengers and crewmembers to communications only. In the proposed systems. In the proposed rule, FRA
communicate with each other in an rule, FRA invited comment on whether invited comment on whether the
emergency situation. Passenger cars that passenger misuse of intercom systems luminescent material that would be
are at least 45 feet in length are required had been identified as a problem, and, required for marking should be HPPL
to have a minimum of one intercom in if so, FRA invited suggestions for material. FRA indicated that it would
each end (half) of each car that is measures that could curb such misuse evaluate any comments received in
accessible to passengers without without rendering the systems considering whether a requirement for
requiring the use of a tool or other inaccessible to passengers in an use of HPPL material should be
implement. Although some passenger emergency. No comments were received established in the final rule.
cars currently equipped with intercom on this issue, and FRA has decided to Although no written comments were
systems have one located in each end adopt the language as proposed. FRA received, the Task Force discussed at
(half), others have only one per car. An makes clear that intercoms need to be length issues associated with the
intercom in each end (half) of a car is accessible to passengers with development of HPPL material
intended to allow passengers to have disabilities to the extent required by the component requirements, as noted
access to an intercom within half a car ADA and its implementing regulations. above. Ultimately, the Task Force
length, which is normally 42 to 45 feet, Paragraph (b)(2) requires that the advised that requirements in Revision 2
and without having to pass into an location of each intercom intended for of APTA Standard SS–PS–002–98,
adjoining car. As long as intercoms are passenger use be clearly marked with ‘‘Standard for Emergency Signage for
accessible to passengers, they may be luminescent material and that legible Egress/Access of Passenger Rail
placed anywhere in each end (half) of and understandable operating Equipment,’’ for HPPL were very
the car and not necessarily in the far instructions be posted at or near each detailed and complex and not readily
ends. such intercom to facilitate passenger transferable directly into this final rule.
Paragraph (b)(1) continues the logic of use. These requirements apply to each Therefore, the Task Force recommended
former § 238.437 by requiring only one Tier I passenger car on or after April 1, incorporating such requirements by
intercom for a passenger car that does 2010, and continue to apply to each Tier reference into the CFR through a
not exceed 45 feet in length, such as the II passenger car. During the separate rulemaking, after the standard
Talgo passenger cars operated by development of the rule, some railroad had been revised and authorized by
Amtrak. As the length of a conventional representatives on the Task Force noted APTA. These would include various
passenger is typically between 85 and that although instructions are currently other sign and marking requirements,
90 feet, FRA believes it appropriate to posted at the intercom locations on their including those addressing size, color,
require a car not more than half that cars, there are no luminescent markings. and contrast. FRA agreed with the Task
length to have only one intercom The Task Force therefore recommended Force’s recommendation, and has not
location. This paragraph also continues that luminescent markings be required. modified this final rule. Accordingly,
to require, as § 238.437 formerly did, FRA proposed to adopt such a the marking is only required to be
that a Tier II passenger car ordered prior requirement in this final rule, and luminescent. As noted, APTA
to May 12, 1999, be equipped with only invited comment on whether the authorized Revision 3 of the standard on
one intercom. The preamble to the April luminescent material should be HPPL October 7, 2007, and FRA intends to use
23, 2002 final rule, which amended the material, as discussed below. See 71 FR this standard in a separate rulemaking
May 12, 1999 final rule, explained that 50293. The final rule requires that will add to and enhance FRA’s
after FRA had proposed that intercoms luminescent marking of each intercom marking and signage requirements for
be located at each end of a Tier II location to ensure that the intercom can passenger train emergency systems.
passenger car, Amtrak indicated that not be easily identified for use in the event Paragraph (c). Paragraph (c) continues
all passenger cars in its high-speed that both normal and emergency to require that PA and intercom systems
trainsets had intercom transmission lighting are not functioning. The posted on Tier II passenger trains have back-up
power for a minimum period of 90 communication was unnecessary. risk increases the potential need for
minutes. See former § 238.437(d). An Instead, the Task Force recommended rescue access of the car’s occupants
example of a back-up power source is that intermittent communication with because of the reduced likelihood that
the main battery in a passenger car. PA the equivalent of 15 minutes of the occupants can evacuate the car on
and intercom systems may continue to continuous communication would be their own. In addition, when there is a
draw back-up power from a source sufficient during a 90-minute period. In rollover, doors, which are the preferred
which provides power to other systems, order to ensure that the system will means of access under normal
as the main car battery does. These have enough power to support a total of circumstances, may be blocked or
systems are not required to have a back- 15 minutes of communication at any otherwise rendered inoperable due to
up power source that provides power point during the 90-minute period, the structural damage to the door or the
exclusively for their operation. Task Force agreed that the system must, door pocket. In particular, end doors,
Additionally, it is permissible to meet at a minimum, support 15 minutes of which due to the direction they face,
this requirement using a main car continuous communication at the end of would normally be better suited for use
battery located in another car, if the two the 90-minute period (i.e., during than side doors when a car has tilted or
cars are semi-permanently coupled as in minutes 76 through 90). The Working rolled onto its side, may also be
the case of a married pair of MU Group concurred with the Task Force’s blocked, jammed, or otherwise
locomotives. recommendations, and FRA has agreed
The Task Force approved a unavailable for use. Moreover, although
to adopt them in this final rule. As a
recommendation for a back-up power emergency responders may be able to
result, the final rule includes
requirement for new Tier I passenger enter a car that is on its side via a rescue
requirements for a back-up power
cars, similar to the requirements system for both Tier I and Tier II access window, the removal of an
contained in § 238.115(b)(4) for passenger trains. injured occupant through a side
emergency lighting back-up power window in such circumstances can be
systems. That is, the back-up power Section 238.123 Emergency Roof difficult or complicated, especially
system must be capable of operating: in Access depending upon the condition of the
all equipment orientations within 45 This new section contains emergency occupant.
degrees of vertical; after the initial shock roof access requirements for Tier I and Paragraph (a). Paragraph (a) contains
of a collision or derailment resulting in Tier II passenger cars ordered on or after requirements for the number and
individually applied accelerations of 8g April 1, 2009, or placed in service for dimensions of emergency roof access
longitudinally, 4g laterally, and 4g the first time on or after April 1, 2011. locations. Each passenger car ordered on
vertically; and for at least 90 minutes. Requirements for Tier II power cars and or after April 1, 2009, or placed in
Yet, this recommendation was not existing Tier II passenger cars remain in service for the first time on or after April
forwarded to the Working Group, due to § 238.441, as discussed below. The 1, 2011, must have a minimum of two
an oversight, prior to the publication of emergency roof access requirements for emergency roof access locations.
the NPRM. Given that backup power to Tier II passenger equipment contained Although the May 12, 1999, final rule
the PA and intercom systems could be in former § 238.441 and APTA PRESS required Tier II passenger cars and
supplied by the same source as that for recommended practice RP–C&S–001– power cars to have only one roof hatch
the emergency lighting system, and that 98, ‘‘Recommended Practice for for emergency roof entry or at least one
the amount of power required would Passenger Equipment Roof Emergency
structural weak point for properly
likely be only a fraction of that required Access,’’ serve as the basis for the
equipped emergency personnel to
for the emergency lighting system, FRA requirements in this section. This APTA
quickly access a car, many new Tier I
had no reason to believe that this recommended practice contains
multi-level passenger cars are currently
recommendation would not have additional useful information not
being manufactured with up to four
received the full support of the Working included in this final rule; however,
FRA notes that this final rule supersedes structural weak points in the roof. In
Group or full RSAC. As a result, FRA
certain provisions of the recommended determining the minimum number of
noted in the NPRM that it was
practice. access points needed for new Tier I and
considering inserting in the final rule a
In the NPRM, FRA originally Tier II passenger cars, the Task Force
back-up power system requirement
proposed to designate this section as agreed it would be useful to protect the
containing the provisions recommended
by the Task Force, and FRA invited § 238.118, see 71 FR 50276, 50304. FRA emergency roof access locations against
comment on doing so. In particular, has chosen instead to designate this crush at either end of the car. To do so
FRA sought comment on whether the section as § 238.123, consistent with the would require placement of the
system needs to be capable of providing decision not to redesignate original locations away from the far ends of the
continuous communication over the 90- sections of the May 12, 1999, Passenger car or, at a minimum, placement not in
minute period, or only intermittent Equipment Safety Standards final rule. the same end (half) of the car in the
communication, which would draw less This new designation has no effect on event that the end with the access
battery power. FRA noted that it may the substance of the emergency roof points becomes crushed. Second, the
not be necessary to provide the means access requirements. Task Force thought it prudent to
to communicate continuously for a 90- Emergency roof access locations (roof facilitate rescue access by having the
minute period, and FRA invited hatches or structural weak points) can access points located within the bottom
comment as to how many minutes of be especially useful in emergency half of the car’s roof, so that the bottom
intermittent communication would situations where passenger cars have of the opening would be closer (lower)
need to be provided. rolled onto their sides following certain to the ground and thus, presumably,
While no written comments were collision and derailment scenarios. All more easily accessible when the car is
received on this issue, the Task Force things being equal, car rollover or tilt on its side. This would require having
discussed the matter at length during its should result in more severe injuries one access point on either side of the
meeting held on October 25–26, 2006. than when a car remains upright, as roof’s longitudinal centerline. To
Both APTA and the UTU indicated that occupants may be thrown greater accomplish both goals, the Task Force
90 minutes of continuous distances inside the car. In turn, this recommended having two access points
located at diagonally-opposite quadrants presented by one versus the other. For obstruction, even though this may result
of the roof. See Figure 3 to subpart B. example, although roof hatches could in its placement partially in both sides
Under this new section, each roof provide a means of self-evacuation in of the roof, or otherwise not wholly
access location is required to have a addition to a means of access, placing within each half of the roof. In such a
minimum opening of 26 inches them in the roofs of electric MU situation, the rule recognizes that
longitudinally (i.e., parallel to the locomotives, which rely on overhead avoidance of the rigid secondary
longitudinal axis of the car) by 24 catenary systems for power, could create structure is more critical than the exact
inches laterally. These dimensions are an electrocution hazard for occupants location of the emergency roof access
consistent with the minimum attempting to self-evacuate in an location.
dimension requirements for emergency emergency. If emergency roof access is provided
window exits specified for new Paragraph (c). Paragraph (c) requires by means of a hatch, it must be possible
passenger cars in the 1999 Passenger that emergency roof access points be to push interior panels or liners out of
Equipment Safety Standards final rule, located, insofar as practical, in such a their retention devices and into the
see 64 FR 25673, and were based on manner that when a car is on its side: interior of the vehicle after removing the
specifying opening requirements (i) One emergency roof access location hatch. For example, for car interior
necessary to allow passage of an is wholly within each half of the roof as aesthetics, it would not be uncommon
emergency responder equipped with a divided top from bottom; and (ii) one to cover the area below the hatch with
self-contained breathing apparatus or emergency roof access location is lining and use a fastener like VELCRO
fire gear, as well as to allow passage of wholly within each half of the roof as to secure the lining in place. This type
a person being carried on a backboard divided left from right. See Figure 3 to of cover and securement make it
or basket stretcher, see 64 FR 25595– subpart B. Use of the word ‘‘practical’’ possible for emergency responders to
25596. In discussing the issue of allows railroads and car builders some reach the interior of the vehicle by
appropriate dimensions for emergency discretion regarding the location of the pushing in the lining after removing the
roof access locations, Task Force access points and is necessary to hatch. This is just one example, and
members noted that in order to gain accommodate particular equipment other types of covers and means of
access to a car via a structural weak types. For instance, some electric MU securement are permissible, provided
point, a responder would normally have equipment has pantographs that take up emergency responders are able to push
to cut through the roof skin, which is a significant portion of one end of the through them to reach the interior of the
usually steel, and then through the rooftop, making it difficult to place one vehicle after removing the hatch.
lining. In some cases, a responder may emergency access location wholly If emergency roof access is provided
have to cut through additional non-rigid within each half of the car’s roof. by means of a structural weak point, the
structures. If the outside dimensions are Additionally, on some passenger cars rule states that it is permissible to cut
only 26 inches longitudinally by 24 that have luggage racks, it may be more through interior panels, liners, or other
inches laterally, and multiple cuts practical to place the emergency access non-rigid secondary structures after
through car structures are required to location so that it is not wholly within making the cutout hole in the roof.
gain access to the passenger the bottom half of the car’s roof (when However, any such additional cutting
compartment, this could present a the car is on its side) if doing so would that is required must permit a minimum
problem for emergency responders, facilitate rescue access by eliminating opening of the dimensions specified in
since each subsequent cut made using a the need for emergency responders to paragraph (a) to be maintained. In this
saw would potentially result in a cut through or maneuver around the regard, having to make additional cuts
smaller opening. Consequently, luggage racks to get to passengers. could affect the size of the markings
railroads and car builders would need to Paragraph (d). Paragraph (d) contains indicating the structural weak points, as
take this into account when designing provisions related to obstructions and provided in paragraph (e).
structural weak points and ensure that requires that the ceiling space below Paragraph (e). Paragraph (e) contains
the dimensions of the final cut in such each emergency roof access location be requirements for providing markings of,
circumstances would still result in an free from wire, cabling, conduit, and and instructions for, emergency roof
opening meeting the minimum piping. Additionally, paragraph (d) access locations. Each emergency roof
dimension requirements. This concern requires that, where practicable, this access location is required to be clearly
is addressed further in the discussion of space also be free of rigid secondary marked with retroreflective material of
paragraph (d), below. structure(s) (e.g., diffusers and diffuser contrasting color. The retroreflective
Paragraph (b). Paragraph (b) provides support, lighting back fixtures, mounted material is intended to enable
that permissible means of emergency PA equipment, and luggage racks). In emergency responders to quickly
roof access include either a hatch, or a determining the placement of the identify the access locations by shining
clearly marked structural weak point in emergency roof access locations, a light on the roof. As discussed in the
the roof for access by properly equipped railroads and manufacturers need to section-by-section analysis of the
emergency response personnel. consider the requirements of § 238.123 definition of ‘‘retroreflective material,’’
Structural weak points, commonly as a whole. Use of the word ‘‘practical’’ FRA has incorporated ASTM
known as ‘‘soft spots,’’ are usually in paragraph (c) is intended to allow International’s Standard D 4956–07 by
created by routing cables, wiring, and more discretion than would be allowed reference in the CFR.
piping in the roof of the car around the through use of the word ‘‘practicable’’ in While FRA did not specifically
location designated for roof access. This this paragraph (d). For example, in a request comment on applying this
paragraph affords railroads the situation where placement of an definition to roof access markings, FRA
flexibility of installing either roof emergency roof access location wholly believes it logical to apply this
hatches or providing structural weak within the bottom half of a car’s roof definition here, in addition to applying
points in the roof, as each individual (when the car is on its side) would it to rescue access windows in
railroad is in the best position to decide result in obstruction by a rigid § 238.114. The underlying reasons for
which one is preferable taking into secondary structure, a railroad would be using retroreflective material for roof
consideration such factors as the car’s required to place the roof access access markings are the same as those
intended use and the safety hazards location elsewhere so as to avoid the for using the material for rescue access
window markings. Nevertheless, FRA Subpart D—Inspection, Testing, and mechanical inspection. Furthermore,
notes that this definition has not been Maintenance Requirements for Tier I some long-distance intercity train trips
included in the emergency roof access Passenger Equipment take three or four days to complete, and
marking requirements in § 238.441 for many of the en-route repair locations
Section 238.303 Exterior Calendar Day
existing Tier II passenger cars and may not be appropriate places to make
Mechanical Inspection of Passenger
power cars—only for new equipment. the repairs to signage. Removing a car
Equipment
As a result, markings on existing from service for missing rescue access
equipment do not have to be removed This section contains the signage before it reaches its final
and reapplied, should they not be in requirements related to the performance destination could result in stranding
conformance with the retroreflectivity of exterior mechanical inspections of passengers on platforms or require that
criteria applicable to markings on new passenger cars (e.g., passenger coaches, the same number of passengers ride in
equipment in this final rule. MU locomotives, and cab cars) and a fewer number of cars, with fewer
unpowered vehicles used in a passenger emergency exits available to them as a
Paragraph (e) requires that legible and train each calendar day that the whole. Thus, the safety of both railroad
understandable instructions be posted at equipment is used in service. Paragraph employees and railroad passengers also
or near each emergency roof access (e) of this section identifies the various necessitates that some flexibility be
location. These instructions are not components that are required to be provided in making repairs.
required to be retroreflective for two inspected as part of the exterior Paragraph (e)(18)(ii) provides even
principal reasons: it can be difficult to calendar day mechanical inspection. greater flexibility for use of passenger
read writing on certain grades of As proposed, FRA is adding new cars with required rescue-access-related
retroreflective materials while shining paragraph (e)(18) to require that all exterior markings, signage, or
light on them, and light used to identify rescue-access-related exterior markings, instructions that are missing, illegible,
the emergency rescue access locations signage, and instructions required by or inconspicuous on a side of a level of
should be available for reading the § 238.114 (rescue access windows) and a car that has more than 50 percent of
instructions as well. This is consistent § 239.107 (emergency exits) be in place the windows designated and properly
with the requirements for marking and, as applicable, conspicuous, and/or marked for rescue access. Such a car is
rescue access windows. As an legible. Paragraph (e)(18)(i) does permit permitted to remain in passenger service
additional requirement, paragraph (e) passenger cars with any required rescue- until no later than the car’s next
requires that if emergency roof access is access-related exterior markings, periodic mechanical inspection required
provided by means of a structural weak signage, or instructions that are missing, under § 238.307, where the car must
point, the line along which the roof skin illegible, or inconspicuous, as repaired or removed from service. In
is intended to be cut is required to be applicable, to remain in passenger developing the rule, FRA agreed with
clearly marked with retroreflective service until the equipment’s fourth the Task Force recommendation that
material. The size of the border marking exterior calendar day mechanical this added flexibility for these types of
may have to be larger than 24 inches inspection or next periodic mechanical cars recognizes the extra effort that a
laterally by 26 inches longitudinally to inspection required under § 238.307, railroad undertakes by designating and
ensure that any cuts in addition to the whichever occurs first, after the identifying a greater number of rescue-
cut through the roof skin retain the noncompliant condition is discovered. access windows than is required by
minimum dimensions required for the The car must then be repaired or § 238.114. A single act of vandalism
opening. Structural weak points are also removed from service. may destroy multiple signs, markings,
required to have a sign plate with a The four-day repair flexibility is and instructions or render them illegible
retroreflective border that states as intended to allow railroads to schedule or inconspicuous. Placement or
follows: repairs at locations where they can be replacement of several signs could take
performed safely and in a manner that more time than may be scheduled for
CAUTION—DO NOT USE FLAME-CUTTING would avoid disrupting normal maintenance of the car prior to the
DEVICES operations. Railroad representatives on periodic mechanical inspection. FRA
CAUTION—WARN PASSENGERS BEFORE the Task Force noted that not all yards believes it makes little sense to require
CUTTING are properly equipped for personnel to immediate repair of the damaged
safely, effectively, or efficiently remove markings when more than a sufficient
CUT ALONG DASHED LINE TO GAIN and replace signage on the exterior of number meeting the requirements of
ACCESS cars. For example, work on the upper § 238.114 are still present on the
ROOF CONSTRUCTION—[STATE levels of cars can be more safely equipment. Moreover, without such
RELEVANT DETAILS] performed at maintenance facilities that flexibility, railroads would likely be
have platform ladders. In addition, discouraged from designating more
In particular, warning must be various vendors noted that signs and rescue-access windows than are
provided against use of a flame-cutting markings must be applied on a dry, required by § 238.114.
device during a rescue access attempt to clean surface at temperatures of Similarly, paragraph (e)(18)(iii)
avoid creation of a fire hazard. This is approximately 65 degrees Fahrenheit provides flexibility for the continued
especially important since rescue access and must be allowed to set for up to two use of a sleeping car that has more than
is usually a last resort for those who hours. Graffiti may render a sign, two consecutive windows with any
cannot self-evacuate due to being marking, or instruction illegible and required rescue-access-related exterior
injured or disabled, as well as due to the thus in need of replacement. Proper markings, signage, or instructions at or
lack of a viable exit. Emergency removal of a sign can be a long and near their locations that are missing,
responders usually have a variety of tedious process because the adhesives illegible, or inconspicuous. Such a car
tools available to them at the scene of used are difficult to remove. This, may be operated in passenger service
an emergency, including a specialized coupled with the conditions necessary until the car’s next periodic mechanical
saw which can be used to cut through for application of a sign, may make it an inspection required under § 238.307,
steel, and do not have to rely on flame- unfeasible task for some railroads to when it would have to be repaired or
cutting devices. perform during an exterior calendar day removed from service. FRA believes this
flexibility is necessary because each As proposed in the NPRM, FRA has opportunity. The provision requiring
sleeping compartment intended to be also slightly modified paragraph (c)(10) that the train crew be given written
occupied by passengers or train in order to add a condition under which notification of any noncompliant PA or
crewmembers is required to have a a car with noncompliant end doors and intercom system is intended to ensure
minimum of one rescue access window side doors may continue in passenger that the crew is aware of any
in the compartment under § 238.114 and service pursuant to paragraph (d) of this nonfunctioning system(s) and will not
most sleeping compartments have only section. The former conditions for such rely upon any such system for
one window. If two consecutive operation were that at least one communication in the event of an
windows were missing exterior operative and accessible door be emergency situation. Without such
markings, signage, or instructions, an available on each side of the car and a notification, the train crew could
emergency responder would still be notice be prominently displayed mistakenly rely on a system that is
readily able to gain access via the directly on the defective door indicating inoperative, which could potentially
window by relying on the signage, that the door is defective. In addition to hinder resolution of an emergency
markings, or instructions posted at a those conditions, this paragraph now situation where the crew relies on using
nearby window. requires that the train crew be provided the PA or intercom system to
Paragraph (e)(18)(iv) requires that a written notification of the noncompliant communicate instructions or warnings
record of any noncomplying marking, condition. This additional measure is of hazards to passengers.
signage, or instruction described in intended to ensure that crewmembers In modifying paragraph (c), FRA has
paragraphs (e)(18)(i) through (iii) be are aware of a door that may not be reserved paragraph (c)(11) for a
maintained. This record must contain available for use in an emergency contemplated requirement that all low-
the date and time that the defective situation that requires the off-loading of location emergency exit path markings
condition was first discovered, and passengers. Without this additional be in place and conspicuous as part of
must be retained until all necessary measure, train crews may not realize a the interior calendar day mechanical
repairs have been completed. These door is defective until they actually try inspection. Low-location emergency exit
records are necessary for purposes of to use it. If an emergency requiring the path markings provide a visual means
tracking when the defect was first rapid off-loading of passengers should for passenger car occupants to locate
discovered and will be utilized in occur before the crew notices that the emergency door exits under conditions
determining when repairs have to be door is inoperative, then the crew might of limited visibility due to darkness or
made on cars that remain in passenger direct passengers to that door, which the presence of smoke, or both. FRA
service. Most commuter and intercity could unnecessarily delay the intends to propose minimum standards
railroads already keep this type of evacuation of the train. for low-location emergency exit path
record electronically. FRA has also added new paragraph markings in a separate NPRM on
(c)(12) to cover the inspection of PA and passenger train emergency systems.
Section 238.305 Interior Calendar Day Finally, as discussed in the NPRM,
intercom systems. Paragraph (c)(12)
Mechanical Inspection of Passenger Cars FRA considered clarifying paragraph
contains requirements for ensuring that,
This section contains the on passenger cars so equipped, PA and (c)(7), the interior calendar day
requirements related to the performance intercom systems are operative and inspection requirement that ‘‘[a]ll
of interior calendar day mechanical function as intended as part of the safety-related signage is in place and
inspections of passenger cars (e.g., interior calendar day mechanical legible.’’ 71 FR 50297. FRA considered
passenger coaches, MU locomotives, inspection. This paragraph also affords including in paragraph (c)(7) express
and cab cars) each calendar day that the flexibility for handling noncompliant references to signage, as well as
equipment is used in service. Paragraph equipment, provided that the train crew markings and instructions, required by
(c) identifies the various components is given written notification of the parts 238 and 239. FRA invited
that are required to be inspected as part defect and a record of the time and date comment on whether such clarification
of the interior calendar day mechanical the defect was discovered is maintained. should be provided in the final rule. No
inspection. Except as provided in Thus, a passenger car with an comment was received, and, in
paragraphs (c)(8) through (c)(12), and in inoperative or nonfunctioning PA or discussing this issue with the Task
paragraph (d), all noncomplying intercom system is permitted to remain Force, the Task Force did not
conditions under this section must be in passenger service until no later than recommend making a change in the
repaired at the time of the daily interior the car’s fourth interior calendar day final rule, as this was already clear. FRA
inspection or the equipment is required mechanical inspection or next periodic does not believe a change is necessary
to be locked-out and empty in order to mechanical inspection required under at this time, but may make
be placed or remain in passenger § 238.307, whichever occurs first, or for modifications related to the possible
service. FRA notes that it has revised a passenger car used in long-distance incorporation by reference of the APTA
the introductory text of paragraph (c) to intercity train service until the eighth signage standard in a future rulemaking.
expressly reference paragraphs (c)(8) interior calendar day mechanical
through (c)(12), removing the reference Section 238.307 Periodic Mechanical
inspection or next periodic mechanical
to paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(7). Inspection of Passenger Cars and
inspection required under § 238.307,
Paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(7) do not Unpowered Vehicles Used in Passenger
whichever occurs first, after the
contain any exceptions themselves. Trains
noncompliant condition is discovered.
Instead, paragraph (d) references these At that time, the PA or intercom system, This section contains the
paragraphs, and it is by operation of or both, would have to be repaired, or requirements for performing periodic
paragraph (d) that exceptions are the car would have to be removed from mechanical inspections on all passenger
provided. FRA makes clear that service. cars and all unpowered vehicles used in
removing the reference to paragraphs In developing the rule, railroad passenger trains. Paragraph (c) identifies
(c)(5) and (c)(7) in the introductory text representatives on the Task Force noted the various components that are
of paragraph (c) does not have any effect that PA systems are currently inspected required to be inspected as part of the
on the exceptions currently provided in on a daily basis and any necessary periodic mechanical inspection that is
this section. repairs are made at the first convenient required to be conducted no less
frequently than every 184 days. FRA has easily be expected to go for at least a intended to reexamine the requirements
modified paragraph (c)(5), which year without becoming illegible or of this section in a future rulemaking
requires in paragraph (c)(5)(i) that inconspicuous. The Task Force also with a view to applying emergency roof
emergency lighting systems be considered that some railroads do not access requirements to Tier I passenger
inspected no less frequently than every have facilities from which they can equipment. Id.
184 days to determine that they are in easily and safely observe the rooftops of As discussed above, in § 238.123 FRA
place and operational, to reserve their equipment, and agreed that is applying emergency roof access
requirements in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) for inspecting roof access markings would requirements to Tier I passenger
the periodic inspection of other be more safely conducted when the equipment and making the requirements
emergency systems in this timeframe, equipment is out of service at a the same for new Tier I and Tier II
such as low-location exit path marking. maintenance facility. The Task Force passenger cars. In doing so, FRA is
As discussed above, FRA intends to recommended that FRA require revising § 238.441, including the section
propose minimum standards for low- emergency roof access markings and heading, to reconcile the requirements
location emergency exit path marking in instructions to be inspected not less of these sections and thereby limit the
a separate rulemaking on passenger frequently than every 368 days, instead application of these separate
train emergency systems. of the 184 days as proposed. FRA agrees requirements in § 238.441 to existing
FRA notes that if emergency lighting with the Task Force’s recommendation, Tier II passenger cars and to any Tier II
is found to be defective at any time considering the favorable maintenance power car (whether existing or new). At
other than the periodic mechanical experience cited and the potential costs the same time, FRA is increasing the
inspection required by paragraph involved. FRA believes that a yearly required dimensions of emergency roof
(c)(5)(i), it still must be brought into inspection of roof access markings and access locations for existing Tier II
compliance pursuant to the provisions instructions is sufficient to ensure that passenger equipment, and providing
contained in § 238.17 related to non- they are in place, conspicuous, and general marking and instruction
running-gear defects. legible. requirements for such equipment. FRA
FRA had proposed to include periodic believes that existing Tier II passenger
inspection requirements within the 184- Subpart E—Specific Requirements for equipment is in compliance with these
day timeframe for emergency roof access Tier II Passenger Equipment requirements, as revised, and that these
markings and instructions. However, Section 238.437 [Reserved] revisions more closely approximate the
FRA has decided to require that requirements for new passenger
emergency roof access markings and This section formerly contained the equipment. FRA notes that all existing
instructions be inspected no less emergency communication Tier II passenger cars were built with
frequently than every 368 days, as requirements for Tier II passenger the same design, thus once an
provided in paragraph (d) of this equipment. These requirements have emergency responder has learned of the
section. As discussed earlier, in been moved to new § 238.121 location of the roof access point on one
commenting on the NPRM, Caltrans (‘‘Emergency communication’’) to be passenger car, the responder has learned
requested that FRA extend the interval integrated with the new emergency it for all passenger cars. Given this and
between inspections for roof access communication system requirements for the fact that there are a limited number
markings and instructions to a Tier I passenger equipment, as stated of existing Tier II equipment, FRA has
maximum of 368 days, instead of the above. This is consistent with FRA’s decided to limit the applicability of
184 days that FRA had proposed. desire to prescribe, to the extent certain provisions to new Tier II
Caltrans stated that it maintains its possible, the same emergency system passenger cars and power cars only.
passenger equipment on a 120-day requirements for all passenger trains, Paragraph (a). Specifically, paragraph
maintenance cycle, and that a regardless of train speed. Section (a) has been revised to limit its
requirement to inspect the roof access 238.437 is therefore being removed and applicability to Tier II passenger cars
markings and instructions every 184 reserved. Please see § 238.121 for a and power cars both ordered prior to
days would result in Caltrans having to discussion of the emergency April 1, 2009 and placed in service for
inspect them every 120 days. Caltrans communication system requirements for the first time prior to April 1, 2011.
stated that this would increase costs and Tier II passenger equipment. Paragraph (a) has also been modified to
the potential for employee injury, as revise the dimensions of the required
Section 238.441 Emergency Roof
each of its inspection requires the use of opening from 18 inches by 24 inches, to
Access
a man-lift or harness for an employee to 24 inches by 26 inches to be consistent
safely inspect the markings. In issuing the Passenger Equipment with the requirements for Tier I
This comment was referred to the Safety Standards, FRA required that passenger equipment. In addition,
Task Force and, with Caltrans’ Tier II passenger equipment have either paragraph (a) has been revised to require
representatives present, the Task Force a roof hatch or a clearly marked that each emergency roof access location
discussed this comment. Commuter structural weak point in the roof to be conspicuously marked, and that
railroads indicated that they had been provide quick access for properly legible and understandable operating
operating cars with roof access locations equipped emergency response instructions be posted at or near each
for several years or more and that roof personnel. See 64 FR 25689. FRA stated such location.
access markings and instructions had that the final rule did not contain such The fundamental differences between
remained legible and conspicuous requirements for Tier I passenger the requirements in § 238.123 for new
during that time. These railroads noted equipment and that there was no passenger cars and those contained in
that vandalism has not been a concern consensus within the Passenger revised paragraph (a) of § 238.441 for
for rooftops, and that vandals are much Equipment Safety Standards Working existing Tier II passenger cars and Tier
more likely to vandalize the sides of Group to do so. See 64 FR 25642. II power cars are as follows: The number
cars, which are much more easily Nevertheless, FRA noted that it believed of required emergency roof access
accessible. Further, sign vendors stated that APTA PRESS Task Force efforts locations (two in § 238.123, and one in
that retroreflective roof access markings would address requirements for Tier I § 238.441), the marking requirements
hold up well in the elements and should passenger equipment and that FRA (‘‘conspicuously marked with
retroreflective material of contrasting Appendix A to Part 238—Schedule of 20-YEAR PV COSTS INCURRED

color’’ in § 238.123, and ‘‘conspicuously Civil Penalties
marked’’ in § 238.441), and the 20-year PV
This appendix contains a schedule of Description
specifications for their location (detailed total ($)
civil penalties to be used in connection
specifications are contained in with this part. Because such penalty Costs:
§ 238.123, while more general schedules are statements of agency (238.113) Emergency Window
requirements are in § 238.441). These policy, notice and comment are not Exits:
differences reflect the consideration required prior to their issuance. See 5 —Installation of pull handles/
given to existing equipment built in gaskets in two intermediate
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Nevertheless, FRA
level windows .................... $4,050
compliance with § 238.441 of the 1999 invited comment on the proposed —Replacement of instruc-
final rule, and also recognize that a penalty schedule, but no comment was tions for window removal
requirement for two emergency roof received. to ensure that potential
access locations on a Tier II power car FRA has amended the penalty hindrances are addressed 10,800
would not be reasonable given that the schedule to reflect changes made to part —Installation of pull handles/
only normally occupied area in such a 238. Specifically, FRA has added entries gaskets in four inter-
for new §§ 238.114, 238.121, and mediate level windows ...... 1,440
car is the cab compartment, in which
(238.114) Rescue Access Win-
only one emergency roof access location 238.123; removed and reserved the dows:
can be placed. entry for § 238.437; revised the entry for —Installation of two windows
Paragraph (b). Paragraph (b) has been § 238.441; revised footnote 1; and added per car ............................... 163,880
footnote 2 to clarify the use of penalty —Marking and instructions ... 3,840
revised to make clear that each Tier II
codes in the penalty schedule. (238.121) Emergency Commu-
passenger car ordered on or after April nication:
1, 2009, or placed in service for the first VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices —Addition of second inter-
time on or after April 1, 2011, is A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT com transmission location 213,675
required to comply with the emergency —Addition of outside speaker
Regulatory Policies and Procedures for public address system 101,565
roof access requirements specified in
This final rule has been evaluated in (238.123) Emergency Roof Ac-
§ 238.123. Section 238.123 subjects new
accordance with existing policies and cess.
Tier I and Tier II passenger cars to the —Structural weak points—
same emergency roof access procedures, and determined not to be
engineering redesign ......... 80,000
requirements, and this revision to significant under both Executive Order —Structural weak points—
paragraph (b) is intended to conform 12866 and DOT policies and additional materials ........... 117,250
with that section’s requirements. procedures. See 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, —Platform ladder .................. 1,700
1979). FRA has prepared and placed in (238.303, 238.305, and
As specified in paragraph (b), new the docket a regulatory evaluation 238.307) Exterior, Interior,
Tier II passenger cars are required to addressing the economic impact of this and Periodic Inspection,
comply with the standards contained in final rule. Document inspection and Testing, and Maintenance .... 14,808,086
§ 238.123, which were developed copying facilities are available at the Total Costs ........................ 15,506,286
exclusively for passenger cars. Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Paragraph (c). Paragraph (c) has been Department of Transportation, West If over the 20-year period covered by
added to address new Tier II power cars. Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, the regulatory evaluation the equivalent
FRA believes that Tier II power cars— 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., of 7.7 lives would be saved as a result
both new and existing—should continue Washington, DC 20590. Docket material of implementing the requirements (from
to be subject to emergency roof access is also available for inspection on the a combination of fatalities prevented,
requirements, and that the requirements Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. and injuries avoided or minimized), the
Photocopies may also be obtained by final rule would be cost-justified by the
for emergency roof access in § 238.123
submitting a written request to the FRA safety benefits alone. FRA believes it is
should generally apply to this
Docket Clerk at Office of Chief Counsel, reasonable to expect that the safety
equipment as well. However, as Mail Stop 10, Federal Railroad
§ 238.123 was developed specifically for benefits would exceed the costs of the
Administration, 1200 New Jersey requirements. Although passenger
passenger cars, its requirements simply Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;
cannot be referenced in their entirety for railroads offer the traveling public one
please refer to Docket No. FRA 2006– of the safest forms of transportation
Tier II power cars. In particular, unlike 25273. available, the potential for injuries and
the requirements of § 238.123, only one Certain of the requirements reflect loss of life in certain situations is very
emergency roof access location is current industry practice, or restate high. Nevertheless, FRA cannot predict
necessary for a power car. As a result, existing regulations, or both. As a result, with reasonable confidence the actual
FRA has specifically limited the in calculating the costs of this final rule, numbers of lives that would be saved.
portions of § 238.123 that are applicable FRA has neither included the costs of The number and severity of each future
to new power cars. Paragraph (c) those actions that would be performed passenger train accident or incident
requires that each power car ordered on voluntarily in the absence of a would determine the ultimate
or after April 1, 2009, or placed in regulation, nor has FRA included the effectiveness of the requirements; these
service for the first time on or after April costs of those actions that would be cannot be forecast with a level of
1, 2011, have a minimum of one required by an existing regulation. precision that would allow us to predict
emergency roof access location, with a As presented in the following table, the actual need for the measures in the
minimum opening of 26 inches FRA estimates that the present value rule. Yet, FRA believes that the
longitudinally by 24 inches laterally, (PV) of the total 20-year costs which the requirements protect passengers and
and comply with the emergency roof industry would be expected to incur to crew members against known safety
access requirements specified in comply with the requirements in this concerns in a cost-effective manner.
§§ 238.123(b), (d), and (e). final rule is $15.5 million: These safety concerns are discussed in
detail, above, in the preamble to this where, if they were to recur, the please refer to Docket No. FRA 2006–
final rule. availability of the safety features 25273.
In particular, as discussed in Section required by this final rule might save The AISE developed in connection
III.C., the requirement for an intercom lives or prevent or minimize injuries. with this final rule concludes that this
system on Tier I passenger trains is For instance, 11 lives were lost in a rule will not have a significant
intended to allow passengers to February 16, 1996 collision between a economic impact on a substantial
communicate to the crew a medical Maryland Rail Commuter (MARC) train number of small entities. The principal
emergency, report a fire onboard the and an Amtrak passenger train in Silver entities impacted by the rule are
train, or provide notification of other Spring, Maryland. The collision governmental jurisdictions or transit
emergency situations as quickly as may breached a fuel tank of an Amtrak authorities—none of which is small for
be necessary. In fact, some passenger locomotive, spraying fuel into the lead purposes of the United States Small
lives may have already been saved at vehicle of the MARC train, which Business Administration (i.e., no entity
least in part due to the availability of an erupted in fire. The fire and collision serves a locality with a population less
intercom system because fellow trapped a number of people in the lead than 50,000). These entities also receive
passengers were able to use the vehicle. Having rescue access windows Federal transportation funds. Although
intercom to alert a crewmember that a available to emergency responders on these entities are not small, the level of
passenger onboard their car was the scene of such a situation in the costs incurred by each entity should
experiencing a medical emergency. This future might facilitate the rescue of one generally vary in proportion to either
led the crew to call the dispatcher to or more passengers. the size of the entity, or the extent to
arrange for prompt medical attention at which the entity purchases newly
Similar accidents and incidents have
a nearby station. FRA believes that over manufactured passenger equipment, or
unique circumstances that ultimately
the next 20 years the availability of an both. Tourist, scenic, excursion, and
determine their severity in terms of
intercom system to passengers may save historic passenger railroad operations
casualties, and actual future events
the life of one or more passengers are exempt from the new requirements
cannot be predicted with certainty.
experiencing a medical emergency. in the rule, and, therefore, these smaller
Nonetheless, it is possible that over the
The availability of an intercom system operations will not incur any costs.
to passengers may also save the life of next 20 years the safety features
The final rule does impact passenger
one or more passengers in other required by this final rule will preserve
car manufacturers. However, these
emergency situations. For example, on life in a single event in an amount that
entities are principally large
December 7, 1993, a gunman opened exceeds the entire estimated costs of the
international corporations that are not
fire onboard an LIRR commuter train rule.
considered small entities. Some
traveling between New Hyde Park and B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and manufacturers and suppliers of
Garden City, NY, killing 6 people and Executive Order 13272 emergency signage and communication
injuring 19 others before he was systems may be impacted by the rule,
overpowered by passengers. No The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 and these may be small entities. Yet,
intercom system was available to the U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and Executive Order FRA believes that any impact on these
passengers, and the train crew was not 13272 require a review of proposed and entities will neither be significant nor
aware of the situation until the train final rules to assess their impact on negative, to the extent that the demand
arrived at the next station where police small entities. FRA has prepared and for products and services that they
happened to be present on the platform. placed in the docket an Analysis of provide actually increases.
The availability of an intercom system Impact on Small Entities (AISE) that Having made these determinations,
to passengers in such a situation could assesses the small entity impact of this FRA certifies that this final rule is not
allow passengers to provide notification final rule. Document inspection and expected to have a significant economic
to the crew in a timely manner so that copying facilities are available at the impact on a substantial number of small
the crew could contact the appropriate Docket Management Facility, U.S. entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
authorities to obtain emergency Department of Transportation, West Act or Executive Order 13272.
assistance and take other necessary Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
action. This may include providing a 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., C. Paperwork Reduction Act
direct warning over the train’s public Washington, DC 20590. Docket material The information collection
address system both to passengers on is also available for inspection on the requirements in this final rule have been
the train as well as to passengers in the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. submitted for approval to the Office of
immediate vicinity of the train on the Photocopies may also be obtained by Management and Budget (OMB) under
station platform. The final rule does submitting a written request to the FRA the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
require that Tier I passenger trains be Docket Clerk at Office of Chief Counsel, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The sections that
equipped with public address systems. Mail Stop 10, Federal Railroad contain the new information collection
Further, over the past 20 years, other Administration, 1200 New Jersey requirements and the estimated time to
accidents and incidents have occurred Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; fulfill each requirement are as follows:
Respondent Total annual

Total annual Average time Total annual burden
CFR section—49 CFR universe burden hours
responses per response cost
(railroads) (in minutes)
238.113—Emergency Window Exits: Mark- 22 662 markings ............ 60/90/120 964 $0 (Included in Reg.
ings and Instructions. Eval.).
238.114—Rescue Access Windows: Mark- 22 1,092 markings ......... 45 819 $0 (Included in Reg.
238.121—Emergency Communication— 22 116 markings ............ 5 10 $410.
Intercom System: Markings and Instruc-
tions.
Respondent Total annual

Total annual Average time Total annual burden
CFR section—49 CFR universe burden hours
responses per response cost
(railroads) (in minutes)
238.123—Emergency Roof Access: Mark- 22 232 marked locations 30 116 $0 (Included in Reg.
238.303—Exterior Calendar Day Mechanical
Inspection of Passenger Equipment:
—Repair/Replacement of Non-Com- 22 150 replacement 20 50 $2,050.
plying Rescue Access Markings. markings.
—Records of Non-Complying Markings 22 150 records ............... 2 5 $205.
238.305—Interior Calendar Day Mechanical
Inspection of Passenger Cars:
—Non-Complying Conditions of End 22 260 notifications + 1 9 $369.
Doors and Side Doors of Passenger 260 notices.
Cars.
—Written Notification to Train Crew of 22 300 notifications ........ 1 5 $205.
Inoperative/Non-Functioning Public
Address and Intercom Systems.
—Records of Non-Compliance with Re- 22 300 records ............... 2 10 $410.
quirements of Section 238.305(d)(3).
238.307—Periodic Mechanical Inspection of 22 32 replacement mark- 20 11 $451.
Passenger Cars and Unpowered Vehicles ings/instructions.
Used in Passenger Trains: Replacement
of Non-complying Emergency Roof Ac-
cess Markings and Instructions.
All estimates include the time for D. Federalism Implications 20133, which mandated that the
reviewing instructions, searching Secretary of Transportation prescribe
FRA has analyzed this final rule in
existing data sources, gathering or ‘‘regulations establishing minimum
accordance with the principles and
maintaining the needed data, and standards for the safety of cars used by
criteria contained in Executive Order
reviewing the information. For railroad carriers to transport
13132, issued on August 4, 1999, which
information or a copy of the paperwork passengers’’ and consider such matters
directs Federal agencies to exercise great
package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. as ‘‘emergency response procedures and
care in establishing policies that have
Robert Brogan, Information Clearance equipment’’ before prescribing such
federalism implications. See 64 FR
Officer, at (202) 493–6292 or via e-mail regulations. This final rule is intended
43255. This final rule will not have a
at robert.brogan@dot.gov; or contact Ms. to add to and enhance the regulations
substantial direct effect on the States, on
issued pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 20133.
Gina Christodoulou at (202) 493–6139 the relationship between the National FRA notes that the above factors have
or via e-mail at government and the States, or on the been considered throughout the
gina.christodoulou@dot.gov. distribution of power and development of this final rule both
OMB is required to make a decision responsibilities among various levels of internally and through consultation
concerning the collection of information government. within the RSAC forum, as described in
requirements contained in this final rule One of the fundamental Federalism Section II of this preamble. The full
between 30 and 60 days after principles, as stated in Section 2(a) of RSAC, which, prior to the publication of
Executive Order 13132, is that the NPRM, reached consensus on the
publication of this final rule in the
‘‘Federalism is rooted in the belief that proposed rule text and recommended
Federal Register. Therefore, a comment
issues that are not national in scope or the proposal to FRA, has as permanent
to OMB is best assured of having its full significance are most appropriately
effect if OMB receives it within 30 days voting members two organizations
addressed by the level of government representing State and local interests:
of publication. Send any comments to: closest to the people.’’ Congress AASHTO and ASRSM. As such, these
The Office of Management and Budget, expressed its intent that there be State organizations concurred with the
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC national uniformity of regulation proposed requirements, which differ in
20503, Attn: FRA OMB Desk Officer; or concerning railroad safety matters when only limited respects from the
via e-mail at it enacted 49 U.S.C. 20106, which requirements contained in this final
oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov. The provides that all regulations prescribed rule. The RSAC regularly provides
OMB control number, when assigned, by the Secretary of Transportation with recommendations to the FRA
will be announced by separate notice in respect to railroad safety matters and the Administrator for solutions to regulatory
the Federal Register. Secretary of Homeland Security with issues that reflect significant input from
FRA is not authorized to impose a respect to railroad security matters its State members. To date, FRA has
penalty on persons for violating preempt any State law, regulation, or received no indication of concerns
information collection requirements order covering the same subject matter, about the Federalism implications of
which do not display a current OMB except a provision necessary to this rulemaking from these
control number, if required. FRA eliminate or reduce an essentially local representatives or from any other
safety or security hazard that is not representative.
intends to obtain current OMB control
incompatible with a Federal law, For the foregoing reasons, FRA

numbers for any new information
regulation, or order and that does not believes that this final rule is in
collection requirements resulting from unreasonably burden interstate accordance with the principles and
this rulemaking action prior to the commerce. This intent was expressed criteria contained in Executive Order
effective date of the final rule. even more specifically in 49 U.S.C. 13132.
E. Environmental Impact G. Energy Impact international treaty obligations.’’ See 64

FR 25545.
FRA has evaluated this final rule in Executive Order 13211 requires
accordance with its ‘‘Procedures for Federal agencies to prepare a Statement I. Privacy Act
Considering Environmental Impacts’’ of Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant Anyone is able to search the
(FRA’s Procedures) (see 64 FR 28545 energy action.’’ See 66 FR 28355 (May electronic form of all comments or
(May 26, 1999)) as required by the 22, 2001). Under the Executive Order, a petitions for reconsideration received
National Environmental Policy Act (see ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as into any of FRA’s dockets by the name
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other any action by an agency (normally of the individual submitting the
environmental statutes, Executive published in the Federal Register) that comment or petition for reconsideration
Orders, and related regulatory promulgates or is expected to lead to the (or signing the comment or petition for
promulgation of a final rule or reconsideration, if submitted on behalf
requirements. FRA has determined that
regulation, including notices of inquiry, of an association, business, labor union,
this final rule is not a major FRA action
advance notices of proposed etc.). You may review DOT’s complete
(requiring the preparation of an
rulemaking, and notices of proposed Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
environmental impact statement or rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant
environmental assessment) because it is Register published on April 11, 2000
regulatory action under Executive Order (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit
categorically excluded from detailed 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is
environmental review pursuant to http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
likely to have a significant adverse effect
section 4(c)(20) of FRA’s Procedures. on the supply, distribution, or use of List of Subjects
See 64 FR 28547 (May 26, 1999). In energy; or (2) that is designated by the
accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of 49 CFR Part 223
Administrator of the Office of
FRA’s Procedures, the agency has Information and Regulatory Affairs as a Glazing standards, Penalties, Railroad
further concluded that no extraordinary significant energy action. FRA has safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
circumstances exist with respect to this evaluated this final rule in accordance requirements.
regulation that might trigger the need for with Executive Order 13211. FRA has
49 CFR Part 238
a more detailed environmental review. determined that this final rule is not
As a result, FRA finds that this final rule likely to have a significant adverse effect Incorporation by reference, Passenger
is not a major Federal action on the supply, distribution, or use of equipment, Penalties, Railroad safety,
significantly affecting the quality of the energy. Consequently, FRA has Reporting and recordkeeping
human environment. determined that this regulatory action is requirements.
not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ within
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of The Rule
the meaning of Executive Order 13211.
1995
H. Trade Impact ■ For the reasons discussed in the
Pursuant to Section 201 of the preamble, parts 223 and 238 of chapter
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal
(Pub. L. 96–39, 19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) Regulations are amended as follows:
(Pub. L. No. 104–4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each
prohibits Federal agencies from
Federal agency ‘‘shall, unless otherwise PART 223—[AMENDED]
engaging in any standards or related
prohibited by law, assess the effects of
activities that create unnecessary
Federal regulatory actions on State, obstacles to the foreign commerce of the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 223
local, and tribal governments, and the United States. Legitimate domestic is revised to read as follows:
private sector (other than to the extent objectives, such as safety, are not Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102–20103, 20133,
that such regulations incorporate considered unnecessary obstacles. The 20701–20702, 21301–21302, 21304; 28 U.S.C.
requirements specifically set forth in statute also requires consideration of 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.49.
law).’’ Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C. international standards and, where
1532) further requires that ‘‘before appropriate, that they be the basis for Subpart A—General
promulgating any general notice of U.S. standards.
proposed rulemaking that is likely to ■ 2. Section 223.5 is amended by
FRA has assessed the potential effect removing the definitions of ‘‘Emergency
result in the promulgation of any rule of this final rule on foreign commerce
that includes any Federal mandate that responder’’ and ‘‘Passenger train
and believes that its requirements are service’’; and by revising the definition
may result in expenditure by State, consistent with the Trade Agreements of ‘‘Emergency window’’ to read as
local, and tribal governments, in the Act. The requirements imposed are follows:
aggregate, or by the private sector, of safety standards, which, as noted, are
$100,000,000 or more (adjusted not considered unnecessary obstacles to § 223.5 Definitions.
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and trade. Moreover, FRA has sought, to the * * * * *
before promulgating any final rule for extent practicable, to state the Emergency window means the
which a general notice of proposed requirements in terms of the segment of a side-facing glazing panel
rulemaking was published, the agency performance desired, rather than in that has been designed to permit rapid
shall prepare a written statement’’ more narrow terms restricted to a and easy removal from inside a
detailing the effect on State, local, and particular design, so as not to limit passenger car in an emergency situation.
tribal governments and the private different, compliant designs by any
* * * * *
sector. The final rule will not result in manufacturer—foreign or domestic.
the expenditure, in the aggregate, of For related discussion on the Subpart B—Specific Requirements
$100,000,000 or more (as adjusted international effects of part 238, please
annually for inflation) in any one year, see the preamble to the May 12, 1999 ■ 3. Section 223.9 is amended by
and thus preparation of such a Passenger Equipment Safety Standards removing paragraph (d); and by revising
statement is not required. final rule on the topic of ‘‘United States paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 223.9 Requirements for new or rebuilt after June 30, 1980, must be equipped and by revising footnote 1 to read as
equipment. with certified glazing in all windows follows:
* * * * * and at least four emergency windows.
Appendix B to Part 223—Schedule of
(c) Passenger cars, including self- ■ 4. Appendix B to part 223 is amended
Civil Penalties 1
propelled passenger cars, built or rebuilt by revising the entry for section 223.9;
Willful
Section Violation violation
223.9 New or rebuilt equipment:

(a) Locomotives ........................................................................................................................................................ $2,500 $5,000
(b) Cabooses ............................................................................................................................................................ 2,500 5,000
(c) Passenger cars ................................................................................................................................................... 2,500 5,000
* * * * * Intercom means a device through You may obtain a copy of the

which voice communication is incorporated standard from ASTM
PART 238—[AMENDED] transmitted and received. International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive,
Intercom system means a two-way, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA
■ 5. The authority citation for part 238 voice communication system. 19428–2959. You may inspect a copy of
continues to read as follows: * * * * * the incorporated standard at the Federal
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20133, Intermediate level means a level of a Railroad Administration, Docket Clerk,
20141, 20302–20303, 20306, 20701–20702, multi-level passenger car that is used for 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
21301–21302, 21304; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; passenger seating and is normally Washington, DC, or at the National
and 49 CFR 1.49. located between two main levels. An Archives and Records Administration
intermediate level normally contains (NARA). For information on the
Subpart A—General two, separate seating areas, one at each availability of this material at NARA,
end of the car, and is normally call 202–741–6030, or go to http://
■ 6. Section 238.5 is amended by connected to each main level by stairs. www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/
revising the definition of ‘‘Emergency ibr-locations.html.
* * * * *
window’’ and by adding the definitions Main level means a level of a * * * * *
of ‘‘Dual-function window,’’ passenger car that contains a passenger Seating area means an area of a
‘‘Emergency responder,’’ ‘‘Intercom,’’ compartment whose length is equal to passenger car that normally contains
‘‘Intercom system,’’ ‘‘Intermediate or greater than half the length of the car. passenger seating.
level,’’ ‘‘Main level,’’ ‘‘PA System,’’ * * * * *
‘‘Passenger compartment,’’ ‘‘Rescue * * * * *
PA system (or public address system) ■ 7. Section 238.17 is amended by
access window,’’ ‘‘Retroreflective
means a one-way, voice communication revising the introductory text of
material,’’ and ‘‘Seating area’’ to read as
system. paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows:
follows:
* * * * * § 238.17 Movement of passenger
§ 238.5 Definitions. Passenger compartment means an equipment with other than power brake
* * * * * area of a passenger car that consists of defects.
Dual-function window means a a seating area and any vestibule that is * * * * *
window that is intended to serve as both connected to the seating area by an open (b) Limitations on movement of
an emergency window exit and a rescue passageway. passenger equipment containing defects
access window and that meets the * * * * * found at time of calendar day
applicable requirements set forth in Rescue access window means a side- inspection. Except as provided in
both §§ 238.113 and 238.114. facing exterior window intended for use §§ 238.303(e)(15), (e)(17) and (e)(18),
* * * * * by emergency responders to gain access 238.305(c) and (d), and 238.307(c)(1),
to passengers in an emergency situation. passenger equipment containing a
Emergency responder means a condition not in conformity with this
* * * * *
member of a police or fire department, part at the time of its calendar day
Retroreflective material means a
or other organization involved with mechanical inspection may be moved
material that is capable of reflecting
public safety charged with providing or from that location for repair if all of the
light rays back to the light source and
coordinating emergency services, who following conditions are satisfied:
that conforms to the specifications for
responds to a passenger train
Type I Sheeting as specified in ASTM * * * * *
emergency.
International Standard D 4956–07, (c) Limitations on movement of
Emergency window means the ‘‘Standard Specification for passenger equipment that develops
segment of a side-facing glazing panel Retroreflective Sheeting for Traffic defects en route. Except as provided in
that has been designed to permit rapid Control.’’ The Director of the Federal §§ 238.303(e)(15), (e)(17) and (e)(18),
and easy removal from inside a Register approves the incorporation by 238.305(c), 238.307(c)(1), and
passenger car in an emergency situation. reference of this standard in accordance 238.503(f), passenger equipment that
* * * * * with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. develops en route to its destination,
1 A penalty may be assessed against an individual listed as a type of violation of a given section, each code, if any. FRA reserves the right, should
only for a willful violation. The Administrator item is also designated by a ‘‘penalty code,’’ which litigation become necessary, to substitute in its
reserves the right to assess a penalty of up to is used to facilitate assessment of civil penalties, complaint the CFR citation in place of the
$27,000 for any violation where circumstances and which may or may not correspond to any combined CFR and penalty code citation, should
warrant. See 49 U.S.C. 21301, 21304, and 49 CFR subsection designation(s). For convenience, penalty
they differ.
part 209, appendix A. If more than one item is citations will cite the CFR section and the penalty
after its calendar day mechanical passenger compartment due to the need paragraph (c) of this section, but must
inspection is performed and before its to provide accessible accommodations otherwise comply with all requirements
next calendar day mechanical under the Americans with Disabilities in this part applicable to emergency
inspection is performed, any condition Act of 1990; window exits.
not in compliance with this part, other (B) There are no more than four seats (d) Marking and instructions. (1) Each
than a power brake defect, may be in the seating area; and emergency window exit shall be
moved only if the railroad complies (C) A suitable, alternate arrangement conspicuously and legibly marked with
with all of the following requirements for emergency egress is provided. luminescent material on the inside of
or, if applicable, the specified (iii) For passenger cars ordered prior each car to facilitate passenger egress.
requirements in paragraph (e) of this to April 1, 2009, and placed in service (2) Legible and understandable
section: prior to April 1, 2011, only one operating instructions, including
emergency window exit is required in a instructions for removing the window,
* * * * *
seating area in a passenger compartment shall be posted at or near each such
Subpart B—Safety Planning and if— window exit. If window removal may be
General Requirements (A) It is not practicable to place a hindered by the presence of a seatback,
window exit in a side of the passenger headrest, luggage rack, or other fixture,
■ 8. Section 238.113 is revised to read compartment (due to the presence of a the instructions shall state the method
as follows: structure such as a bathroom, electrical for allowing rapid and easy removal of
locker, or kitchen); and the window, taking into account the
§ 238.113 Emergency window exits. (B) There are no more than eight seats fixture(s), and this portion of the
(a) Number and location. Except as in the seating area. instructions may be in written or
provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this (4) Cars with a sleeping compartment pictorial format.
section, the following requirements in or similar private compartment. Each ■ 9. Section 238.114 is added to read as
this paragraph (a) apply on or after April level of a passenger car with a sleeping follows:
1, 2008— compartment or a similar private
(1) Single-level passenger cars. Each compartment intended to be occupied § 238.114 Rescue access windows.
single-level passenger car shall have a by a passenger or train crewmember (a) Number and location. Except as
minimum of four emergency window shall have at least one emergency provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this
exits. At least one emergency window window exit in each such compartment. section, the following requirements in
exit shall be located in each side of each For purposes of this paragraph (a)(4), a this paragraph (a) apply on or after April
end (half) of the car, in a staggered bathroom, kitchen, or locomotive cab is 1, 2008—
configuration where practical. (See not considered a ‘‘compartment.’’ (1) Single-level passenger cars. Except
Figure 1 to this subpart; see also Figures (b) Ease of operability. On or after as provided in this paragraph (a)(1) and
1b and 1c to this subpart.) November 8, 1999, each emergency in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and
(2) Multi-level passenger cars—main window exit shall be designed to permit (a)(5) of this section, each single-level
levels. Each main level in a multi-level rapid and easy removal from the inside passenger car shall have a minimum of
passenger car is subject to the same of the car during an emergency situation two rescue access windows. At least one
requirements specified for single-level without requiring the use of a tool or rescue access window shall be located
passenger cars in paragraph (a)(1) of this other implement. in each side of the car entirely within
section. (c) Dimensions. Except as provided in 15 feet of the car’s centerline, or entirely
(3) Multi-level passenger cars—levels paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this within 71⁄2 feet of the centerline if the
with seating areas other than main section, each emergency window exit in car does not exceed 45 feet in length.
levels. a passenger car, including a sleeping (See Figure 1a to this subpart; see also
(i) Except as provided in paragraphs car, ordered on or after September 8, Figures 1b and 1c to this subpart.) If the
(a)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section, on or 2000, or placed in service for the first seating level is obstructed by an interior
after August 1, 2009, any level other time on or after September 9, 2002, shall door or otherwise partitioned into
than a main level used for passenger have an unobstructed opening with separate seating areas, each separate
seating in a multi-level passenger car, minimum dimensions of 26 inches seating area shall have a minimum of
such as an intermediate level, shall have horizontally by 24 inches vertically. A one rescue access window in each side
a minimum of two emergency window seatback is not an obstruction if it can of the seating area, located as near to the
exits in each seating area. The be moved away from the window center of the car as practical.
emergency window exits shall be opening without using a tool or other (i) For a single-level passenger car
accessible to passengers in the seating implement. ordered prior to April 1, 2009, and
area without requiring movement (1) Emergency window exits in placed in service prior to April 1, 2011,
through an interior door or to another exterior side doors. An emergency rescue access windows may be located
level of the car. At least one emergency window exit located within an exterior farther than the above prescribed
window exit shall be located in each side door, in accordance with the distances from the car’s centerline, or
side of the seating area. An emergency requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of located within exterior side doors, or
window exit may be located within an this section, may have an unobstructed both, if at least one rescue access
exterior side door in the passenger opening with minimum dimensions of window is located within each side of
compartment if it is not practical to 24 inches horizontally by 26 inches each end (half) of the same passenger
place the window exit in the side of the vertically. compartment.
seating area. (See Figures 2 and 2a to (2) Additional emergency window (ii) For a single-level passenger car
this subpart.) exits. Any emergency window exit in ordered prior to September 8, 2000, and
(ii) Only one emergency window exit addition to the minimum number placed in service prior to September 9,
is required in a seating area in a required by paragraph (a) of this section 2002, the requirements of paragraph
passenger compartment if: that has been designated for use by the (a)(1) apply on or after August 1, 2009
(A) It is not practical to place an railroad need not comply with the if the car has at least two exterior side
emergency window exit in a side of the minimum dimension requirements in doors (or door leaves), each with a
manual override device, and such doors (B) There are no more than eight seats after January 1, 2012, each Tier I
(or door leaves) are located one on each in the seating area. passenger car shall be equipped with a
side of the car, in opposite ends (halves) (4) Cars with a sleeping compartment PA system that provides a means for a
of the car (i.e., in diagonally-opposite or similar private compartment. Each train crewmember to communicate by
quadrants). The manual override device level of a passenger car with a sleeping voice to passengers of his or her train in
shall be— compartment or a similar private an emergency situation.
(A) Capable of releasing the door (or compartment intended to be occupied (2) New Tier I and all Tier II
door leaf) to permit it to be opened by a passenger or train crewmember passenger cars. Each Tier I passenger
without power from outside the car; shall have a minimum of one rescue car ordered on or after April 1, 2008, or
(B) Located adjacent to the door (or access window in each such placed in service for the first time April
door leaf) that it controls; and compartment. For purposes of this 1, 2010, and all Tier II passenger cars
(C) Designed and maintained so that paragraph, a bathroom, kitchen, or shall be equipped with a PA system that
a person can access the override device locomotive cab is not considered a provides a means for a train
from outside the car without using a ‘‘compartment.’’ crewmember to communicate by voice
tool or other implement. (5) Dual-function windows. If, on any to passengers of his or her train in an
(2) Multi-level passenger cars—main level of a passenger car, the emergency emergency situation. The PA system
levels. Each main level in a multi-level window exits installed to meet the shall also provide a means for a train
passenger car is subject to the same minimum requirements of § 238.113 are crewmember to communicate by voice
requirements specified for single-level also intended to function as rescue in an emergency situation to persons in
passenger cars in paragraph (a)(1) of this access windows, the minimum the immediate vicinity of his or her
section, with the exception of paragraph requirements for the number and train (e.g., persons on the station
(a)(1)(ii), which is not applicable. location of rescue access windows in platform). The PA system may be part
(3) Multi-level passenger cars—levels paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this of the same system as the intercom
with seating areas other than main section are also met for that level. system.
levels. (i) Except as provided in (b) Ease of operability. On or after (b) Intercom system. (1) New Tier I
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (a)(3)(iii) of this April 1, 2008, each rescue access and all Tier II passenger cars. Each Tier
section, any level other than a main window must be capable of being I passenger car ordered on or after April
level used for passenger seating in a removed without unreasonable delay by 1, 2008, or placed in service for the first
multi-level passenger car, such as an an emergency responder using either— time on or after April 1, 2010, and all
intermediate level, shall have a (1) A provided external mechanism; Tier II passenger cars shall be equipped
minimum of two rescue access windows or with an intercom system that provides
in each seating area. The rescue access (2) Tools or implements that are a means for passengers and
windows shall permit emergency commonly available to the responder in crewmembers to communicate by voice
responders to gain access to passengers a passenger train emergency. with each other in an emergency
in the seating area without requiring (c) Dimensions. Each rescue access situation. Except as further specified, at
movement through an interior door or to window in a passenger car, including a least one intercom that is accessible to
another level of the car. At least one sleeping car, ordered on or after April 1, passengers without using a tool or other
rescue access window shall be located 2009, or placed in service for the first implement shall be located in each end
in each side of the seating area. A rescue time on or after April 1, 2011, shall have (half) of each car. If any passenger car
access window may be located within an unobstructed opening with minimum does not exceed 45 feet in length, or if
an exterior side door in the passenger dimensions of 26 inches horizontally by a Tier II passenger car was ordered prior
compartment if it is not practical to 24 inches vertically. A rescue access to May 12, 1999, only one such
place the access window in the side of window located within an exterior side intercom is required. The intercom
the seating area. (See Figures 2 and 2a door, in accordance with the system may be part of the same system
of this subpart.) requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of as the PA system.
(ii) Only one rescue access window is this section, may have an unobstructed (2) Marking and instructions. The
required in a seating area in a passenger opening with minimum dimensions of following requirements apply to each
compartment if— 24 inches horizontally by 26 inches Tier I passenger car on or after April 1,
(A) It is not practical to place a rescue vertically. A seatback is not an 2010 and to all Tier II passenger cars:
access window in a side of the obstruction if it can be moved away (i) The location of each intercom
passenger compartment due to the need from the window opening without using intended for passenger use shall be
to provide accessible accommodations a tool or other implement. conspicuously marked with
under the Americans with Disabilities (d) Marking and instructions. Each luminescent material; and
Act of 1990; rescue access window shall be marked (ii) Legible and understandable
(B) There are no more than four seats with retroreflective material. A unique operating instructions shall be posted at
in the seating area; and and easily recognizable symbol, sign, or or near each such intercom.
(C) A suitable, alternate arrangement other conspicuous marking shall also be (c) Back-up power. PA and intercom
for rescue access is provided. used to identify each such window. systems shall have a back-up power
(iii) For passenger cars ordered prior Legible and understandable window- system capable of—
to April 1, 2009, and placed in service access instructions, including (1) Operating in all equipment
prior to April 1, 2011, only one rescue instructions for removing the window, orientations within 45 degrees of
access window is required in a seating shall be posted at or near each rescue vertical;
area in a passenger compartment if— access window. (2) Operating after the initial shock of
(A) It is not practicable to place an ■ 10. Add new § 238.121 to read as a collision or derailment resulting in the
access window in a side of the follows: following individually applied

passenger compartment (due to the accelerations:
presence of a structure such as a § 238.121 Emergency communication. (i) Longitudinal: 8g;
bathroom, electrical locker, or kitchen); (a) PA system (public address system). (ii) Lateral: 4g; and
and (1) Existing Tier I passenger cars. On or (iii) Vertical: 4g; and
(3) Powering each system to allow PA equipment, or luggage rack) where Sec.
intermittent emergency communication practicable. If emergency roof access is Figure 1 to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
for a minimum period of 90 minutes. provided by means of a hatch, it shall of Location and Staggering of Emergency
Intermittent communication shall be be possible to push interior panels or Window Exits—§ 238.113
considered equivalent to continuous liners out of their retention devices and Figure 1A to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
communication during the last 15 into the interior of the vehicle after of Location of Rescue Access Windows—
minutes of the 90-minute minimum removing the hatch. If emergency roof § 238.114
period. access is provided by means of a Figure 1B to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
■ 11. Section 238.123 is added to read structural weak point, it shall be of Location and Staggering of Emergency
as follows: permissible to cut through interior Window Exits and Location of Rescue
panels, liners, or other non-rigid Access Windows—§§ 238.113 and
§ 238.123 Emergency roof access. secondary structures after making the 238.114
Except as provided in § 238.441 of cutout hole in the roof, provided any Figure 1C to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
this chapter— such additional cutting necessary to of a Passenger Compartment Including a
(a) Number and dimensions. Each access the interior of the vehicle permits Vestibule Connected by an Open
passenger car ordered on or after April a minimum opening of the dimensions Passageway and Excluding a Vestibule
1, 2009, or placed in service for the first specified in paragraph (a) to be Separated by an Interior Door—
time on or after April 1, 2011, shall have maintained. §§ 238.113 and 238.114
a minimum of two emergency roof (e) Marking and instructions. Each Figure 2 to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
access locations, each with a minimum emergency roof access location shall be of a Multi-Level Car Complying with
opening of 26 inches longitudinally (i.e., conspicuously marked with Window Location and Staggering
parallel to the longitudinal axis of the retroreflective material of contrasting Requirements—§§ 238.113 and 238.114
car) by 24 inches laterally. color. As further specified, legible and Figure 2A to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
(b) Means of access. Emergency roof of an Intermediate Level Seating Area of
understandable instructions shall be
access shall be provided by means of a a Multi-Level Car Complying With
posted at or near each such location. If
hatch, or a conspicuously marked Window Location Requirements—
structural weak point in the roof for emergency roof access is provided by
means of a structural weak point— §§ 238.113 and 238.114
access by properly equipped emergency Figure 2B to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
response personnel. (1) The retroreflective material shall
conspicuously mark the line along of an Intermediate Level Seating Area of
(c) Location. Emergency roof access a Multi-Level Car Complying With
locations shall be situated as practical which the roof skin shall be cut; and
(2) A sign plate with a retroreflective Window Location Requirements—
so that when a car is on its side— §§ 238.113 and 238.114
(1) One emergency access location is border shall also state as follows:
Figure 3 to Subpart B of Part 238—Example
wholly within each half of the roof as of Location and Marking of Structural
divided top from bottom; and CAUTION—DO NOT USE FLAME CUTTING
DEVICES Weak Points on Roof of Passenger Car—
(2) One emergency access location is § 238.123
wholly within each half of the roof as CAUTION—WARN PASSENGERS BEFORE
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
divided left from right. (See Figure 3 to CUTTING
this subpart.) CUT ALONG DASHED LINE TO GAIN
(d) Obstructions. The ceiling space ACCESS
below each emergency roof access
location shall be free from wire, cabling, ROOF CONSTRUCTION—[STATE
RELEVANT DETAILS]
conduit, and piping. This space shall
also be free of any rigid secondary ■ 12. Subpart B to part 238 is amended
structure (e.g., a diffuser or diffuser by adding Figures 1, 1a, 1b, 1c, 2, 2a, 2b,
support, lighting back fixture, mounted and 3 to read as follows:
ER01FE08.001</GPH>
ER01FE08.002</GPH>
ER01FE08.003</GPH>
ER01FE08.004</GPH>
ER01FE08.005</GPH>
ER01FE08.006</GPH>
ER01FE08.007</GPH>
ER01FE08.008</GPH>
BILLING CODE 4910–06–C ■ 14. Section 238.305 is amended by (c) The periodic mechanical
revising paragraph (c) introductory text inspection shall specifically include the
Subpart D—Inspection, Testing, and
and paragraph (c)(10), and by adding following interior and exterior
Maintenance Requirements for Tier I
paragraphs (c)(11) and (c)(12) to read as mechanical components, which shall be
Passenger Equipment
follows: inspected not less frequently than every
■ 13. Section 238.303 is amended by 184 days. At a minimum, this
§ 238.305 Interior calendar day mechanical inspection shall determine that:
adding paragraph (e)(18) to read as inspection of passenger cars.
follows: * * * * *
* * * * *
(5) With regard to the following
§ 238.303 Exterior calendar day (c) As part of the interior calendar day emergency systems:
mechanical inspection of passenger mechanical inspection, the railroad
equipment. (i) Emergency lighting systems
shall verify conformity with the required under § 238.115 are in place
* * * * * following conditions, and and operational; and
(e) * * * nonconformity with any such condition
(18) All rescue-access-related exterior (ii) [Reserved]
renders the car defective whenever
markings, signage, and instructions discovered in service, except as * * * * *
required by § 238.114 and § 239.107(a) provided in paragraphs (c)(8) through (d) At an interval not to exceed 368
of this chapter shall be in place and, as (c)(12) and paragraph (d) of this section. days, the periodic mechanical
applicable, conspicuous or legible, or inspection shall specifically include
* * * * * inspection of the following:
both.
(i) Except as provided in paragraphs (10) All end doors and side doors (1) Manual door releases, to determine
(e)(18)(ii) and (iii) of this section, operate safely and as intended. A that all manual door releases operate as
passenger equipment that has any noncomplying car may continue in intended;
required rescue-access-related exterior passenger service pursuant to paragraph (2) The hand or parking brake as well
marking, signage, or instruction that is (d) of this section— as its parts and connections, to
missing, illegible, or inconspicuous may (i) If at least one operative and determine that they are in proper
remain in passenger service until no accessible door is available on each side condition and operate as intended. The
later than the equipment’s fourth of the car; date of the last inspection shall be either
exterior calendar day mechanical (ii) The train crew is provided written entered on Form FRA F 6180–49A,
inspection or next periodic mechanical notification of the noncomplying suitably stenciled or tagged on the
inspection required under § 238.307, condition; and equipment, or maintained electronically
whichever occurs first, after the (iii) A notice is prominently displayed provided FRA has access to the record
noncomplying condition is discovered, directly on the defective door indicating upon request; and
where the car shall be repaired or that the door is defective. (3) Emergency roof access markings
removed from service. (11) [Reserved] and instructions required under
(ii) A passenger car having more than (12) On passenger cars so equipped, § 238.123(e), to determine that they are
50 percent of the windows on a side of public address and intercom systems in place and, as applicable, conspicuous
a level of the car designated and shall be operative and function as or legible, or both.
properly marked for rescue access that intended. A passenger car with an * * * * *
has any required rescue-access-related inoperative or nonfunctioning public
exterior marking, signage, or instruction address or intercom system may remain Subpart E—Specific Requirements for
that is missing, illegible, or in passenger service until no later than Tier II Passenger Equipment
inconspicuous on any of the other the car’s fourth interior calendar day
windows on that side and level of the mechanical inspection or next periodic § 238.437 [Removed]
car may remain in passenger service mechanical inspection required under ■ 16. Section 238.437 is removed and
until no later than the car’s next § 238.307, whichever occurs first, or for reserved.
periodic mechanical inspection required a passenger car used in long-distance ■ 17. Section 238.441 is revised to read
under § 238.307, where the car shall be intercity train service until the eighth as follows:
repaired or removed from service. interior calendar day mechanical
(iii) A passenger car that is a sleeping inspection or next periodic mechanical § 238.441 Emergency roof access.
car that has more than two consecutive inspection required under § 238.307, (a) Existing passenger cars and power
windows with any required rescue whichever occurs first, after the cars. Each passenger car and power car
access-related exterior marking, signage, noncomplying condition is discovered, ordered prior to April 1, 2009 and
or instruction at or near their locations where it shall be repaired or removed placed in service for the first time prior
that is missing, illegible, or from service; provided, the train crew is to April 1, 2011, shall have a minimum
inconspicuous may remain in passenger given written notification of the of one roof hatch emergency access
service until no later than the car’s next noncomplying condition, and all of the location with a minimum opening of 26
periodic mechanical inspection required requirements contained in paragraph inches by 24 inches, or at least one
under § 238.307, where the car shall be (d)(3) of this section are met. structural weak point in the roof
repaired or removed from service. * * * * * providing a minimum opening of the
(iv) A record shall be maintained of same dimensions, to provide access for
■ 15. Section 238.307 is amended by
any noncomplying marking, signage, or properly equipped emergency response
instruction described in paragraphs revising paragraph (c) introductory text,
paragraph (c)(5), and paragraph (d) to personnel. Each emergency roof access
(e)(18)(i) through (iii) of this section that location shall be conspicuously marked,
read as follows:
contains the date and time that the and legible and understandable
defective condition was first discovered. § 238.307 Periodic mechanical inspection operating instructions shall be posted at
This record shall be retained until all of passenger cars and unpowered vehicles or near each such location.
necessary repairs are completed. used in passenger trains. (b) New passenger cars. Each
* * * * * * * * * * passenger car ordered on or after April
1, 2009 or placed in service for the first location, with a minimum opening of 26 238.121, and 238.123, under subpart E
time on or after April 1, 2011, shall inches longitudinally by 24 inches by removing and reserving the entry for
comply with the emergency roof access laterally, and comply with the section 238.437 and revising the entry
requirements specified in § 238.123. emergency roof access requirements for section 238.441, and by revising
(c) New power cars. Each power car specified in §§ 238.123(b), (d), and (e). footnote 1 and adding footnote 2 to read
ordered on or after April 1, 2009, or as follows:
placed in service for the first time on or ■ 18. Appendix A to part 238 is
after April 1, 2011, shall have a amended by adding entries under Appendix A to Part 238—Schedule of
minimum of one emergency roof access subpart B for new sections 238.114, Civil Penalties 1 2
Willful
Section Violation violation
Subpart B—Safety Planning and General Requirements
* * * * * * *
238.114 Rescue access windows ................................................................................................................................. 2,500 5,000
* * * * * * *
238.121 Emergency communication ............................................................................................................................. 2,500 5,000
238.123 Emergency roof access ................................................................................................................................... 2,500 5,000
* * * * * * *
Subpart E—Specific Requirements for

Tier II Passenger Equipment
§ 238.437 [Reserved]
* * * * * * *
238.441 Emergency roof access ................................................................................................................................... 2,500 5,000
* * * * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 17,

2008.
Joseph H. Boardman,
Federal Railroad Administrator.
[FR Doc. 08–247 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–00–P
1 A penalty may be assessed against an individual deprive the railroad of the benefit of the movement- assessed for each unit of passenger equipment
only for a willful violation. Generally when two or for-repair provision and make the railroad and any contained in a train that is not properly inspected.
more violations of these regulations are discovered responsible individuals liable for penalty under the Whereas, the penalties listed for failure to perform
with respect to a single unit of passenger equipment particular regulatory section(s) concerning the the brake inspections and tests under § 238.313
that is placed or continued in service by a railroad, substantive defect(s) present on the unit of through § 238.319 may be assessed for each train
the appropriate penalties set forth above are passenger equipment at the time of movement. that is not properly inspected.
aggregated up to a maximum of $16,000 per day.
Failure to observe any condition for the 2 The penalty schedule uses section numbers
However, failure to perform, with respect to a
movement of passenger equipment containing from 49 CFR part 238. If more than one item is
particular unit of passenger equipment, any of the
inspections and tests required under subparts D and defective safety appliances, other than power listed as a type of violation of a given section, each
F of this part will be treated as a violation separate brakes, set forth in § 238.17(e) will deprive the item is also designated by a ‘‘penalty code,’’ which
and distinct from, and in addition to, any railroad of the movement-for-repair provision and is used to facilitate assessment of civil penalties,
substantive violative conditions found on that unit make the railroad and any responsible individuals and which may or may not correspond to any
of passenger equipment. Moreover, the liable for penalty under the particular regulatory subsection designation(s). For convenience, penalty
Administrator reserves the right to assess a penalty section(s) contained in part 231 of this chapter or citations will cite the CFR section and the penalty
of up to $27,000 for any violation where § 238.429 concerning the substantive defective code, if any. FRA reserves the right, should
circumstances warrant. See 49 CFR part 209, condition. litigation become necessary, to substitute in its
appendix A. The penalties listed for failure to perform the complaint the CFR citation in place of the
Failure to observe any condition for movement of exterior and interior mechanical inspections and combined CFR and penalty code citation, should
defective equipment set forth in § 238.17 will tests required under § 238.303 and § 238.305 may be they differ.

Rule: Passenger Train Emergency Systems Emergency Communication, Emergency Egress, and Rescue Access

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Rule: Passenger Train Emergency Systems Emergency Communication, Emergency Egress, and Rescue Access

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Friday,

49 CFR Parts 223 and 238

No. FRA–2006–25273, Notice No. 2, and for purposes of prescribing and

retroreflective material of contrasting Appendix A to Part 238—Schedule of 20-YEAR PV COSTS INCURRED

Respondent Total annual

Respondent Total annual

incompatible with a Federal law, For the foregoing reasons, FRA

E. Environmental Impact G. Energy Impact international treaty obligations.’’ See 64

223.9 New or rebuilt equipment:

* * * * * Intercom means a device through You may obtain a copy of the

access window in a side of the follows: following individually applied

Subpart B—Safety Planning and General Requirements

Subpart E—Specific Requirements for

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 17,

S-ar putea să vă placă și