98-15932. Track Safety Standards

[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33992-34056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15932]



[[Page 33991]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Railroad Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



49 CFR Part 213



Track Safety Standards; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 1998 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 33992]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 213

[Docket No. RST-90-1, Notice No. 8]
RIN 2130-AA75


Track Safety Standards

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: FRA amends the Track Safety Standards to update and enhance 
its track safety regulatory program. To address today's railroad 
operating environment, these amendments present additional regulatory 
requirements, including standards specifically addressing high speed 
train operations. FRA issues these changes to improve track safety and 
provide the railroad industry with the flexibility needed to effect a 
safer and more efficient use of resources. The amendments reflect 
recommendations submitted to FRA by the Railroad Safety Advisory 
Committee. The provisions included in this notice become effective with 
this rule. However, FRA anticipates that further amendments will be 
added to address the use of Gage Restraint Measuring Systems.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective September 21, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison H. MacDowell, Office of Safety 
Enforcement, Federal Railroad Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., 
Mail Stop 25, Washington, D.C. 20590 (telephone: [phone]), or 
Nancy Lummen Lewis, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Mail Stop 10, Washington, 
D.C. 20590 (telephone: [phone]).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    The first Federal Track Safety Standards were implemented in 
October, 1971, following the enactment of the Federal Railroad Safety 
Act of 1970 in which Congress granted to FRA comprehensive authority 
over ``all areas of railroad safety.'' See 36 FR 20336 and 49 U.S.C. 
20101 et seq. FRA envisioned the new standards to be an evolving set of 
safety requirements subject to continuous revision allowing the 
regulations to keep pace with industry innovations and agency research 
and development.
    FRA amended the Track Safety Standards with minor revisions several 
times in the past two decades. It began a project to revise the 
standards extensively in 1978, but later withdrew the effort when 
investigation revealed that considerably more data collection and 
analysis were necessary to support recommended revisions. A less 
extensive revision of the Track Safety Standards was issued in 
November, 1982. Since then, FRA has acquired much information crucial 
to further development of the Track Safety Standards through the 
enhanced statistical analysis capabilities resulting from additional 
field reporting requirements and improved data collection processes.

Statutory Background

    The Rail Safety Enforcement and Review Act of 1992, Public Law 102-
365, 106 Stat. 972 (September 3, 1992), later amended by the Federal 
Railroad Safety Authorization Act of 1994, Public Law 103-440, 108 
Stat. 4615 (November 2, 1994), requires FRA to revise the track safety 
regulations contained in 49 CFR Part 213. Now codified at 49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 20142, the amended statute requires:

    (a) Review of Existing Regulations.--Not later than March 3, 
1993, the Secretary of Transportation shall begin a review of 
Department of Transportation regulations related to track safety 
standards. The review at least shall include an evaluation of--
    (1) Procedures associated with maintaining and installing 
continuous welded rail and its attendant structure, including cold 
weather installation procedures;
    (2) The need for revisions to regulations on track excepted from 
track safety standards; and
    (3) Employee safety.
    (b) Revision of Regulations.--Not later than September 1, 1995, 
the Secretary shall prescribe regulations and issue orders to revise 
track safety standards, considering safety information presented 
during the review under subsection (a) of this section and the 
report of the Comptroller General submitted under subsection (c) of 
this section.
* * * * *
    (d) Identification of Internal Rail Defects.--In carrying out 
subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall consider whether or not 
to prescribe regulations and issue orders concerning--
    (1) Inspection procedures to identify internal rail defects, 
before they reach imminent failure size, in rail that has 
significant shelling; and
    (2) Any specific actions that should be taken when a rail 
surface condition, such as shelling, prevents the identification of 
internal defects.

Petitions for Rulemaking

    In May, 1990, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes (BMWE) 
filed a petition with FRA to revise the Track Safety Standards. The 
petition suggested substantive changes to the standards, the addition 
of new regulations addressing recent developments in the industry, as 
well as the reinstatement of many of the regulations deleted from the 
standards in 1982. The BMWE also petitioned FRA to further address 
employee safety by incorporating in the Track Safety Standards certain 
sections of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards presently 
administered by the U.S. Department of Labor.
    In March, 1992, the Association of American Railroads (AAR) 
submitted to FRA a list of recommended revisions to the Track Safety 
Standards. The AAR suggested some changes in the wording of existing 
regulations to provide additional flexibility to accommodate future 
innovations in railroad technology. Several suggested revisions 
included new approaches to determining compliance with certain existing 
regulations. Most notable among those was AAR's proposal that the 
revised track standards permit the use of a Gage Restraint Measuring 
System (GRMS) in place of detailed crosstie and fastener requirements.

Proceedings to Date

    On November 16, 1992, FRA published an Advance Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (ANPRM) in this docket. See 57 FR 54038. The ANPRM 
summarized FRA's knowledge about developments in the rail industry in 
the past two decades and then posed some 52 questions regarding how 
those developments should be addressed in the revised track safety 
standards.
    The ANPRM also announced plans for four public workshops in which 
technically-knowledgeable persons with specialized experience in track 
maintenance were invited to share their views with FRA in an informal 
setting. The workshops were fact-finding sessions comprised of informal 
give-and-take exchanges between industry, labor, and government 
professionals charged with the administration of the track safety 
standards on a day-to-day basis. They constituted an initial step by 
FRA to use more active collaboration with labor, railroad management, 
manufacturers, state governments, and public interest associations in 
structuring the revised regulations.
    Participants in the workshops included representatives of major and 
short line railroads, the AAR, the American Short Line Railroad 
Association (ASLRA), the BMWE, as well as individuals with a particular 
interest in certain areas of the track safety standards. In addition to 
the workshops, FRA invited interested

[[Page 33993]]

persons to submit written comments to the questions posed in the ANPRM. 
Approximately 30 individuals, railroads, and industry groups submitted 
their suggestions and observations.
    Following one workshop which included an extensive discussion about 
the safety of maintenance-of-way employees, FRA decided to isolate that 
issue from this proceeding so that it could be addressed thoroughly in 
a separate rulemaking. That issue became the focus of a proceeding 
addressing roadway worker safety, FRA's first negotiated rulemaking. 
FRA established its first formal regulatory negotiation committee in 
1994. After months of discussions and debates, the committee reached 
consensus conclusions and recommended provisions for an NPRM to the 
Federal Railroad Administrator (Administrator) on May 17, 1995. An NPRM 
based upon those recommendations was published on March 14, 1996 (see 
61 FR 10528), and a final rule was issued on December 16, 1996 (see 61 
FR 65959). Thus, a significant portion of the mandate of the Rail 
Safety Enforcement and Review Act of 1992 calling for a general 
revision of the Track Safety Standards already has become effective.

The Railroad Safety Advisory Committee and the Track Working Group

    In past rulemakings, interested parties generally have approached 
the proceedings in an adversarial manner, a tactic that often inhibited 
the development of the best regulatory solutions to resolve difficult 
safety issues. In addition, parties also have resorted to pressuring 
Congress for legislation that would grant regulatory results with which 
FRA disagreed or were at odds with FRA's regulatory agenda. FRA 
concluded, therefore, that inclusion of these parties in its regulatory 
process would result in a more positive approach to developing the best 
solutions to pressing safety problems.
    Although FRA gathered much information in the 1993 track workshops, 
as well as in similar workshops associated with other rulemaking 
proceedings, the agency recognized that continued use of these ``ad 
hoc'' collaborative procedures for each rulemaking was not the most 
effective means of accomplishing the agency's goal of achieving a more 
consensus-based regulatory program. Following the success in 1995 of 
the negotiated rulemaking addressing roadway worker safety, FRA decided 
that several pending rulemakings, including this proceeding to revise 
Part 213, should advance under a new rulemaking model that relies upon 
consensus among various members of the affected industry and the 
regulated community. On March 11, 1996, FRA announced formation of the 
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC), the centerpiece of the 
agency's new regulatory program which emphasizes rulemaking by 
consensus with those most affected by the agency's regulations. See 61 
FR 740.
    The RSAC is comprised of 48 individual representatives drawn from 
27 member organizations. The membership of the RSAC is representative 
of those interested in railroad safety issues, including railroad 
owners, manufacturers, labor groups, state government groups, and 
public interest associations. It's sponsor is the Administrator, who 
recommends specific issues for it to address. The RSAC operates by 
consensus. It is authorized to establish smaller ``working groups'' to 
research and initially address the issues recommended by the 
Administrator and accepted by the RSAC to resolve.
    Most of the text of this final rule was recommended to FRA by the 
RSAC. The committee was tasked by the Administrator to formulate and 
present to FRA recommendations for new regulations and revisions of 
existing ones.
    In accordance with established RSAC procedures, RSAC formed a Track 
Working Group, comprised of approximately 30 representatives from 
railroads, rail labor, trade associations, state government, track 
equipment manufacturers, and FRA, to develop and draft a proposed rule 
for the revision of Part 213. It met periodically over a span of six 
months in 1996.
    The Track Working Group identified issues for discussion from 
several sources. One source of issues was, of course, the statutory 
mandates issued by Congress in 1992 and in 1994. Two other sources were 
the BMWE's petition and AAR proposals. Several issues came to the Track 
Working Group by way of requests for consideration made by FRA's track 
safety Technical Resolution Committee. The group also examined track 
issues involved in a number of recommendations made to FRA by the 
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in the past decade. 
Discussions utilized information acquired by FRA through its research 
and development program, as well as from findings from routine agency 
investigations and accident investigations. Finally, the Track Working 
Group systematically surveyed the existing regulations to identify 
those sections and subsections that needed updating or, in some cases, 
deletion.
    At a public meeting on October 31, 1996, the Track Working Group 
presented its proposed rule to the RSAC for approval to recommend it to 
the Administrator. As required by RSAC procedures, each provision in 
the proposed rule had received unanimous approval by the members of the 
Track Working Group. At the request of the BMWE, the RSAC agreed to 
defer the vote on whether to recommend the proposed rule to the 
Administrator to provide that organization additional time to inform 
its members. At the time of the formal vote by mail on November 21, 
1996, representatives of many of the labor unions withdrew support of 
the proposed rule and recommended that it be returned to the Track 
Working Group for further discussion.
    Despite the lack of support by many RSAC representatives of rail 
labor, the number of votes cast in favor of recommending the proposed 
rule to the Administrator exceeded the number necessary for a simple 
majority. RSAC's procedures provide that where there is a majority vote 
to recommend to the Administrator a rule presented to the RSAC with 
full consensus of the working group that produced it, the RSAC will 
recommend adoption of the rule by the Administrator. Following those 
procedures, the RSAC formally recommended to the Administrator that FRA 
issue the proposed rule as it was drafted.
    On July 3, 1997, FRA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM) which included substantially the same rule text and preamble 
developed by the Track Working Group. See 62 FR 36138. In developing 
the regulatory evaluation for the NPRM, FRA attempted to incorporate 
additional data in the cost/benefit analysis beyond the impact data 
provided by the Track Working Group. In the NPRM, FRA requested 
additional relevant data to use in the regulatory evaluation for this 
final rule, but parties who had access to relevant data did not respond 
to that request.

Comments and Responses

    The NPRM generated comments from 12 sources. Four of the 
commenters, namely, the AAR, the BMWE, the ASLRA, and Amtrak, were 
represented on the Track Working Group and helped draft the recommended 
rule which became the basis for the NPRM. All four of those commenters 
expressed support for the RSAC process.
    The BMWE stated that it agrees with many of the revisions proposed 
in the NPRM, but that the standards proposed

[[Page 33994]]

therein ``do not go far enough to ensure the integrity of the track 
structure.'' The BMWE stated that ``several significant deficiencies'' 
led that group, as well as RSAC members representing other labor 
organizations, to recommend to RSAC that the proposed rule as drafted 
by the Track Working Group be returned to that group for further 
consideration.
    The AAR, in its comments to the docket, stated that it continues to 
support the NPRM and the language drafted by the Track Working Group. 
However, the AAR also added a request that should FRA revise any of the 
proposed rule in direct response to comments by RSAC participants who 
withdrew support of the rule drafted by the Track Working Group, then 
FRA would also re-examine the positions the AAR originally expressed 
about those issues. The AAR stated that its support of the proposed 
rule reflects that organization's willingness to compromise some of its 
positions in the interest in reaching consensus about the proposed rule 
in the Track Working Group. Therefore, the AAR's general support of the 
NPRM should not be misconstrued as agreement by the organization with 
each and every provision of the NPRM.
    FRA has not significantly changed the NPRM based on comments from 
other RSAC participants who withdrew support for the rule proposed by 
the Track Working Group. Thus the AAR's suggested revisions based on 
that contingency are not examined in the ``Section By Section 
Analysis'' portion of this final rule.

Continuous Welded Rail (CWR)

    In the first track safety standards published in 1971, Sec. 213.119 
dealt with CWR in a rather general manner, stating simply that CWR must 
be installed at a rail temperature that prevents lateral displacement 
of track or pull-aparts of rail ends, and that it should not be 
disturbed at rail temperatures higher than the installation or adjusted 
installation temperature. (See 36 FR 20341.) In 1979, when FRA proposed 
a significant revision of Part 213, the agency suggested that this 
subsection be eliminated because it provided ``little guidance to 
railroads'' and was ``difficult to enforce.'' The agency further stated 
that research had ``not advanced to the point where specific safety 
requirements can be established.'' (See 44 FR 52114.) However, when the 
proposed revision was withdrawn in 1981 (see 46 FR 32896), the proposal 
to eliminate Sec. 213.119 was also abandoned. In the November, 1982 
revisions to the Track Safety Standards, Sec. 213.119 was deleted.
    In the Rail Safety Enforcement and Review Act of 1992, Congress 
mandated FRA to evaluate procedures for installing and maintaining CWR. 
In 1994, in the Federal Railroad Authorization Act, Congress added an 
evaluation of cold weather installation procedures to that mandate. In 
light of the evaluation of those procedures, as well as information 
resulting from FRA's own research and development, this final rule 
returns CWR procedures to Part 213.
    CWR is naturally subjected to high compressive and tensile forces 
which, if not adequately restrained, can result in track buckling or 
pull-aparts. The potential for track buckling increases as the ambient 
air temperature increases while the potential for pull-aparts increases 
as the ambient air temperature decreases. Track buckling tends to occur 
under train movement and therefore can be instantaneous and somewhat 
unpredictable.
    In recent years, FRA engaged in a research program to develop 
criteria and guidelines for improving CWR's resistance to buckling. The 
program sought to (1) define critical forces and conditions associated 
with track buckling, (2) quantify parameters which govern the 
resistance of track to buckling, and (3) develop technology to detect 
incipient failures prior to track buckling. Railroads have also 
invested considerable resources into CWR research and employee training 
which has resulted in a marked decrease in the number of reportable 
buckled track incidents over the last decade. FRA's Accident/Incident 
data base reveals that the number of reportable buckled track 
derailments has been reduced by approximately 50% since 1985, dropping 
from a yearly average of approximately 60 instances to approximately 30 
such occurrences per year.
    How a railroad provides the adequate lateral resistance to prevent 
track buckling may vary from railroad to railroad. The Track Working 
Group found that consistent methodology is not as important as 
effective methodology in installing and maintaining CWR. Therefore, the 
Track Working Group's recommendations and the new subsection 
(Sec. 213.119) are premised on the concept that the regulations should 
provide railroads with as much flexibility as safely feasible. The new 
subsection allows railroads to develop and implement their individual 
CWR programs based on procedures which have proven effective for them 
over the years. At a minimum, procedures shall be developed for the 
installation, adjustment, maintenance, and inspection of CWR, as well 
as a training program and minimal requirements for recordkeeping. FRA 
fully expects the railroad industry to take advantage of continuing 
research initiatives to update and enhance their CWR procedures, and 
cautions railroads not to develop less than acceptable CWR procedures 
as a means to lessen the effect of regulatory oversight. FRA will 
monitor the railroads' adherence to these procedures as well as the 
overall effectiveness of the CWR programs.
    While the CWR provision, as proposed, received support from some 
commenters (the NTSB), others were critical of the new provision. The 
AAR called it ``a classic case of overregulation'' and suggested that 
the provision require track owners only to have CWR procedures and 
training programs in effect and accessible to FRA. While it supported 
the provision as a means to enhance track safety, the BMWE also advised 
that the provision lacks a means to address railroads' non-compliance 
with their own CWR programs. The ASLRA suggested that railroads should 
have the option of excluding from their CWR plans any trackage over 
which trains do not operate at speeds over 30 m.p.h. and which do not 
exceed one million gross ton miles in traffic annually. The AAR also 
stated that it generally supports the provision as drafted by the Track 
Working Group and that its suggestions for changes were to be 
considered only in the event FRA decides to revise the proposed 
provision in response to recommendations of other RSAC participants 
who, after helping to draft the recommended NPRM, withdrew support for 
the recommendation. All three commenters who expressed negative 
comments were active participants in the Track Working Group and helped 
to draft the language which adds the provision for CWR in this final 
rule.

Excepted Track

    With some limitations, the excepted track regulation permits 
railroads to designate track as ``excepted'' from compliance with 
minimum safety requirements for roadbed, track geometry and track 
structure. FRA added the excepted track provision (Sec. 213.4) to the 
regulations in 1982 in response to an industry outcry for regulatory 
relief on those rail lines producing little or no income. FRA believed 
that without some relief for low density lines, railroads would 
accelerate abandonment of those lines rather than invest their slim 
resources where returns would be limited.

[[Page 33995]]

Therefore, the 1982 revision provided the industry with a means to 
operate over designated tracks without complying with the substantive 
requirements of the Track Safety Standards. FRA believed that the 
designated tracks would be located in yards or otherwise on 
comparatively level terrain in areas where the likelihood was remote 
that a derailment would endanger a train crew or the general public.
    The 1982 provision contains a number of operating restrictions, 
including limitations on where excepted track can be located and the 
number of cars containing hazardous materials (five) that can be hauled 
in one train. Maximum speed is 10 m.p.h., and passenger service is 
prohibited.
    Despite these limitations, railroads have embraced the concept of 
excepted track. In 1992, an FRA survey revealed the existence of 
approximately 12,000 miles of designated excepted track nationwide, far 
more than FRA envisioned when the provision was added to the 
regulations. Recent surveys conducted by the AAR and the ASLRA indicate 
that between 8,000 and 9,000 miles of excepted track presently exist 
nationwide.
    Comments to the ANPRM, the NPRM, as well as some opinions expressed 
within the Track Working Group, showed that many railroads favor 
maintaining an excepted track provision in the Track Safety Standards. 
They argued that accident and injury data do not support the notion 
that trackage in ``excepted'' status presents any significant safety 
hazard. FRA's data show that between 1990 and 1995, track-caused 
derailments on excepted track caused three reportable injuries and one 
release of hazardous materials. In commenting on the NPRM, the ASLRA 
stated that, in a recent survey of short line railroads, 146 railroads 
that reported having excepted track had 122 reportable accidents in a 
five-year period from 1991 through 1995. Of those accidents, 87 were 
track-related.
    The ASLRA strenuously argued that short line railroads depend on 
the excepted track provision in order to keep certain track segments in 
business. Many short lines operate over track they acquired just before 
abandonment by a major railroad. A significant number of those lines 
serve only a handful of industries with comparatively small gross 
tonnage. The ASLRA commented that the cost to short line railroads to 
upgrade and maintain excepted track would exceed $230 million. 
Elimination of the excepted track provision would cause the abandonment 
of approximately 95 lines affecting 1,063 shippers who may be then 
compelled to use highway transportation.
    Approximately 65% of all reportable derailments on excepted track 
from 1988 through the third quarter of 1995 were track-caused. Of 
those, nearly 33% were attributed to wide gage as a result of defective 
crossties or rail fasteners. Several commenters expressed approval of 
some type of gage restriction. The BMWE suggested that the revised 
provision should also address the condition and placement of ties and 
fasteners, as well as switch maintenance and rail/joint bar defects.
    The AAR commented that the gage restrictions proposed in the NPRM 
should be eliminated. The AAR stated that there are situations where 
wide gage is safe, for instance, in road crossings. In those cases, 
pavement would have to be destroyed and replaced to correct wide gage 
when the pavement would have restricted wheel position and prevented a 
derailment. The AAR also stated that it recommends that the gage 
restriction be eliminated only if FRA decides to revise the proposed 
provision based on the comments of other RSAC participants who helped 
draft the recommendations and then later withdrew support of them. 
Otherwise, the AAR supports the NPRM as drafted by the Track Working 
Group.
    Because none of the commenters presented FRA with a compelling 
reason to make further changes to the gage restrictions in the excepted 
track provision, this final rule adopts the language as recommended by 
the Track Working Group and as proposed in the NPRM. Under this final 
rule, track owners must maintain gage to a 58\1/4\'' standard and 
perform periodic switch inspections.
    FRA and state inspectors have found instances where railroads have 
taken advantage of the permissive language in the 1982 provision to 
conduct operations in a manner not envisioned when FRA drafted the 
provision. For example, a railroad removes a segment of track from the 
excepted designation only long enough to move a train with more than 
five cars carrying hazardous materials, or to operate an excursion 
passenger train, and then replaces the segment in excepted status as 
soon as the movement is completed. The BMWE and the NTSB suggested that 
the revised provision include time limits for the use of this provision 
over any segment of track. The final rule adopts the language as 
proposed in the NPRM and requires railroads to provide FRA with 
notification 10 days prior to removing track from excepted status.
    The revision also changes the word ``revenue'' to ``occupied'' in 
describing passenger trains prohibited from operating over excepted 
track. This change codifies FRA's long-standing interpretation of the 
1982 provision which allowed trains on excepted track to be occupied by 
crews, work gangs, and other railroad employees attending to their job-
related duties. It is also designed to dispel the misconception by some 
railroads that passengers could be hauled over excepted track as long 
as they were not charged, and the railroad received no ``revenue,'' for 
their transportation. The purpose of the passenger prohibition is to 
safeguard railroad passengers; its purpose is not concerned with the 
revenue-generating power of passenger service.

Liability Standard

    The current track regulations are enforced against a track owner 
``who knows or has notice'' that the track does not meet compliance 
standards. This knowledge standard is unique to the track regulations; 
other FRA regulations are based on strict liability. The knowledge 
standard is founded on the notion that railroads cannot prevent the 
occurrence of some defects in track structures that are continually 
changing in response to the loads imposed on them by traffic and 
effects of weather. Many defects may not be detected even when the 
track owner exercises reasonable care. Therefore, track owners should 
be held responsible only for those defects about which they know or 
should know. Today, even after years of track abandonments by major 
railroads, the industry is responsible for maintaining about 200,000 
miles of track. Many defects occur suddenly in remote areas, making it 
difficult for even the most diligent track inspectors to keep pace with 
all defects as they happen.
    With a knowledge standard attached to the track regulations, 
railroads are held liable for non-compliance or civil penalties for 
only those defects that they knew about or those that are so evident 
the railroad is deemed to have known about them. FRA and state 
inspectors meet this knowledge standard in a number of ways. Sometimes 
they record and notify a railroad of a defect that they find, and then 
re-inspect later to see if the defect has been repaired. If it has not, 
they may cite the railroad for a violation of the track safety 
standards. While this method provides a failsafe way of proving 
railroad notice of a defect, it is not always practicable for 
inspectors to perform follow-up inspections. Such a system would make 
railroads responsible only for defects

[[Page 33996]]

FRA already has detected, which is clearly not a sufficient incentive 
to comply.
    Often, inspectors choose to inspect the railroad's own inspection 
records to see if a defect they have noted is recorded there. If it is, 
the inspection record forms proof that the railroad had notice of the 
defect. If the defect is not recorded in the railroad's inspection 
records, but is of the nature that it would have had to exist at the 
time of the railroad's last inspection (for example, defective 
crossties or certain breaks that are covered with rust) and would have 
been detected with the exercise of reasonable care, the defect's 
existence constitutes constructive knowledge by the railroad and the 
railroad is cited for a violation. FRA's reading of its ``knows or has 
notice'' standard has been its long-standing enforcement policy and is 
explained in FRA's Track Enforcement Manual.
    In its petition, the BMWE suggested that FRA put track owners under 
a strict liability standard by removing the phrase ``knows or has 
notice'' from Sec. 213.5. Under that standard, any defect found by an 
FRA inspector could be written as a violation regardless of the 
railroad's ignorance of it or the railroad's opportunity to have 
detected it under the required inspection schedule. The AAR requested 
in its petition that FRA develop performance standards for the track 
regulations. Certain defects would not be cited as long as the track is 
performing safely, making unnecessary many of the regulations (for 
example, inspection requirements and the minimum number of crossties). 
The inherent weakness in such a proposal is that railroads will develop 
differing internal requirements for track inspection and maintenance. 
Some railroads may not be as vigilant as others in spotting defects or 
potential defects. Track defects compromising safety may not be 
discovered until the track fails, causing a derailment and possibly 
injuries and death.
    Neither the BMWE nor the AAR provided FRA with cost/benefit 
information to support their respective requests.
    The Track Working Group considered and rejected both proposals, 
finding that the existing language, as it has been enforced to date, 
strikes the best balance of all interests. Therefore, the NPRM proposed 
to leave the standard of liability unchanged. In its comments on the 
NPRM, the BMWE again proposed that the standard of liability be changed 
to that of strict liability. According to the BMWE, the current 
language encourages railroads to under-report track defects and offers 
the railroads no disincentive from assigning railroad track inspectors 
``overly-expansive inspection territories'' resulting in less thorough 
and comprehensive track inspections.
    In preparing this final rule, FRA weighed the BMWE comments, as 
well as its own enforcement experience, against the consensus-based 
recommendation of the Track Working Group which representatives of the 
railroads, FRA, and labor developed. FRA has concluded that the Track 
Working Group struck the right balance, and thus in this final rule, 
railroads will continue to be held liable for track defects of which 
they knew or had notice. Even if a railroad has not recorded those 
defects, notice may include constructive knowledge of defects that, by 
their nature, would have had to be in existence when the railroad was 
last required to perform an inspection.
    Moreover, the penalty provision now makes clear what has been the 
law for many years, i.e., that anyone who makes a false report under 
the safety laws is liable for criminal penalties under 49 U.S.C. 21311. 
This should provide an additional deterrent to anyone who would 
purposely under-report defects.

Tourist Railroads

    The Track Safety Standards apply to only those tourist railroads 
that operate on the general system. FRA estimates that approximately 95 
tourist railroads operating over 1,350 miles of standard gage track off 
the general system are not currently subject to the track safety 
standards. The agency sees the need to address this growing market and 
increasing safety exposure in the area of track safety, as well as 
other areas of rail operation.
    In April, 1996, FRA referred tourist railroad safety issues to the 
RSAC. The RSAC, in turn, established a working group comprised of 
agency and tourist railroad industry representatives to analyze the 
industry's unique aspects and formulate recommendations for appropriate 
regulation of that specialized industry. Among the issues the working 
group will examine is track safety. The findings of that group may or 
may not lead to a recommendation by the RSAC that the Track Safety 
Standards should be revised to apply to all tourist railroads. However, 
if such a recommendation is the result, FRA may then consider 
initiating a separate rulemaking to address that issue. The NTSB took 
the opportunity of this proceeding to express its opinion that the 
Track Safety Standards should apply to tourist railroads both on and 
off the general system. Because many issues affecting tourist railroads 
are still under consideration by FRA, this final rule includes no 
changes to the Track Safety Standards that are directed specifically to 
those railroads.

Gage Restraint Measurement System

    Historically, railroads assess a track's ability to maintain gage 
through visual inspections of crossties and rail fasteners. However, 
the inability of the track structure to maintain gage sometimes becomes 
apparent only after a derailment occurs. Many railroads throughout the 
country have successfully tested the GRMS, which was developed under a 
joint FRA/industry research project.
    Accident statistics taken from FRA's Annual Accident/Incident 
Bulletins reveal that from 1985 through 1995, reportable wide gage 
derailments from defective crossties and fasteners totaled 2,232 
instances and cost the industry over 60 million dollars in damages.
    Current crosstie and fastener maintenance techniques rely heavily 
on visual inspections by track inspectors, whose subjective knowledge 
is based on varying degrees of experience and training. The subjective 
nature of those inspections sometimes creates inconsistent 
determinations about the ability of individual crossties and fasteners 
to restrain track gage. Crossties may not always exhibit strong 
indications of good or bad condition. If a crosstie in questionable 
condition is removed from track prematurely, its maximum service life 
is unnecessarily shortened resulting in added maintenance costs for the 
railroad. Yet, a crosstie of questionable condition left too long in 
track can cause a wide-gage derailment with its inherent risk of injury 
to railroad personnel and passengers and damage to property. In many 
instances of gage failure caused by defective crossties and/or 
fasteners, the static or unloaded gage is within the limits prescribed 
by the current track standards. However, when a train applies an 
abnormally high lateral load to a section of track that contains 
marginal crosstie or fastener conditions, the result is often a wide 
gage derailment.
    In 1993, FRA granted CSX Transportation a waiver of compliance for 
the purpose of conducting a test program to evaluate the GRMS 
performance-based standard using FRA's research vehicle, in lieu of 
existing crosstie and rail fastening requirements, on nearly 500 miles 
of various track segments. The experience gained under this waiver has 
provided FRA with the opportunity to continually make adjustments to 
the conditional

[[Page 33997]]

requirements of the waiver to the point where the technology has proven 
itself to be a more consistent method of objectively determining 
crosstie and fastener effectiveness. FRA believes the technology is now 
ready to be deployed within the industry.
    The Track Working Group could not reach consensus about how the 
revised Track Safety Standards should address GRMS technology. The RSAC 
therefore recommended that a small task group continue evaluating the 
possibility of developing GRMS standards for broader application within 
the industry. Nevertheless, some parties submitted comments to the NPRM 
concerning the use of GRMS. The NTSB recommended that the revised 
standards incorporate the use of advanced track inspection 
technologies, such as track geometry cars, GRMS, light-weight loading 
fixtures, and state-of-the-art rail inspection methods for internal 
rail defects. In its comments to the NPRM, the BMWE reiterated its 
position that GRMS technology be used in conjunction with current 
inspection requirements. The AAR, in its comments, repeated its 
position that the revised Track Safety Standards should allow alternate 
inspection procedures that would permit railroads to use some 
combination of geometry cars, measurement equipment and instrumentation 
such as GRMS, hyrail inspections, and other means of inspecting in 
place of the required visual inspections. At the publication of this 
final rule, the task group continues to work to reconcile the 
differences and reach a consensus on what type of GRMS provision would 
be most effective. FRA, for its part, is still examining the points 
made for and against incorporation of a GRMS provision and is not 
prepared to resolve the issue at this time. However, FRA anticipates 
coming to resolution in the near future. All of the relevant issues 
appear to have been identified and discussed in this proceeding.

High Speed Rail Standards

    The current Track Safety Standards include six classes of track 
that permit passenger and freight trains to travel up to 110 m.p.h. 
Passenger trains have been allowed to operate at speeds over 125 m.p.h 
under conditional waiver granted by FRA. This final rule adds three new 
classes of track that designate standards for track over which trains 
may travel at speeds up to 200 m.p.h. Standards for high speed track 
classes will be contained in a new Subpart G of Part 213 which will 
cover track Classes 6 through 9. The new subpart is intended to 
function as ``stand alone'' regulations governing any track identified 
as belonging to one of these higher classes. In other words, the track 
owner needs to refer only to Subpart G for compliance with the Track 
Safety Standards for track over which railroads operate trains at the 
speeds associated with the high speed track classes. However, if that 
same track does not meet the standards in Subpart G at any time, the 
other subparts (A through F) apply.
    These track standards constitute only one of several components 
comprising a regulatory program permitting trains to travel at high 
speeds. FRA also may address high speed issues in regulations outside 
of Part 213, such as emergency preparedness, wheel conditions, braking 
systems, and grade crossings. These track standards are an integral 
part of that larger regulatory scheme.
    FRA's approach to track safety standards for high speeds is based 
on the fundamental principle that vehicles in the high speed regime 
must demonstrate that they will not exceed minimum vehicle/track 
performance safety limits when operating on specified track. In 
addition, railroads must monitor the vehicle/track system to ensure 
that the safety limits will be met under traffic conditions.
    A panel of experts in high speed rail transportation worked with 
the Track Safety Working Group to provide recommendations for vehicle/
track performance limits and track geometry. The panel identified 
acceleration and wheel/rail force safety criteria by reviewing 
technical studies, considering foreign experience and practices, and 
performing independent computer simulation and analytical studies. Once 
it identified vehicle/track performance limits, the panel developed 
specific geometry safety criteria. The panel also recommended 
requirements necessary for track structure to sustain the forces 
generated by vehicles at high speeds.
    In developing this final rule, FRA sought out the best available 
technical data about dynamic performance of vehicle/track systems to 
devise safety standards that are practical to implement. The high speed 
standards in this notice provide for the qualification of vehicles; 
geometry standards for gage, surface, and alinement; track structure; 
and inspection requirements for both automated and visual inspections. 
While some of the sections in the new Subpart G are identical, or 
nearly identical, to their counterparts in other sections of the 
regulation, the standards for high speed operations generally differ 
markedly from those for the lower track classes which cover a much 
broader range of railroad vehicles. Several sections have no 
counterpart in the standards for the lower classes of track because 
they address issues unique to the high speed environment. Other 
sections are simply modifications of the requirements for the lower 
track classes.
    Comments to the new Subpart G proposed in the NPRM came from 
Amtrak, the NTSB, Bombardier GEC Alsthom Consortium, Union Switch and 
Signal, and the Director of Ground Transportation of the French 
Ministere de l'Equipment des Transports et du Logement. The commenters 
were generally supportive of the new standards, but they offered 
suggestions for modifying some sections in the subpart. Their specific 
comments are addressed in this notice under segment designated as 
``Section by Section Analysis.''
    A representative for the Florida Overland eXpress responded to the 
NPRM with a request that FRA remove from the final rule reference to 
Florida Overland eXpress's plans to operate trains at very high speeds. 
Florida Overland eXpress petitioned FRA in 1996 for a Rule of 
Particular Applicability for its proposed operation. Such a rule would 
include a variety of railroad safety regulations, including track 
safety regulations, that would apply only to the Florida Overland 
eXpress. FRA issued a Notice of Rule of Particular Applicability, 
published on December 12, 1997. See 62 FR 65478. Florida Overland 
eXpress objected to a reference to that operation in the NPRM because 
this rule of general applicability will not apply to its operation. FRA 
agrees that the reference in the NPRM to the Florida Overland eXpress, 
without explanation of its unique circumstances, may mislead others 
into believing that this rule will apply to that operation. It will 
not.
    Following the closure of the comment period for the NPRM (September 
15, 1997), the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (VNTSC) 
issued a working paper entitled ``Evaluation of Proposed High Speed 
Track Surface Geometry Specification,'' dated December 1, 1997. The 
working paper evaluated the response of different high speed locomotive 
designs to track profile geometry variations. Because the VNTSC working 
paper contained relevant and useful information for this final rule but 
was not available at the time of the publication of the NPRM, FRA 
placed the paper in the docket for this proceeding and issued a special 
notice on December 12, 1997, inviting public comment on its content. 
See 62 FR 65401. The comment period for the

[[Page 33998]]

VNTSC working paper expired on December 22, 1997. FRA received only one 
response to the special notice. The AAR noted that it would not be able 
to provide comment on the VNTSC working paper without knowing how FRA 
would use the report to set the geometry standards for the high speed 
classes of track.

Torch Cut Rails

    Torch cutting rail, a practice that was widespread in the railroad 
industry until a few years ago, is now used by most railroads only for 
emergency repairs in Classes 3 through 5 track. Technology has advanced 
to the point where cutting rail with the various types of rail saws 
that are readily available is more efficient than torch cutting. FRA 
lacks reliable data on the number of existing torch cuts. The railroads 
report that torch cuts no longer exist on Class 6 track, and the torch 
cuts remaining in Class 5 track nationwide probably number ``in the 
hundreds.'' Nevertheless, torch cuts from years ago when the practice 
was more prevalent still exist and are believed to pose a safety 
hazard.
    In 1983, following its investigation of an Amtrak derailment in 
Texas, the NTSB recommended that torch cuts be removed and that trains 
move at only 10 m.p.h. over torch cuts made in emergency situations or 
as a preparatory step in field welding. It should be noted, however, 
that the rail involved in the Texas accident had a type of high alloy 
content which the industry now recognizes as inferior. It is no longer 
used in the industry.
    Because rails that have been torch-cut have a greater tendency to 
develop fractures in the short term, the NPRM proposed that the 
practice of torch-cutting rails in Classes 3 through 5 track should be 
prohibited in the future except for emergency temporary repairs. The 
NPRM further proposed that existing torch cuts in Class 3 track over 
which regularly scheduled passenger trains operate should be 
inventoried and any torch cuts that are found later but are not listed 
on the inventory must be removed. Torch cuts in Class 4 track must be 
removed within two years of the effective date of this final rule, and 
torch cuts in Class 5 track must be removed within one year. Because 
torch cuts existing on yard tracks and main tracks where trains operate 
at slow speeds (Classes 1 and 2) do not pose as high a risk, the NPRM 
proposed that existing torch cuts in Classes 1 and 2 track be allowed 
to remain.
    In commenting on the NPRM, the NTSB suggested that torch cuts 
should be prohibited and eliminated from all track in classes above 
Class 1, and movement over torch cuts should be restricted to 10 m.p.h. 
The BMWE commented that torch cutting should be prohibited in all 
classes above Class 2, and that existing torch cuts in Class 2 track 
should be removed within a reasonable time. The AAR commented that the 
torch cut provision should simply prohibit torch cutting in Classes 3 
through 5 track. However, the AAR further stated that it generally 
supports the NPRM and offered this suggestion to be considered only in 
the event FRA decides to change the proposed provision in accordance 
with the comments of other RSAC participants who helped draft the 
provision and then later withdrew support of the RSAC recommendations.
    This final rule adopts the proposed rule as drafted by the Track 
Working Group, approved by majority consensus of the RSAC, and proposed 
in the NPRM. The comment by the NTSB, that torch cuts should be removed 
from any track class above Class 1, is based upon the NTSB's 
investigation of the 1983 Amtrak derailment in Texas. However, FRA's 
analysis of the derailment indicates that the high alloy content of the 
rail at the site of the accident played a larger part in causing the 
derailment than did the torch cut. Therefore, FRA is not persuaded by 
the NTSB's analysis. The BMWE offered no clear explanation of its 
proposal to prohibit all torch cuts in track classes above Class 2. 
Similarly, FRA was not persuaded by AAR's argument that accident 
statistics fail to support a torch cut regulation that requires 
anything more than a prohibition against any future torch cutting in 
track classes above Class 3. FRA believes that existing torch cuts in 
the higher classes of track may pose a danger of derailment.

Other Issues

Plant Railroads and Industrial Spurs

    In general, FRA has elected not to exercise jurisdiction over the 
safety of railroads that conduct their operations exclusively within an 
industrial or military installation. FRA chose this self-imposed 
limitation because such operations have not demonstrated the same 
degree and frequency of track problems found on tracks in the general 
system which are subject to heavier tonnages and more frequent use. 
Nevertheless, FRA recognizes its responsibility for the safety of 
railroad employees and operations inside such facilities where a 
general system railroad provides service on that property, either by 
picking up and placing cars for transportation in interstate commerce 
or by switching for the plant. The same responsibility applies to 
operations on privately owned industrial spurs used exclusively by a 
main line railroad to serve an industry.
    The applicability section of the current Track Safety Standards 
(Sec. 213.3) excludes track ``located inside an installation which is 
not part of the general railroad system of transportation.'' This broad 
statement implies that the track standards do not apply anywhere inside 
a plant, regardless of who operates there or the type of operations 
that occur on the plant track. However, Sec. 213.3 must be read in 
conjunction with 49 C.F.R. Part 209, Appendix A, which explains that 
the track owner of any plant railroad trackage over which a general 
system railroad operates is responsible for the condition of track used 
by the general system railroad. With the entrance of a general system 
railroad, the plant does not become part of the general system, but it 
does lose some of its insularity as to that part of the track used by 
the general system railroad.
    Since the enactment of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, FRA 
has had at its disposal statutory authority to issue emergency orders 
to repair or discontinue use of industrial or plant trackage should the 
agency find that conditions of the track pose a hazard of death or 
injury. See 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20901. It is FRA's opinion that this 
emergency order authority is sufficient power to ensure track safety 
within plants, as well as other installations (e.g., military 
installations). However, if conditions or events in the future tend to 
demonstrate that track safety within plants or installations should be 
more specifically regulated, FRA will seek to change the applicability 
of this Part in a future rulemaking. This final rule leaves the 
application section of the Track Safety Standards unchanged.

Train Speed/Preemption

    Under the current Track Safety Standards, FRA has only an indirect 
role in determining speed limits. Railroads set train speed in their 
timetables or train orders. Once a railroad sets a train speed, it must 
then maintain the track according to FRA standards for the class of 
track that corresponds to that train speed. The signal and train 
control regulations also fix limits on train speed based upon the type 
of signal system that is in place. If the railroad fails to comply with 
track or signal system requirements for speed at which trains are 
operated, the railroad is subject to penalty.

[[Page 33999]]

    FRA's current regulations governing train speed do not afford any 
adjustment of train speeds in urban settings or at grade crossings. 
This omission is intentional. FRA believes that locally established 
speed limits may result in hundreds of individual speed restrictions 
along a train's route, increasing safety hazards and causing train 
delays. The safest train maintains a steady speed. Every time a train 
must slow down and then speed up, safety hazards, such as buff and 
draft forces, are introduced. These kinds of forces can enhance the 
chance of derailment with its attendant risk of injury to employees, 
the traveling public, and surrounding communities.
    FRA always has contended that Federal regulations preempt any local 
speed restrictions on trains. Section 20106 of Title 49, United States 
Code (formerly 45 U.S.C. Sec. 434) declares that--

[l]aws, regulations, and orders related to railroad safety shall be 
nationally uniform to the extent practicable. A State may adopt or 
continue in force an additional or more stringent law, regulation, 
or order related to railroad safety when the law, regulation, or 
order--(1) is necessary to eliminate or reduce an essentially local 
safety hazard; (2) is not incompatible with a law, regulation, or 
order of the United States Government; and (3) does not unreasonable 
burden interstate commerce.

FRA's long-held belief that Part 213 preempts local speed laws was 
verified by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1993 in the case CSX v. 
Easterwood, 507 U.S. 658 (1993). The Court held that legal duties 
imposed on railroads by a state's common law of negligence fall within 
the scope of preemption provision of 49 U.S.C. 20106, which preempts 
any state ``law, rule, regulation, order or standard relating to 
railroad safety.'' The Court said that preemption of such state laws 
``will lie only if the federal regulations substantially subsume the 
subject matter of the relevant state law.'' Easterwood, 664. However, 
the Court further stated that because Part 213 ties certain track 
requirements to train speed, it should be viewed as ``covering the 
subject matter'' of speed limits.
    Notwithstanding some of the language in Easterwood that a cursory 
reading may otherwise indicate, FRA has never assumed the task of 
setting train speed. Rather, the agency holds railroads responsible for 
minimizing the risk of derailment by properly maintaining track for the 
speed they set themselves. For example, if a railroad wants its freight 
trains to operate at 59 m.p.h. between two certain locations, it must 
maintain the tracks between those locations to Class 4 standards.
    Moreover, there are significant safety reasons for facilitating the 
fastest transit of trains throughout the railroad system. For example, 
the risk of releases of hazardous materials is reduced by minimizing 
the time such shipments spend in transportation. It would be poor 
public policy to allow local governments to attempt to lower their risk 
by raising everyone's risk and by clogging the transportation system. 
Railroads have strong economic motives to minimize the time shipments 
spend in transportation, so public safety and employee safety are best 
served by setting and enforcing the standards railroads must meet to 
travel at particular speeds.
    In recent years, FRA has encountered increasing pressure from 
communities along railroad rights-of-way to set slower train speeds on 
main tracks located in urban areas. They typically cite the inherent 
dangers of grade crossings, pedestrian safety, as well as the risk of 
derailments of rail cars containing hazardous materials.
    As to grade crossings, FRA has consistently maintained that their 
danger is a separate issue from train speed. The physical properties of 
a moving train virtually always prevent it from stopping in time to 
avoid hitting an object on the tracks regardless of the speed at which 
the train is traveling. Prevention of grade crossing accidents is more 
effectively achieved through the use of adequate crossing warning 
systems and through observance by the traveling public of crossing 
restrictions and precautions. Therefore, FRA continues to sponsor and/
or support initiatives to improve safety at grade crossings under the 
Department of Transportation's Grade Crossing Action Plan. These 
initiatives are geared towards enhancing enforcement of traffic laws at 
crossings, closing unneeded crossings, enhancing rail corridor crossing 
reviews and improvements, expanding public education and Operation 
Lifesaver activities, increasing safety at private crossings, improving 
data and research efforts, and preventing rail trespassing.
    In January, 1995, FRA implemented regulations for maintenance, 
inspection and testing of warning devices at crossings, such as lights 
and gates. See 59 FR 50086. The agency also implemented regulations 
requiring certain locomotives to be equipped with auxiliary lights 
making trains more visible to motorists, railroad employees, and 
pedestrians. See 61 FR 8881. FRA believes that these measures are more 
effective approaches to enhancing safety at grade crossings than an 
attempt to design speed limits for each geographic situation.
    FRA received no comments on this issue following a similar 
discussion of the issue in the NPRM.

Vegetation

    The vegetation control requirements of Part 213 currently deal with 
fire hazards to bridges, visibility of railroad signs and signals, 
interference with normal trackside duties of employees, proper 
functioning of signal and communication lines, and the ability to 
inspect moving equipment (``roll by'' inspections). The regulation does 
not address the issues of motorists' and pedestrians' ability to see 
warning devices at highway-rail crossings.
    Since 1978, accidents and fatalities at highway-rail grade 
crossings have decreased dramatically due to engineering improvements 
at individual crossings, education of the public, and greater 
enforcement of highway traffic laws. Nevertheless, FRA finds that the 
present loss of life, injuries, and property damage are still 
unacceptable. Projections for 1997 based upon nine months of 
preliminary data show that 441 people were killed, and 1,525 suffered 
serious injuries in grade crossing accidents. Second only to trespasser 
fatalities as a leading cause of death in the railroad industry, 
highway-rail collisions far out-number fatalities to railroad employees 
and passengers.
    In lengthy discussions about vegetation at grade crossings, the 
Track Working Group quickly realized that the issue requires the 
expertise of entities not represented on the Track Working Group or 
RSAC, e.g., state and federal highway designers, traffic engineers, as 
well as representatives of local jurisdictions with grade crossings. 
The NPRM generated no comments concerning the issue of vegetation at 
grade crossings. FRA agrees with the assessment reached by the Track 
Working Group that the issue requires the judgment of experts in other 
transportation arenas. Therefore, this final rule adds only one 
requirement for railroads in maintaining vegetation. Under this rule, 
railroads are required to clear vegetation away from signs and signals 
on railroad rights-of-way at grade crossings. The additional language 
is intended only to cover the clearing of vegetation at highway-rail 
grade crossings to provide adequate visibility of railroad signs and 
signals to the traveling public. It is not intended to cover or preempt 
state or local requirements for the clearing of vegetation on railroad 
rights-of-way at highway-rail grade crossings, nor is it

[[Page 34000]]

intended to dictate standards for surrounding landowners.
    Because concern about this issue remains, the FRA Administrator has 
recommended that the Department of Transportation initiate a joint 
regulatory proceeding by FRA and the Federal Highway Administration to 
address vegetation maintenance and sight distances for motorists at 
grade crossings. Should the Department of Transportation decide not to 
initiate such a regulatory project, FRA will then consider the next 
appropriate action which may include launching its own regulatory 
proceeding.

Metric System

    In the 1992 ANPRM, FRA requested comments in response to a proposal 
to create a dual system of measurements, English and metric, for 
inclusion in these regulations. Responses were varied. Some commenters 
suggested that FRA implement metric standards, while others recommended 
that a dual system would be better. Still others argued that the 
addition of metric standards, whether as a single standard or in a dual 
system with English standards, would cause confusion in the industry. 
They added that computerized recordkeeping would have to be re-
programmed at a significant expense.
    The RSAC did not recommend the addition of metric standards in this 
proceeding. Although the issue was raised in the NPRM, it generated no 
comments. FRA concludes that the introduction of metric values into the 
regulations is not appropriate at this time.

Section by Section Analysis--Track Classes 1-5

    The Federal Track Safety Standards, until now, included only six 
classes of track representing speeds up to 110 m.p.h. The regulations 
applied to all of the classes. This final rule separates the classes of 
track into two general categories: Classes 1 through 5 for speeds up to 
90 m.p.h. (80 m.p.h. for freight) and Classes 6 through 9 for speeds 
above 90 m.p.h. (80 m.p.h. for freight). Subparts A through F apply to 
Classes 1 through 5, as they always have. However, the new Subpart G 
applies exclusively to Classes 6 through 9. This separation of the 
classes of track is designed for better ease of use. Owners of track 
over which high speed trains operate need to refer only to Subpart G 
for almost all of the relevant regulations. (The exceptions are 
Sec. 213.2, Preemptive effect; Sec. 213.3, Application; and 
Sec. 213.15, Penalties.) On the other hand, track owners over which 
train speeds do not exceed 90 m.p.h. continue to refer to Subparts A 
through .
    Class 6 is included in the category for high speed track, governed 
by Subpart G, because the safety issues associated with that class of 
track more closely resemble those associated with the higher classes.

Section 213.1--Scope of the Part

    Proposed rule: An amendment to this section would eliminate the 
word ``initial.'' When the Track Safety Standards were first published 
in 1971, they were referred to as ``initial safety standards'' because 
they were the first Federal standards addressing track safety. Twenty-
five years and several amendments later, the current Track Safety 
Standards are no longer initial standards. Therefore this amendment 
eliminates a mischaracterization of the standards by removing the 
outdated descriptive ``initial.''
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The section incorporates the change as proposed in the 
NPRM and adds a sentence to distinguish the applicability of Subpart G 
from the applicability of Subparts A through F. Subpart G applies to 
track over which trains are operated at speeds in excess of those 
permitted over Class 5 track, a maximum of 80 m.p.h. for freight trains 
and 90 m.p.h. for passenger trains. Subpart G is designed to be mostly 
comprehensive, so that a railroad operating at speeds above Class 5 
maximum speeds may refer to Subpart G for all of the substantive track 
safety requirements for high speed rail. Such a railroad needs to refer 
to the earlier sections of the Track Safety Standards only for the 
general provisions at Sec. 213.2 (preemptive effect), Sec. 213.3 
(application), and Sec. 213.1 (Penalties). On the other hand, railroads 
which never operate at speeds in excess of the maximum Class 5 speeds 
need not refer to Subpart G at all.
    The final rule also adds language to this section to state that 
railroads are not restricted from adopting and enforcing more stringent 
track safety requirements as long as they are not inconsistent with the 
track safety standards in this Part. This statement is consistent with 
the earlier statement that these regulations are minimum requirements.

Section 213.2--Preemptive Effect

    Proposed rule: This section is added to Part 213 to indicate that 
states cannot adopt or continue in force laws related to the subject 
matter covered in this rule, unless such laws are needed to address a 
local safety hazard and they impose no undue burden on interstate 
commerce. This section is consistent with the mandate of 49 U.S.C. 
20106, formerly Sec. 205 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970. 
Although the courts ultimately determine preemption in any particular 
factual context, this section provides a statement of agency intent and 
promotes national uniformity of regulation in accordance with the 
statute.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The section is modified slightly so that the language 
more closely corresponds to the language of the statute. See 49 U.S.C. 
20106.

Section 213.3--Application

    Proposed rule: This section was not proposed to be amended. The 
Track Working Group discussed amending subsection (b) to reference 
Appendix A of Part 209 in an effort to clarify FRA's safety policy 
toward trackage used by general system railroads within the confines of 
installations. According to Appendix A of Part 209, a plant does not 
become a general system railroad, subject to all of the attendant 
safety requirements applied to such railroads, simply because a general 
system railroad operates over a portion of the plant trackage. 
Nevertheless, a plant owner is held liable for the condition of any 
plant trackage over which a general system railroad operates. Under 
this policy, FRA will not hold plant owners responsible for compliance 
with ancillary track safety provisions, such as the requirements for 
recordkeeping or inspection frequencies. However, FRA will judge the 
safety of the plant railroad against the substantive safety 
requirements in those standards to assess the need to invoke its 
emergency order authority against the plant owner.
    The Track Working Group advised that a reference in Part 213 to 
Appendix A of Part 209, which is merely a statement of FRA policy, 
could have the effect of making all provisions of Part 213, including 
those ancillary provisions, enforceable against thousands of plant 
owners, at least to the extent general system railroads operate within 
plant borders. Such a result would be more far-reaching than intended 
by the RSAC.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the application of Part 213 
be extended to cover standard gage tourist railroads which operate off 
the general system and meet the FRA's test for insularity. This 
commenter also suggested that the agency consider developing track 
safety standards for non-standard gage tourist railroad operations.

[[Page 34001]]

    Final rule: This section is amended to conform the discussion of 
jurisdiction over rapid transit service to the statute. See 49 U.S.C. 
20102. The statute has been amended since part 213 was issued, but 
Sec. 213.3(b)(2) was never amended to conform to the statute. The Track 
Safety Standards will still exclude urban area rapid transit systems 
that are unconnected to the general system. This change is not intended 
make the Track Safety Standards applicable to rapid transit whose only 
connection to the general system is a switch permitting receipt of 
shipments from the general system.
    In response to concerns expressed by and about tourist railroads, 
FRA proffered, and the RSAC accepted, a task to study tourist railroad 
concerns. The RSAC has established a working group to perform the task. 
It is comprised of agency and tourist railroad industry representatives 
who are analyzing the industry's unique aspects and formulating 
recommendations for appropriate regulation of that specialized 
industry. Therefore, the NPRM proposed no changes in that regard.
    While FRA does not think a reference to Appendix A to Part 209 
would have the effect feared by the Track Working Group, FRA declines 
to exercise its jurisdiction over plant railroads at this time because 
the safety issues now presented on their track do not warrant the 
allocation of agency resources that would be diverted from matters 
presenting greater safety risks. The agency continues to have safety 
jurisdiction over those railroads and may invoke its statutory 
emergency authority if it deems that necessary in order to safeguard 
anyone from the hazard of death or personal injury.

Section 213.4--Excepted Track

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to maintain the provision for 
excepted track with added restrictions for its use and maintenance. 
Since its inception in 1982, the excepted track category has become an 
economic issue for some small railroads, particularly short line 
railroads and low volume shippers. It allows railroads to continue to 
use, on a limited basis, low-density trackage that does not earn 
sufficient revenue to justify the expense of maintaining it to higher 
track standards. It allows short lines to acquire and use trackage that 
may have been abandoned by larger railroads, thereby preserving rail 
service to shippers and avoiding the necessity of shifting traffic over 
those lines from moving to some other, perhaps more hazardous, means of 
transport.
    Because the majority of reportable derailments on excepted track 
are track-caused, and the majority of this total are wide gage-related, 
the NPRM proposed to institute a requirement that gage must not exceed 
of 58\1/4\'' on excepted track. This requirement would apply to the 
actual gage measurement itself, and would not extend to the evaluation 
of crossties and fasteners which provide the gage restraint. A 
clarification was added to the inspection requirements on excepted 
track which specifically reference turnout inspections required under 
this section.
    The NPRM also proposed to include a requirement that railroads 
notify FRA at least 10 days before removing trackage from excepted 
status. This provision is intended to prevent the practice FRA has 
witnessed in the past by some railroads who remove trackage from 
excepted status only long enough to move a passenger excursion train or 
a train with more than five cars containing hazardous materials. 
Furthermore, the NPRM included an edit to Sec. 213.4(e)(2) changing the 
word ``revenue'' to ``occupied'' in describing passenger trains 
prohibited from operating over excepted track. This change addresses a 
misconception by some railroads that they could operate passenger 
excursion trains over excepted track as long as they did not charge 
passengers admission for a ride. The proposed change clarifies that the 
prohibition is directed toward all passengers but is not meant to 
include train crew members, track maintenance crews, and other railroad 
employees who must travel over the track to attend to their work 
duties.
    Comments: Comments received generally supported the proposed 
amendments to the excepted track regulation. However, several 
commenters proposed that additional requirements and restrictions 
should be incorporated into the regulation. Proposals included a total 
prohibition of hazardous materials shipments, additional restrictions 
on where excepted track could be utilized, additional minimum safety 
standards, and a time limit for length of time a track could remain in 
excepted status.
    Final rule: In preparing its recommended proposed rule, the Track 
Working Group discussed at length the same requirements and 
restrictions suggested for inclusion into this final rule by 
commenters. The final rule includes additional regulatory control over 
abuses of the excepted track provision which have been documented in 
the past. The final rule also prescribes a minimum safety standard for 
gage that addresses the major causal factor associated with track-
caused derailments on excepted track.
    FRA rejected the suggestion that the provision should include a 
prohibition of all hazardous material shipments. Many small short line 
railroads who operate over excepted track haul hazardous materials on a 
regular basis. A general prohibition would cause many of these 
railroads to close operation, and the hazardous materials would be 
hauled by trucks over public highways. Similarly, a restriction on the 
length of time track may remain in excepted status, and a restriction 
on where excepted track could be utilized, would place an undue burden 
on many short line railroads who operate exclusively on excepted track. 
Statistics show that 87 track-caused reportable accidents occurred on 
8,000 to 9,000 miles of excepted track in five years. These numbers, in 
FRA's judgment, do not justify implementing restrictions over-
burdensome to small railroads.
    FRA considered implementing minimum safety standards, in addition 
to the new gage and switch requirements. However, the ASLRA estimated 
that the cost to short line railroads to improve excepted track to 
Class 1 standards would cost the short line industry some $230 million. 
FRA believes that this final rule provides needed additional measures 
of safety for excepted track while maintaining the regulatory relief 
the excepted track provision provides, but under more restrictive 
conditional and operational requirements.

Section 213.5--Responsibility of Track Owners

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to change subsections (c) and (d) 
to modify the way in which track owners may assign compliance 
responsibility to another entity. Under the current regulations, a 
track owner may petition the Federal Railroad Administrator to 
recognize another party as the one primarily responsible for the 
maintenance and inspection of the owner's track. This provision is 
intended to facilitate compliance by track owners whose track is leased 
to another entity for operation. Often track owners (e.g., municipal 
communities, county governments) do not have the necessary expertise to 
maintain compliance with Federal track standards, but their track 
lessees do. Thus, track owners can successfully petition FRA for 
reassignment of primary responsibility by providing certain information 
about the assigned party and the relationship of the assigned party to 
the track owner. When such a petition is approved by FRA, the

[[Page 34002]]

assigned party becomes responsible, along with the track owner, for 
compliance with Part 213.
    The change for these subsections eliminates the approval process by 
FRA, shown in years past to be the cause of unnecessary paperwork. 
Records show that FRA has approved almost every such petition it has 
reviewed. Under the subsection proposed in the NPRM, a track owner 
could reassign responsibility to another entity simply by notifying 
FRA's regional administrator for the FRA region in which the track is 
located. The notification would include the same information required 
for the petitions under the current standards. However, FRA would 
discontinue its practice of publishing in the Federal Register the 
petitions for reassignment, along with requests for public comment. The 
reassignments would no longer be reviewed by FRA's Railroad Safety 
Board.
    FRA believes that the change would not diminish track safety. 
Although the intent of the original subsection was to give FRA some 
control over who should be responsible for maintaining track, the 
practical application of the subsection has shown that such control by 
the agency is unnecessary. Rather, it is more important for FRA to know 
what party or parties to hold responsible for compliance with track 
safety standards. Therefore, the subsection (c) would require 
notification to the agency of reassignments of track responsibility, 
but it would no longer require approval by FRA now required in 
subsection (d). The text currently shown as subsection (d) would be 
eliminated.
    The NPRM also proposed one minor change in current subsection (e), 
substituting the name ``Surface Transportation Board'' for ``Interstate 
Commerce Commission.'' This substitution is meant to reflect Congress' 
action in 1995 to eliminate the Interstate Commerce Commission and turn 
over many of its functions to the new Surface Transportation Board 
within the Department of Transportation. With the elimination of the 
current text of subsection (d), this subsection now designated as (e) 
would become subsection (d).
    Comments: Comments received were supportive of these changes.
    Final rule: Subsection (f) of this section is added to include in 
the category of those responsible for compliance with the track 
standards those who perform the function of complying with the 
standards, not just the track owner. For example, this addition will 
hold track maintenance contractors responsible for compliance. This is 
not inconsistent with past enforcement and it conforms to the authority 
given FRA by the statute. See 49 U.S.C. 21301 and 1 U.S.C. 1.
    Paragraph (e) of this section is changed to correct a typographical 
error in the NPRM. The correct cite for the Federal law which gives the 
Surface Transportation Board authority to direct rail service is 49 
U.S.C. 11123.

Section 213.7--Designation of Qualified Persons To Supervise Certain 
Renewals and Inspect Track

    Proposed rule: In the past, FRA has interpreted this section in a 
way that allowed signal maintainers and other railroad employees to 
pass trains over broken rails or pull-aparts in situations when they 
were the first on the scene to investigate a signal or track circuit 
problem. Under this interpretation, the intent of the regulation would 
not be violated if signal maintainers or others had been given selected 
training relating to the safe passage of trains over broken rails and 
pull-aparts. The BMWE, however, has argued that this section was never 
intended to allow for the partial qualification of personnel on Part 
213 standards.
    The RSAC recommended the creation of a new subsection (d) which 
prescribes the manner in which persons not fully qualified as outlined 
in subsections (a) and (b) of this section may be qualified for the 
specific purpose of authorizing train movements over broken rails and 
pull-aparts. Language in the new subsection is specific to employees 
with at least one year of maintenance of way or signal experience and 
requires a minimum of four hours of training and examination on 
requirements related to the safe passage of trains over broken rails 
and pull-aparts. The purpose of the examination is to ascertain the 
person's ability to effectively apply these requirements. A railroad 
may use the examination to determine whether or not a person should be 
allowed to authorize train movements over broken rails and pull-aparts. 
However, the examination is not to be used as a test to disqualify the 
person from other duties.
    The maximum speed over broken rails and pull-aparts shall not 
exceed 10 m.p.h. However, movement authorized by a person qualified 
under this subsection may further restrict speed over broken rails and 
pull-aparts if warranted by the particular circumstances. This person 
must watch all movements and be prepared to stop the train if 
necessary. Fully qualified persons under Sec. 213.7 must be notified 
and dispatched to the location promptly to assume responsibility for 
authorizing train movements and effecting temporary or permanent 
repairs. The word ``promptly'' is meant to provide the railroad with 
some flexibility in events where there is only one train to pass over 
the condition prior to the time when a fully qualified person would 
report for a regular tour of duty, or where a train is due to pass over 
the condition before a fully qualified person is able to report to the 
scene. Railroads should not use persons qualified under 213.7(d) to 
authorize multiple train movements over such conditions for an extended 
period of time.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendments to 
this section. One commenter argued that only those employees fully 
qualified under Sec. 213.7 should be designated to authorize train 
movements over broken rails and pull-aparts. FRA disagrees with this 
statement. For the narrow purpose of temporarily authorizing train 
movements over broken rails or pull aparts, a person does not need to 
be trained in all of the remedial actions included in Part 213, as 
outlined in Sec. 213.7.
    Several commenters suggested that Sec. 213.7 should contain a 
requirement for the requalification of employees designated to inspect 
track or to supervise restorations or renewals. A regulation requiring 
such requalification of designated persons would overlap the existing 
regulation, as FRA has long held that the requirement to be 
``qualified'' is a continuing requirement, not a static one, and it is 
the responsibility of the track owner to assure that persons designated 
under this section are qualified at all times. This mandate for 
qualification is not periodic, it is continuing. FRA will address this 
issue by issuing a technical bulletin containing ``good practice'' 
industry guidelines for the requalification of persons designated under 
Sec. 213.7, as drafted by the Track Working Group.
    Final rule: FRA believes that persons who are trained, examined, 
and periodically re-examined on specific issues relating to the 
singular function of passing trains over broken rails and pull-aparts 
at restricted speed does not violate the intent of the Track Safety 
Standards, nor does this practice compromise safety provided those 
persons demonstrate to the track owner that they know and understand 
the requirements on which they were examined.
    FRA proposes to re-designate paragraph (d) in the NPRM as paragraph 
(c) in the final rule. Similarly, paragraph (c) in the NPRM will become 
paragraph

[[Page 34003]]

(d) in the final rule with a reference to ``persons not fully 
qualified'' for the purpose of maintaining records of those 
designations. These changes provide for a more orderly structure of the 
requirements of this section and also recognize FRA's and the railroads 
``need to know'' what persons are being designated under this new 
paragraph for purposes of compliance with this part.

Section 213.9--Classes of Track: Operating Speed Limits

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to move Class 6 standards to 
Subpart G, a new subpart which establishes track safety standards for 
high speed rail operations. As proposed in the NPRM, the new subpart 
would consist of Class 6 and three new track classes, Classes 7 through 
9, to accommodate train speeds up to 200 m.p.h. The Track Working Group 
and the RSAC recommended including Class 6 in the high speed standards 
because that class of track already requires certain heightened 
maintenance practices not required by the lower classes of track.
    Comments: Comments received generally supported the proposed 
amendment to this section. One commenter suggested that the provision 
under Sec. 213.9(b) allowing operation for up to 30 days over track not 
in compliance with Class 1 standards was too liberal, and this option 
should only be allowed as an upper limit for track under emergency 
repairs.
    Final rule: FRA believes that the option provided the track owner 
under subsection (b) of this section, to continue operations over track 
not in full compliance with Class 1 standards, at Class 1 speeds for a 
period of not more than 30 days, is appropriate, considering the many 
types of defects that can occur and the various levels of risks 
associated with these defects. The regulation requires that the person 
designated under Sec. 213.7(a) who makes the determination to continue 
operations at Class 1 speeds shall do so only after personally 
evaluating the immediate circumstances and the associated risks 
presented by the non-compliance condition, and then determining that 
operations may safely continue.
    However, this provision is not meant to supplant the remedial 
actions for defective rails prescribed in Sec. 213.113. If a person 
designated under Sec. 213.7 determines that tracks containing defective 
rail may continue in use, the rail must be replaced or the remedial 
action prescribed in the table in Sec. 213.113 must be initiated.
    There are several minor editorial changes to this section. In 
subsection (a), the reference to subsection (c) contained in the NPRM 
was deleted in the final rule because there is no subsection (c) to 
this section. The final rule also cross-references the maximum 
allowable speed for excepted track in the Sec. 213.9(a) table 
concerning ``Maximum Allowable Operating Speeds.''
    Otherwise, this section as proposed, is adopted in this final rule. 
In grouping Class 6 with Classes 7 through 9, FRA does not suggest, and 
it would be inaccurate to infer, that Class 6 track or operation of 
trains over Class 6 track at the speeds permitted is in any way 
unconventional or unusual. Trains have been run at those speeds for 
decades.

Section 213.11--Restoration or Renewal of Track Under Traffic 
Conditions

    Proposed rule: An added phrase recommended by the RSAC for the end 
of this section would clarify a qualified inspector's authority to 
limit the speed of trains operating through areas under restoration or 
renewal. In the Track Working Group, the BMWE expressed concern that 
the current language of the section provides no guidance for track 
inspectors determining the appropriate speed through restoration areas. 
The language proposed by the NPRM gives a qualified track inspector 
discretion to set train speed through a work area, but does not allow 
the inspector to authorize trains to operate at speeds faster than the 
maximum speed for the appropriate track class. This change does not 
represent a change to past interpretation and enforcement of this 
section; it is merely a clarification of established policy.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.13--Measuring Track Not Under Load

    Proposed rule: The proposed rule recommended no changes to this 
section.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the phrase ``under a loaded 
condition'' should be more clearly defined.
    Final rule: FRA considers that the dynamic loading conditions 
applied by train operations is implicit in the phrase ``under a loaded 
condition'' and therefore the final rule is adopted as proposed by the 
NPRM.

Section 213.15--Penalties

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed no changes to this section. The 
section covers all subparts to this part, including the new Subpart G.
    Comments: One commenter advised FRA that Appendix B had not been 
revised to reflect entries for the new Sec. 213.119 addressing 
Continuous Welded Rail (CWR).
    Final rule: The final rule changes this section in several ways. 
The section is now entitled, ``Penalties'' rather than ``Civil 
penalties'' because it now includes a provision for criminal penalties. 
The authority for FRA to initiate criminal penalties is granted by the 
statute at 49 U.S.C. 21311.
    The section also adds language to indicate that ``person'' as used 
in this section is defined by the statute at 1 U.S.C. 1 and includes, 
but is not limited to, a railroad, manager, supervisor, official, agent 
of the railroad, owner, manufacturer, lessor or lessee of railroad 
equipment or track, independent contractor to the railroad.
    The section also changes the maximum penalties FRA is authorized to 
assess for violations of the provisions of this Part. The maximum 
penalty is raised from $10,000 to $11,000 for violations, and from 
$20,000 to $22,000 for willful violations. This change is included to 
comply with the provisions of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 
1996 which requires Federal agencies to adjust civil monetary penalties 
to counter inflation's effect of diminishing the impact of these 
penalties. See Pub. L. 104-134, April 26, 1996. According to the Act, 
the inflation adjustment is to be calculated by increasing the maximum 
civil monetary penalty by the percentage that the Consumer Price Index 
for the month of June, 1995, exceeds the Consumer Price Index for the 
month of June of the last calendar year in which the amount of the 
penalty was last set or adjusted. The initial adjustment, however, may 
not exceed 10 percent. Hence, the maximum penalties for violations of 
this Part are increased by 10 percent. In addition, the minimum civil 
penalty amount shown in this section is changed from $250 to $500 to 
conform with Rail Safety Enforcement and Review Act of 1992, codified 
at 49 U.S.C. 21301.
    In further compliance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act, FRA 
reviewed existing penalties contained in Appendix B of Part 213. After 
examination of those penalties and FRA's enforcement policies, FRA 
decided that the existing penalties require no adjustment at this time.
    The civil penalties shown in Appendix B of the NPRM did not include 
penalties for CWR, torch cut rail, new provisions in excepted track or 
Subpart G. The Appendix B in this final rule includes penalties for the 
new provisions in the final rule. Because

[[Page 34004]]

FRA's civil penalties are statements of policy, notice and comment of 
these changes were not required.

 Section 213.17--Exemptions

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group considered a proposal by the 
BMWE that this section be eliminated. However, the group agreed that 
the existing language allowing for the temporary suspension of certain 
track standards is appropriate and exemptions are necessary for the 
industry to experiment with alternative methods of compliance and new 
technology. Further, FRA is required by law to consider appropriately 
suggested waiver requests and has adopted generally applicable 
procedures for doing so in 49 CFR Part 211. Therefore, the NPRM 
recommended that this section be left as currently written.
    Comments: No comments received.
    Final rule: The title of this section, as well as the language of 
the section itself, are changed by the replacement of ``exemptions'' 
with ``waivers.'' This language change makes the section consistent 
with the language contained in 49 U.S.C. 20103, as well as 49 CFR Part 
211.

Section 213.19--Information Collection

    Proposed rule: The addition of this section was not proposed in the 
NPRM.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this addition.
    Final rule: FRA adds this section to show which sections of this 
part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. See 44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq. The requirement for approval by OMB has been added since 
the Track Safety Standards were first issued. While subsequent 
revisions to the track standards have received OMB approval, those 
approvals have not been reflected in the standards themselves.

Section 213.31--Scope

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.33--Drainage

    Proposed rule: In its 1990 petition for revision of the track 
standards, the BMWE requested that this section be expanded to include 
more specific requirements for drainage and water diversion around 
track roadbeds, addressing water seeping toward the track, water 
falling upon the roadbed, cross drainage, and the use of geotextiles. 
The proposal was discussed by the Track Working Group, as was a 
proposal by the AAR that merely modified the phrase ``clear of 
obstruction'' to ``sufficiently clear of obstruction.'' The NPRM 
proposed to follow an RSAC recommendation that the section be left 
unchanged.
    Comments: No comments received.
    Final rule: The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.37--Vegetation

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to add a phrase to subsection (b) 
to include a requirement to clear vegetation from signs and signals 
along railroad rights-of-way and at highway-rail grade crossings. The 
current regulation stipulates only that vegetation cannot interfere 
with visibility of railroad signs and signals. Because the scope of 
Part 213 limits vegetation requirements to railroad property, this 
proposal was not intended to be an attempt to dictate standards for 
surrounding landowners. The additional language was intended only to 
cover the clearing of vegetation at highway-rail grade crossings to 
provide adequate visibility to the traveling public of railroad signs 
and signals; it was not intended to cover or preempt state or local 
requirements for the clearing of vegetation on railroad rights-of-way 
at highway-rail grade crossings.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The final rule includes one minor change to the rule 
text of this section to correct an error regarding the effective date 
for compliance with the change. In the NPRM, paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) 
were both exempt from compliance for a period of one year following the 
effective date of the rule. The requirement for controlling vegetation 
along the right-of-way so that it does not obstruct the visibility of 
railroad signs and signals, as outlined in paragraph (b)(1), has been a 
requirement of the Track Safety Standards since their inception. The 
final rule will clarify that only paragraph (b)(2), which was added to 
enhance visibility to the traveling public of railroad signs and 
signals at highway-rail crossings, will be exempt from compliance for 
one year following the effective date of the rule.

Section 213.51--Scope

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.53--Gage

    Proposed rule: The proposed rule recommended no changes to this 
section.
    Comments: No comments received.
    Final rule: The final rule includes one minor editorial change to 
this section. The section now cross-references the maximum allowable 
gage for excepted track in the gage table under Sec. 213.53(b) which 
was inadvertently omitted in the NPRM.

Section 213.55--Alinement

    Proposed rule: The NPRM introduced a 31-foot chord requirement, in 
addition to the present 62-foot chord requirement, for measuring 
alinement on curves in Classes 3 through 5 track. The RSAC, on advice 
from the Track Working Group, recommended this addition to control 
transient short wavelength variations in alinement. This control was 
considered necessary to introduce an averaging approach for the 
application of the Vmax formula which determines the maximum 
allowable operating speed for each curve. The change in the application 
of the Vmax formula is discussed in Sec. 213.57 of this 
notice.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.57--Curves; Elevation and Speed Limitations

    Proposed rule: The existing subsection (a) limits the design 
elevation on curves to a maximum of six inches. However, this 
subsection also provides for a deviation from this design elevation, 
which is contained in the Sec. 213.63 table. For a curve elevated to 
six inches in Class 1 track, the allowable deviation would be three 
inches and therefore any point in that curve could have as much as nine 
inches of elevation and remain in compliance. For a similar situation 
in Class 3 track, any point in that curve could have as much as seven 
and three-fourths inches of elevation and still be in compliance. For 
modern rail cars with a high center of gravity, low speed curve 
negotiation under excessive levels of superelevation places the vehicle 
in an increased state of overbalance. This condition creates the 
possibility of wheel unloading and

[[Page 34005]]

subsequent wheel climb when warp conditions are encountered within the 
curve.
    The Track Working Group considered the characteristics of the 
present-day vehicle fleet and concluded that a lower limit on maximum 
elevation in a curve should be prescribed in the regulations. 
Therefore, the NPRM proposed to revise subsection (a) to limit the 
amount of crosslevel at any point in a curve to not more than eight 
inches on Classes 1 and 2 track, and not more than seven inches on 
Classes 3 through 5 track.
    Subsection (b) of this section addresses the maximum allowable 
operating speed for curved track. The equilibrium speed on a curve is 
the speed where the resultant force of the weight and centrifugal force 
is perpendicular to the plane of the track. The American Railway 
Engineering and Maintenance-of-way Association's (AREMA) Manual of 
Engineering, Chapter 5, states that passenger cars have been shown to 
ride comfortably around a curve at a speed which produces three inches 
of underbalance, or otherwise stated, three inches less elevation than 
would be required to produce equilibrium conditions. The AREMA Manual 
sets forth a formula based on the steady-state forces involved in curve 
negotiation which is commonly referred to as the Vmax 
formula. This formula considers the variables of elevation, curvature, 
and the amount of unbalanced elevation or cant deficiency in 
determining the maximum curving speed. (Note: FRA considers the terms 
``unbalanced elevation'' and ``cant deficiency'' to be 
interchangeable.) The present standards under paragraph (b) limit 
curving speed based on a maximum of three inches of unbalance or cant 
deficiency and is commonly referred to as the ``three-inch unbalance 
formula.'' FRA has granted waivers for other levels of unbalance on 
specified equipment.
    Over the years, railroad engineers have differed as to the 
application of this three-inch unbalance formula. Some engineers have 
suggested the designed elevation and curvature should be used to 
calculate the maximum operating speed around a curve. Other engineers 
recommend that an average of the entire curve or segment of the curve 
better recognizes situations where steady-state conditions change. For 
example, the elevation may be decreased through a road crossing to 
accommodate road levels and then increased beyond the crossing.
    Recognizing the origin and purpose of the Vmax formula, 
the Track Working Group recommended that an average of the alinement 
and crosslevel measurements through a track segment in the body of the 
curve should be used in the formula to arrive at the maximum authorized 
speed. This approach recognizes the ``steady-state'' purpose of the 
formula. Transient locations (points) are covered by the alinement and 
track surface tables. Normally, approximately 10 stations are used 
through the track segment, spaced at 15'6'' apart. If the length of the 
body of the curve is less than 155 feet, measurements should be taken 
for the full length of the body of the curve.
    This uniform or averaging technique over the 10 stations through 
the track segment is consistent with the concept used by the vehicle/
track dynamicists who discuss ``g'' levels in steady-state conditions, 
often considered to be one or two seconds. At 80 m.p.h., a vehicle will 
have traversed approximately 118 feet of track in one second. 
Measurements taken over 155 feet (10 stations at 15'6'') provide the 
necessary distance to determine the behavior of the vehicle over the 
one- or two-second steady-state interval.
    Analysis has shown that, although application of the 
Vmax formula on a point-by-point basis is overly 
conservative, it does provide for the coverage of certain combinations 
of alinement and crosslevel deviations in Classes 3 through 5 track 
which could result in wheel climb derailments. However, further 
analysis has shown that these transient short-wavelength anomalies can 
be covered by the introduction of a 31-foot chord to the alinement 
table contained in Sec. 213.55.
    The Track Working Group also recommended the addition of new 
paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f) which will permit curving speeds 
based on four inches of unbalance or cant deficiency for certain 
categories of equipment that demonstrate safe curving performance at 
this level of unbalance. The means of qualification is a basic 
procedure known as a ``static lean'' test that has been used many times 
in recent years for the testing of equipment for operation at higher 
cant deficiencies. Although four inches of cant deficiency is usually 
applied to passenger trains, other types of equipment with comparable 
suspension systems, centers of gravity, and cross-sectional areas may 
perform equally well. Standard freight equipment, however, typically 
does not have the prerequisite vehicle characteristics which would 
allow curving speeds based on more than three inches of cant 
deficiency. The Track Working Group recommended that FRA review the 
information provided by the track owner or operator to verify safe 
curving performance and approve the proposal before the vehicles are 
operated at four inches of cant deficiency.
    The NPRM proposed to revise Appendix A, which currently contains a 
table specifying the maximum allowable operating speed for each curve 
based on three inches of cant deficiency. Under this proposed change, 
Appendix A would be amended to include two tables. Table 1 would be 
identical to the current table, while Table 2 would specify curving 
speeds based on four inches of cant deficiency.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendments.
    Final rule: FRA adds paragraph (g) to this section to afford track 
owners or railroads operating above Class 5 speeds an option to qualify 
equipment at cant deficiencies greater than four inches in lower track 
classes. Track owners or railroads operating under the provisions of 
Subpart G may exercise the option on lower track classes (Classes 1 
through 5) that are contiguous with high speed territory without first 
petitioning FRA for a waiver from compliance with the other provisions 
of Sec. 213.57.
    Under paragraph (g), a track owner or railroad operating under 
Subpart G on track that is contiguous to lower speed track may request 
FRA approval to operate at a higher level of cant deficiency using the 
same procedures available under Sec. 213.329(c) and (d). The track 
owner or railroad must submit to FRA for approval a test plan which 
will determine through engineering analysis the safety limits for 
lateral carbody accelerations which can be used as a surrogate measure 
to determine the amount of wheel unloading under cant deficient 
operation.
    Upon FRA approval of the test plan, the track owner or railroad may 
conduct incrementally increasing train speed test runs to demonstrate 
that wheel unloading is within the prescribed safety limits. Once the 
test is completed and FRA approves a level of cant deficient operation, 
paragraph (g) requires geometry car inspections and acceleration 
measurements to confirm the integrity of the vehicle/track interaction 
on the curves.
    The provision in paragraph (g) does not apply to track owners or 
railroads which operate trains in only Classes 1 through 5. FRA must 
consider other factors associated with track in Classes 1 through 5, 
such as the likelihood of a decrease in overall track quality and an 
absence of information generated through vehicle qualification testing 
procedures as required under Sec. 213.345. Therefore, a track owner or 
railroad wishing to operate in Classes 1 through

[[Page 34006]]

5 at cant deficiencies greater than four inches must petition FRA for a 
waiver.

Section 213.59--Elevation of Curved Track; Runoff

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Sec. 213.63--Track Surface

    Proposed rule: The present track surface table contained in this 
section was established in the original standards more than 20 years 
ago and has served the industry well as a minimum safety requirement. 
However, some of the parameters need updating to recognize the 
knowledge gained from investigation of derailment causes, engineering 
analysis, and changes in terminology. Therefore, the NPRM proposed 
several changes to track surface requirements to better address current 
knowledge of track/vehicle interaction.
    The NPRM proposed that the parameter referring to the rate of 
runoff at the end of a track raise and the parameter for deviation from 
uniform profile should both remain unchanged. The profile parameter is 
conservative for single occurrences on both rails and less conservative 
for repeated perturbations.
    In the 1982 revisions to the Track Safety Standards, the 
requirement for maintenance of curve records, including degree of 
curvature and the amount of elevation designated in curves was removed. 
Since that time, the term ``designated elevation'' has been 
controversial and difficult to apply. The NPRM proposed to remove that 
term from the revised table.
    The NPRM also proposed to revise the way the Track Safety Standards 
address transition spirals. For many curves, especially in the lower 
track classes, track maintenance personnel often differ as to the 
locations where spirals begin and end, as well as to the measured 
runoff rate. In view of the somewhat subjective nature of the concept 
of uniform runoff in spirals, the proposed changes in this notice use a 
different approach from runoff or ``variation in crosslevel in 
spirals'' and incorporate this parameter into another parameter.
    In the present track surface table, the maximum variation in 
crosslevel in spirals could exceed that allowed on tangents and in the 
full body of curves over the same distance. The mechanism for 
derailment in the body of the curve is the same as in the spiral. The 
NPRM proposed that the differences in crosslevel in spirals be included 
in one parameter to simplify the table and correct the discrepancy that 
currently exists. The NPRM also proposed that the existing parameters 
referring to ``deviation from designated elevation'' and ``variation in 
crosslevel'' in spirals are unnecessary, provided spiral variations in 
crosslevel are included in the ``warp'' parameter. The ``warp'' 
parameter is measured by determining the difference in crosslevel 
between two points less than 62-feet apart.
    While the difference in crosslevel parameter (warp) addresses the 
majority of situations where wheel climb or rock off can occur, three 
footnotes are added to the table to address specific situations.
    The footnote identified by an asterisk inside the table addresses 
the present practice on some railroads to design a greater runoff of 
elevation in spirals due to physical restrictions on the length of 
spirals. Spiral runoff in new construction must be designed and 
maintained within the limits shown in the table for difference in 
crosslevel.
    Footnote 1 is included to address the known derailment cause where 
a warp occurs in conjunction with an amount of curve elevation that 
approaches the maximum typically in use. When a vehicle is in an 
unbalanced condition on this curve elevation and encounters a warp 
condition, the vehicle is subjected to wheel/rail forces that could 
result in wheel climb.
    Footnote 2 is included to address the harmonic rock off problem of 
which the railroad industry has been aware for many years. Under 
repeated warp conditions, the vehicle can experience an increase in 
side-to-side rocking that may result in wheel climb in curves or center 
plate separation on tangents.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendments. One 
commenter questioned the use of the terms ``variation'' and 
``difference,'' and recommended the consistent use of one or the other, 
but not both.
    Final rule: The term ``variation'' only appears in the statement 
behind the asterisk inside the track surface table. The term 
``variation'' is used because this statement refers to the previous 
warp standard for spirals which used the same term. In certain 
locations, the prior standard for warp in spirals will be grandfathered 
due to physical restrictions and therefore FRA believes the terms 
should be consistent. In all other instances in this section, the term 
``difference'' is used exclusively. The final rule makes one change in 
the track surface table under the parameter described as the difference 
in crosslevel between any two points less than 62 feet apart, or 
commonly referred to as the ``warp'' parameter. The results of recent 
track twist (warp) studies conducted at the Transportation Technology 
Center (TTC), where three different vehicle types were tested to 
determine their responses to crosslevel and combined crosslevel/
alinement perturbations on tangent and curved test zones, indicate that 
a limit for warp of 2\1/4\ inches for Class 2 track would be more 
appropriate than the proposed limit of 2\1/2\ inches by RSAC. The 
report of the TTC testing was not available to the Track Working Group 
when their recommendations were made.

Section 213.101--Scope

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.103--Ballast; General

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.109--Crossties

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to amend this section to include 
several recommendations made by the Track Working Group and adopted by 
the RSAC. After reviewing FRA's Accident/Incident data base, the Track 
Working Group concluded that wide gage resulting from defective 
crossties continues to be the single largest causal factor associated 
with track-caused reportable derailments.
    Gage widening forces applied to the track structure from the 
movement of rolling stock tend to increase as track curvature 
increases. Therefore, the NPRM proposed to increase the number of 
effective crossties required under subsection (c) for turnouts and 
curved track with over two degrees of curvature. The purpose of this 
proposed requirement was to strengthen the track structure to enable it 
to better resist such forces.

[[Page 34007]]

    In Class 1 track, the required number of crossties in any 39-foot 
segment of track would increase from five to six; in Class 2 track, 
from eight to nine; in Class 3 track, from eight to 10; and in Classes 
4 and 5 track, from 12 to 14. These changes were proposed to become 
effective two years after the effective date of the final rule.
    Under subsection (d), the NPRM proposed an optional requirement for 
the number and placement of crossties near rail joints in Classes 3 
through 5 track. The existing requirement calls for one crosstie within 
a specified distance from the rail joint location, while the proposed 
optional requirement would allow two crossties, one on each side of the 
joint, within a specified distance from the rail joint location. FRA 
previously examined both standards under various static loading 
conditions. The results indicated that the proposed optional 
requirement provides equal or better joint support than the present 
requirement.
    The NPRM also proposed to add a new subsection (e) to address track 
constructed without conventional crossties, such as concrete-slab 
track. The existing standards do not address this type of construction 
in which the running rails are secured through fixation to another 
structural member. The proposed addition addressed this type of track 
construction by requiring railroads to maintain gage, surface, and 
alinement to the standards specified in subsections (b)(1)(i), (ii), 
and (iii).
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendments. One 
commenter suggested that the GRMS technology be incorporated into this 
section.
    Final rule: As discussed earlier in the preamble to this final 
rule, a separate task group continues to evaluate GRMS technology for 
possible incorporation into the Track Safety Standards.
    The final rule includes subsection (c) as it is currently written, 
as well as subsection (d) to become effective two years after the 
effective date of this final rule.
    The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule with 
renumbering of the subsections. Subsection (d) in the NPRM appears as 
subsection (f) in the final rule, and subsection (e) in the NPRM 
appears as subsection (g) in the final rule.

Section 213.113--Defective Rails

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed several substantive changes to 
this section which reflect the results of FRA's on-going rail integrity 
research program. The results indicate the need to revise the remedial 
action tables and specifications to more adequately address the risks 
of rail failure, reserving the most restrictive actions on limiting 
operating speed for those rail defects which are large enough to 
present a risk of service failure.
    Because ``zero percent'' entries serve no useful purpose, they 
should be dropped from the remedial action tables. Similarly, ``100 
percent'' of rail head cross-sectional area is not a meaningful 
dividing point for transverse defects. The proposed revisions to the 
remedial action table for transverse defects placed a lower limit of 
five percent of the rail head cross-sectional area. If a transverse 
defect is reported to be less than five percent, no remedial action 
would be required under the revised standards. Defects reported less 
than five percent are not consistently found during rail breaking 
programs and therefore defect determination within this size range is 
not always reliable. Furthermore, if the determination is reliable, 
defect growth to service failure size within the newly established 
testing frequency under Sec. 213.237 is highly unlikely. The proposed 
revisions to the remedial action table for transverse defects also 
established one or more mid-range defect sizes, between five percent 
and 100 percent, each of which would require specific remedial actions.
    In the proposed revised remedial action table, all longitudinal 
defects were combined within one group subject to identical remedial 
actions based on their reported size. These types of longitudinal 
defects all share similar growth rates and the same remedial actions 
are appropriate to each type. The lower limit of ``0'' inches was 
eliminated and the size divisions were revised upward slightly to 
reflect FRA's research findings which indicate that this class of rail 
defect has a relatively slow growth rate.
    The ``0'' inch lower limit was eliminated also for bolt hole cracks 
and broken bases. The proposed revision also included minor changes in 
the size divisions for bolt hole cracks, as well as changes in the 
required remedial action for broken bases less than 6 inches and 
damaged rail.
    The NPRM also proposed to add ``Flattened Rail'' to the rail defect 
table. Although it is not a condition shown to affect the structural 
integrity of the rail section, it can result in less-than-desirable 
dynamic vehicle responses in the higher speed ranges. The flattened 
rail condition is identified in the table, as well as in the definition 
portion of subsection (b), as being \3/8\ inches or more in depth and 8 
inches or more in length.
    The Track Working Group discussed at length a ``break out in rail 
head,'' but was unable to agree on a standard definition. The RSAC 
therefore recommended that the industry continue to be guided by FRA's 
current interpretation that a break out in the rail head consists of a 
piece physically separated from the parent rail.
    The NPRM also proposed to make several substantive revisions to the 
remedial actions specified under ``Notes'' in subsection (a)(2) of this 
section. A new note ``A2'' was added to address the mid-range 
transverse defect sizes which were added to the table. This remedial 
action allows for train operations to continue at a maximum of 10 
m.p.h. for up to 24 hours, following a visual inspection by a person 
designated under Sec. 213.7.
    Note ``B'', which currently does not define a limiting speed, was 
changed to limit speed to 30 m.p.h. or the maximum allowable speed 
under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track concerned, whichever is lower.
    Notes ``C'', ``D'', and ``H'' were revised to limit the operating 
speed, following the application of joint bars, to 50 m.p.h. or the 
maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower. Presently, the standards limit speed to 
60 m.p.h. or the maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class 
of track concerned, whichever is lower.
    A second paragraph in Note ``C,'' the remedial action which applies 
specifically to detail fractures, engine burn fractures, and defective 
welds, proposed a significant change to the current standards. This 
revision addressed defects which are discovered in Classes 3 through 5 
track during an internal rail inspection required under Sec. 213.237, 
and whose size is determined not to be in excess of 25 percent of the 
rail head cross-sectional area. For these specific defects, a track 
owner may operate for up to four days at a speed limited to 50 m.p.h. 
or the maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower. If the defective rail is not removed or 
a permanent repair made within four days of discovery, the speed is 
limited to 30 m.p.h. until joint bars are applied.
    Under the existing standards, these types of defects, predominant 
on heavy utilization trackage, would require a 30 m.p.h. restriction 
until joint bars are applied. Practice within the industry today is to 
operate the rail test vehicle until the number of defects found exceeds 
the railroad's ability to effect immediate repairs. At that time the 
rail test vehicle is shut down for the day.

[[Page 34008]]

The purpose of this practice is to reduce speed restrictions which not 
only affect the railroad's ability to move trains, but also can produce 
undesirable in-train forces that can lead to derailments. However, 
prematurely shutting down rail test car operations negate any 
possibility of discovering larger and more serious defects that may lie 
just ahead.
    Furthermore, the results of FRA's research indicate that defects of 
this type and size range have a predictable slow growth life. Research 
indicates that even on the most heavily utilized trackage in use today, 
defects of this type and size are unlikely to grow to service failure 
size in four days.
    Comments: Comments received generally supported the proposed 
amendments to this section. One commenter suggested that definitions 
for ``bolt hole crack,'' ``defective weld,'' and ``head-web 
separation'' should be added to subsection (b). This commenter also 
suggested that remedial actions for certain rail defects, which are 
expressed in terms of an ``either/or'' option, could be made less 
ambiguous by bracketing those options.
    One commenter suggested that a periodic re-examination of 
``flattened rails'' should be required so that the severity and growth 
rate of this rail defect can be monitored. This commenter also 
suggested that ``shelled rail'' should be defined as a rail defect 
which would require some specified remedial action.
    One commenter argued that when a track owner voluntarily elects to 
conduct a continuous search for internal defects on Class 1 and 2 track 
where regulatory requirements for inspections of this type are non-
existent, any rail defects found should be subject to the requirements 
of only remedial action B, regardless of the defect type or size of the 
defect. The commenter argued that such a provision would ensure that 
there is not a regulatory disincentive for voluntarily conducting 
internal rail inspections on Class 1 and 2 track.
    Another commenter suggested that FRA's definition of ``break out in 
rail head'' should be more restrictive than the present version. This 
commenter also suggested that the final rule should set parameters for 
determining ``excessive rail wear'' in a manner similar to the methods 
used to measure excessive wheel wear prescribed in the 49 CFR Part 215, 
Railroad Freight Car Safety Standards.
    Final rule: The Track Working Group discussed at length the issues 
associated with ``flattened rail'' (localized collapsed head rail) and 
``shelled rail.'' FRA and industry research indicates that these 
occurrences are more accurately categorized as rail surface conditions, 
not rail defects, as they do not in themselves cause service failure of 
the rail.
    FRA believes that the risk of detail fractures being masked by 
``shelled rail'' conditions was appropriately addressed in the proposed 
rule by specifying more restrictive inspection intervals and by 
requiring specific remedial actions to be taken when surface conditions 
such as ``shelled rail'' prevent a valid inspection for internal 
defects. The proposed rule addresses the issue of ``flattened rail'' in 
terms of a specified remedial action for those of a certain depth and 
length. FRA believes that further monitoring of ``flattened rail'' 
conditions can be accomplished without prescribing regulations which 
mandate inspection procedures beyond which already exist. FRA's rail 
integrity research program will continue to study ``shelled rail'' and 
``flattened rail'' conditions, and in the event that research indicates 
additional regulation is necessary in the future, FRA will not hesitate 
to do so.
    The Track Working Group was unable to improve FRA's current 
definition of a ``break out in rail head.'' The current definition, 
when viewed in terms of the remedial action which it requires when met, 
has been considered too liberal under certain circumstances, while 
conversely, it has also been considered too conservative under other 
circumstances. The circumstances primarily dictated by the type and 
size of defect, along with the location of the defect in the rail. FRA 
believes that under the current remedial action requirement, the 
current definition for ``break out in rail head'' is adequate.
    The issue of ``excessive rail wear'' continues to be evaluated by 
FRA's rail integrity research program. FRA believes that insufficient 
data exist at this time which would indicate that parameters for this 
condition should be proposed as a minimum safety standard.
    FRA believes that the remedial action tables and specifications in 
this final rule better address the risks associated with rail failure. 
These risks are primarily dependent upon defect type and size and 
should not be dependent upon the manner or mechanism which reveals the 
existence of the defect. FRA believes that providing special regulatory 
relief for defects found during voluntary inspections for internal rail 
defects would not be a prudent approach to take. However, in revising 
the remedial action table, FRA has sought to provide enhanced 
flexibility where warranted by safety considerations.
    FRA agrees that additional definitions would be helpful, so this 
final rule adds definitions for ``bolt hole crack,'' ``defective 
weld,'' and ``head-web separation.'' FRA also agrees that bracketing 
certain ``either/or'' remedial actions will clarify the intent of those 
requirements.
    With the exception of these minor changes, the rule is adopted as 
proposed by the Track Working Group and endorsed by the RSAC.

Section 213.115--Rail End Mismatch

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.119--Continuous Welded Rail (CWR); General

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to introduce a requirement for 
railroads to establish and place in effect written procedures to 
address CWR. These procedures must address the installation, 
adjustment, maintenance and inspection of CWR track, and include a 
formal training program for the application of these procedures. The 
procedures, including a program for training, must be submitted to FRA 
within six months following the effective date of this rule. Although 
many railroads already have in effect a CWR program, FRA will review 
each submitted set of procedures for compliance with the individual 
requirements of the proposed regulation.
    Within the last decade, through the determined efforts of 
researchers from industry and government, along with experience gained 
from accident investigators and track maintenance people, the railroad 
industry has gained a better comprehension of the mechanics of 
laterally unstable CWR track. As a result, the industry has identified 
maintenance procedures that are critical to maintaining CWR track 
stability.
    As proposed, the requirements do not detail how each procedure is 
to be carried out. Rather, they identify the basic safety issues and 
permit railroads to develop and implement their own procedures to 
address those issues, provided the procedures are consistent with 
current research results as well as findings from practical experience 
documented in recent years. The procedures should be clear, concise, 
and

[[Page 34009]]

easy to understand by maintenance-of-way employees. A comprehensive 
training program must be in place for the application of these 
procedures.
    The proposed regulation requires the designation of a ``desired 
rail installation temperature range'' for the geographic area in which 
the CWR is located. By definition contained in the proposed regulation, 
``desired rail installation temperature range'' is the rail temperature 
range at which forces in CWR should not cause a track buckle in extreme 
heat, or a pull-apart during cold weather. Current general practice 
within the industry, based to a large extent on research findings, is 
to establish a ``desired rail installation temperature range'' which is 
considerably higher than the annual mean temperature for the geographic 
area in which the CWR is located. The regulation, as proposed in the 
NPRM, provides railroads with flexibility to establish the ``desired 
rail installation temperature range'' based on the characteristics of 
the specific territory involved and the historical knowledge acquired 
through the application of past procedures.
    When CWR is installed and anchored/fastened at the ``desired rail 
installation temperature range,'' it is considered to be in its initial 
``stress-free'' state, where the net longitudinal force is equal to 
zero. Research discloses that many factors, some of which are 
unavoidable, like dynamics of train operation, the necessary lining and 
surfacing of the track structure, and performing rail repairs all 
contribute to a gradual lowering over time of the initial rail 
installation temperature range which increases the potential for track 
buckling. This phenomenon substantiates the need to install and anchor/
fasten CWR at a relatively high rail installation temperature range.
    Maintenance of the ``desired rail installation temperature range'' 
is critical to ensuring CWR stability. Therefore, the procedures for 
installation, adjustment, effecting rail repairs, and repairing track 
buckles or pull-aparts must compare the existing rail temperature with 
the ``desired rail installation temperature range'' for the area 
concerned.
    The procedures also must address several other topics, such as rail 
anchoring, controlling train speed when CWR track has been disturbed, 
ballast re-consolidation, inspections, and recordkeeping for the 
installation of CWR and rail repairs that do not conform to the 
railroad written procedures. A track owner may update or modify CWR 
procedures as necessary, upon notification to FRA of those changes.
    Development of individual CWR programs could prove burdensome for 
many small railroads. As recommended by the Track Working Group, FRA 
will work with the ASLRA to develop a generic set of CWR procedures to 
apply to low speed/low tonnage Class 2 and Class 3 railroad operations.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendment. One 
commenter questioned the need for certain railroads that only conduct 
low speed/low tonnage operations to adopt written procedures addressing 
CWR. Another commenter questioned FRA's enforceability of the proposed 
new section.
    Final rule: The details of these procedures are to be based on 
research findings and sound engineering principles. FRA is committed to 
working with ASLRA to develop a generic set of CWR procedures with wide 
applicability for the spectrum of smaller railroads. FRA believes that 
certain requirements contained in the generic procedures, such as a 
requirement to operate at reduced speed following maintenance work 
which disturbs the track, will not have an impact on a railroad that 
normally only operates at 10 m.p.h. Other requirements of this generic 
set of procedures would also be less burdensome due to the nature of 
most low speed/low tonnage operations.
    This new section is enforceable to the extent that CWR procedures 
must be developed and implemented, and employees responsible for their 
application must be trained on these procedures. In the proper exercise 
of its enforcement discretion, the agency is unlikely to take 
enforcement action against minor deviations from CWR procedures unless, 
together with other violations, they are part of a larger problem.

Section 213.121--Rail Joints

    Proposed rule: Under existing subsection (a), the phrase ``proper 
design and dimension'' often has been interpreted to prohibit the use 
of any joint bar on a rail section for which it was not specifically 
designed. This interpretation does not consider the fact that certain 
joint bars are interchangeable between different rail sections. 
Therefore, the NPRM proposed to change the word ``proper'' to 
``structurally sound'' in subsection (a).
    In subsection (b), the NPRM proposed to add the modifier 
``excessive'' in front of the phrase ``vertical movement.'' The 
existing language in this subsection implies that no vertical movement 
of either rail could be allowed when all bolts are tight. This 
interpretation is too strict. FRA's Enforcement Manual suggests that 
FRA inspectors evaluate excessive vertical movement when determining 
compliance with this paragraph. This change would make the rule conform 
to sound practices.
    The NPRM proposed to extend to Class 2 track the prohibition of 
torch cutting bolt holes in rail. The reference to joint bars was 
removed, the subject to be covered in the proposed new subsection (h) 
which restricts the practice of re-configuring joint bars. Joint bars 
for older rail sections are becoming increasingly difficult to find and 
are no longer being manufactured. Therefore, the new subsection (h) 
prohibits the re-configuration of joint bars in Classes 3 through 5 
track, but not in Classes 1 and 2 track.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendments. One 
commenter agreed that the term ``structurally sound'' is more 
technically correct, but stated that the term provides no additional 
guidance as to what joint bars are interchangeable with various rail 
sections. Several commenters suggested that the prohibition on 
reconfiguring joint bars with a torch should be extended to Class 2 
track. Another commenter suggested that the term ``excessive'' should 
be quantified.
    Final rule: FRA believes the risks in the lower speed track classes 
are minimal when a railroad torch cuts bolt holes in joint bars and 
reconfigures joint bars with a torch. The most critical of joint bar 
failures are those in which the bar cracks or breaks through the middle 
two bolt holes. If this were to happen as a result of reconfiguring by 
a torch, a regulation already exists which prohibits any cracks or 
breaks in this area of the joint bar for any class of track.
    FRA believes that the term ``excessive'' in the context of this 
section should be left to the discretion of a qualified person based on 
that person's evaluation of what risks may be associated with any 
particular set of conditions. FRA agrees that additional guidance 
should be provided for the interpretation of ``structurally sound'' 
joint bars and will work with the industry to develop and issue 
guidelines in the form of a Technical Bulletin addressing the 
interchange ability of joint bars between various rail sections. This 
approach is similar to a recent recommendation issued by FRA's 
Technical Resolution Committee.
    The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.122--Torch Cut Rail

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed this new section to address the 
proper

[[Page 34010]]

handling of rails cut by the use of a torch. The practice of torch-
cutting rail at one time was commonplace on railroads, but was 
discontinued in higher speed track several years ago when better saws 
were developed and railroads discovered that rails that have been 
torch-cut have a greater tendency to develop fractures. Today, on track 
Classes 3 and above, the practice is used almost exclusively for 
temporary emergency repairs, such as quickly returning a track to 
service following a derailment or washout. These locations are then 
quickly replaced with new rail. The purpose of this section is to 
outlaw the practice of torch cutting rails, except for emergency 
repairs, on all track in classes above Class 2. Train speed on track 
that has been torch cut for emergency repairs made after the effective 
date of this rule must be reduced to the maximum allowable speed for 
Class 2 until the torch cut rail is replaced.
    The proposed section also provides railroads with guidance for 
eliminating old torch cut rail in track Classes 3 through 5. The 
industry believes no torch cuts exist in Class 6 track. Torch cuts in 
Class 5 track must be eliminated within a year of the effective date of 
this final rule, while torch cuts in Class 4 track must be removed 
within two years. Within one year of the effective date of this final 
rule, railroads must inventory existing torch cuts in any Class 3 track 
over which regularly scheduled passenger trains operate. Those torch 
cuts found and inventoried will be ``grandfathered in.'' Any torch cuts 
that are found on such track after the expiration of one year and that 
are not inventoried will be limited immediately to Class 2 speed and 
removed within 30 days of discovery. If a railroad chooses to upgrade a 
segment of track from Classes 1 or 2 to Class 3, and regularly 
scheduled passenger trains operate over that track, the railroad must 
remove any torch cuts before the speeds can be increased beyond the 
maximum allowable for Class 2 track. If a railroad chooses to upgrade a 
segment of track from any class of track to Class 4 or 5, it must 
remove all torch cuts.
    Comments: Comments received generally supported the proposed 
amendments. Several commenters suggested that torch cut rail ends be 
prohibited in all but Class 1 track. One commenter also suggested that 
existing torch cut rail ends be restricted to 10 m.p.h..
    Final rule: FRA believes the risks associated with torch cut rail 
ends in Class 2 track are minimal based on lower speeds and lower 
impact loads. If rail defects were to develop as a result of torch cut 
rail ends, requirements already exist which would address them. FRA 
also believes that existing torch cut rail ends have survived the early 
mortality rate which is associated with rails that fail due to poor 
torch cutting practices, and therefore existing torch cuts do not 
present a significant risk, given the low frequency of expected failure 
and lower accident severity at Class 2 speeds.
    The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.123--Tie Plates

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to add a new subsection (b) to 
this section which reads, ``In Classes 3 through 5 track, no metal 
object which causes a concentrated load by solely supporting a rail 
shall be allowed between the base of rail and the bearing surface of 
the tie plate.'' The specific reference to ``metal object'' is intended 
to include only those items of track material which pose the greatest 
potential for broken base rails such as track spikes, rail anchors, and 
shoulders of tie plates. The phrase ``causes a concentrated load by 
solely supporting a rail'' further clarifies the intent of the 
regulation to apply only in those instances where there is clear 
physical evidence that the metal object is placing substantial load on 
the rail base, as indicated by lack of load on adjacent ties.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.127--Rail Fastening Systems

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to change the title of this 
section from ``Rail fastenings'' to ``Rail fastening systems'' and to 
reduce the language of the regulation to one sentence which reads, 
``Track shall be fastened by a system of components which effectively 
maintains gage within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.53(b).''
    The change to ``rail fastening systems'' more adequately addresses 
the many individual components of modern-day elastic fastening systems, 
such as pads, insulator clips, and shoulder inserts. The failure of 
certain critical components within the system could adversely affect 
the ability of the individual fastener to provide adequate gage 
restraint. The revised language of the regulation provides for an 
evaluation of all components within the system, if necessary, in order 
to evaluate whether they are affording effective gage restraint.
    The RSAC considered the current reference to qualified Federal or 
State track inspectors and the definition of a qualified State track 
inspector to be redundant, given the adoption of Part 212. Therefore, 
the NPRM proposed to delete the phrase ``qualified Federal or State 
track inspector,'' as well as the last sentence of the current section 
which contains the definition of a qualified state track inspector.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendment. One commenter 
suggested that the GRMS technology be incorporated into this section.
    Final rule: As discussed earlier in the preamble to this final 
rule, a separate task group continues to evaluate GRMS technology for 
possible incorporation into the Track Safety Standards. The rule is 
adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.133--Turnouts and Track Crossings Generally

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to retain the language of 
subsection (a) which reads, ``In turnouts and track crossings, the 
fastenings must be intact and maintained so as to keep the components 
securely in place.'' The AAR proposed to revise the language to say, `` 
* * * the fastenings must be maintained for the safe passage of 
trains.'' The AAR contended that turnout and track crossings are 
designed with a high degree of redundancy, making it unnecessary for 
each fastening to be intact to maintain safety. However, the RSAC 
recommended that the regulations allow track inspectors discretion to 
evaluate immediate circumstances in determining what level of remedial 
action is necessary for loose or missing fastenings. RSAC recommended 
that inspectors be provided specific guidance about interpreting this 
provision, such as the guidance contained in technical bulletin T-95-09 
recently issued by FRA.
    The NPRM proposed to change subsection (b) to reflect proposals 
presented by the BMWE and by the AAR and FRA. The RSAC recommended that 
rail anchoring requirements be extended to include Class 3 trackage and 
that ``rail anchors'' be changed to ``rail anchoring `` so that rail 
anchoring would include elastic rail fasteners.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendments.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.135--Switches

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to revise subsection (b) to 
consider the existence of reinforcing bars or straps on

[[Page 34011]]

switch points where joint bars cannot be applied to certain rail 
defects, as required under Sec. 213.113(a)(2), because of the physical 
configuration of the switch. In these instances, remedial action B will 
govern, and a person designated under Sec. 213.7(a), who has at least 
one year of supervisory experience in track maintenance, will limit 
train speed to that not exceeding 30 m.p.h. or the maximum allowable 
under Sec. 213.9(a) for the appropriate class of track, whichever is 
lower. Of course, the person may exercise the options under 
Sec. 213.5(a) when appropriate.
    The RSAC did not recommend specific dimensions for determining when 
switch points are ``unusually chipped or worn,'' as provided for in 
subsection (h). FRA stated that its Accident/Incident data base 
indicates that worn or broken switch points are the largest single 
cause of derailments within the general category of ``Frogs, Switches, 
and Appliances.'' However, the AAR contended that developing meaningful 
numbers for these measurements would be a difficult task because most 
of these derailments are related also to other causal factors such as 
wheel flange condition, truck stiffness, and train handling 
characteristics. The NPRM, therefore, proposed to retain the current 
wording in subsection (h), allowing qualified individuals to evaluate 
immediate circumstances to determine when switch points are ``unusually 
chipped or worn.''
    The NPRM also proposed a new subsection (i) to read, ``Tongue and 
plain mate switches, which by design exceed Class 1 and excepted track 
maximum gage limits, are permitted in Class 1 and excepted track.'' 
This new subsection provides an exemption for this item of specialized 
track work, primarily used in pavement or street railroads, which by 
design does not conform to the maximum gage limits prescribed for Class 
1 and excepted track.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendments. One 
commenter suggested that the term ``unusually chipped or worn'' be 
quantified.
    Final rule: FRA believes that the term ``unusually chipped or 
worn'' in the context of this section should be left to the discretion 
of a qualified person based on that person's evaluation of what risks 
may be associated with any particular set of circumstances. The rule is 
adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.137--Frogs

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to add a new subsection (d) to 
this section, which reads, ``Where frogs are designed as flange-
bearing, flangeway depth may be less than that shown for Class 1 if 
operated at Class 1 speeds.'' This subsection provides an exemption for 
an item of specialized track work which by design does not conform to 
the minimum flangeway depth requirements prescribed in subsection (a) 
of this section.
    Comments: Comments received supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.139--Spring Rail Frogs

    Proposed rule: The proposed rule recommended no changes to this 
section.
    Comments: No comments were received.
    Final rule: This final rule inserts the word ``compression'' for 
that of the phrase ``a tension'' in subsection (d) to correct a 
technical error in wording. In order for the wing rail to be held tight 
against the point rail, the spring must be in compression and not in 
tension.
    Except for this minor change, the rule is adopted as proposed by 
the NPRM.

Section 213.141--Self-Guarded Frogs

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.143--Frog Guard Rails and Guard Faces; Gage

    Proposed rule: To facilitate an easier understanding of the 
requirements contained in this section, the NPRM proposed to add a 
diagram to illustrate the method for measuring guard check gage and 
guard face gage. The proposal contained no substantive changes to this 
section.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendment.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.201--Scope

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.205--Derails

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to add language to this section 
designed to ensure that derails are maintained to function properly. 
The RSAC recommended these changes as additional safety features for 
train crews, as well as railroad employees working on and around 
tracks.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendments.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.231--Scope

    Proposed rule: The Track Working Group discussed this section and 
recommended that it remain as currently written.
    Comments: FRA received no comments.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the recommendation of the Track Working 
Group and this section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.233--Track Inspections

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed several changes to subsection (b). 
The five m.p.h. restriction over highway crossings is eliminated to 
permit safe operation of vehicles through highway traffic. However, the 
subsection would still require an inspector to perform an adequate 
inspection, regardless of how the inspector operates over the crossing. 
Also, the word ``switch'' is replaced by the word ``turnout'' to 
clarify the track device originally intended to be addressed in the 
regulation.
    The Track Working Group considered advising the RSAC to recommend 
specific speed restrictions for inspection vehicles. However, after 
several lengthy discussions, the group suggested instead that this 
subsection provide the individual inspector with sole discretion in 
determining vehicle speed based on track conditions, inspection 
requirements, and other circumstances that may vary from day to day and 
location to location. The group also suggested the insertion of a 
footnote at the end of this section which indicates this discretion is 
not limited by any other part of this section, and is extended to 
determine sight distance (``visibility remains unobstructed by any 
cause'') which is referenced in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this 
section.
    The existing language under subsection (b) does not specify how 
many tracks may be inspected in one pass of an inspection vehicle in 
multiple track territory. FRA has never issued interpretive language 
regarding this issue, opting to judge the overall effectiveness of the 
inspection program

[[Page 34012]]

rather than the specific manner in which it was conducted. The NPRM 
proposed to establish some guidelines for hyrail inspections conducted 
in multiple track territory.
    As a result, subsection (b), as proposed in the NPRM, contains 
additional language specifying the number of additional tracks that can 
be inspected, depending on whether one or two qualified individuals are 
in the vehicle, and depending on the distance between adjacent tracks 
measured between track centerlines. Inspectors may inspect multiple 
tracks from hy-rail vehicles only if their view of the tracks inspected 
is unobstructed by tunnels, differences in ground level, or any other 
circumstance that would prevent an unobstructed inspection of all the 
tracks they are inspecting. The revised subsection also requires 
railroad to traverse each main track bi-weekly and each siding monthly, 
and to so note on the appropriate track inspection records.
    With respect to the inspection frequency required in subsection 
(c), neither the Track Working Group nor the RSAC could reach agreement 
in determining a frequency requirement that would be based on speed, 
tonnage, or track usage. Therefore, the NPRM did not propose to change 
the language in this subsection.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendments. 
Several commenters suggested that the requirements that address 
inspections in multiple track territory should be more restrictive. 
Several commenters suggested that a maximum speed limit should be set 
when performing inspections for compliance with this part, one of which 
suggested a maximum speed of 15 m.p.h..
    Final rule: FRA believes that the appropriate vehicle inspection 
speed over a particular territory is subject to many variables, i.e., 
track condition, type of track construction, weather conditions, time 
of day, as well as many others which may only be apparent to the 
individual inspector at that moment in time. With this in mind, FRA 
believes that the appropriate vehicle speed for any particular set of 
conditions should be determined by the person performing the 
inspection, including those performed in multiple track territory. The 
final rule provides for the inspector's discretion as it involves 
inspection speed and sight distance.
    This final rule also changes this section by cross-referencing 
excepted track in the Sec. 213.233(c) table for required inspection 
frequency.

Section 213.235--Inspection of Switches, Track Crossings, and Lift Rail 
Assemblies or Other Transition Devices on Moveable Bridges

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to change subsection (a) by adding 
the word ``turnout'' after the word ``switch'' to clarify the track 
device and the intent of the requirement which is to inspect the entire 
turnout. The word ``switch'' is retained to include switch point 
derails or any other device which is not considered a full turnout.
    The NPRM proposed a second sentence to be added to subsection (a) 
which reads, ``Each switch in Classes 3 through 5 track that is held in 
position only by the operating mechanism and one connecting rod shall 
be operated to all of its positions during one inspection in every 
three-month period.'' The nature of this type of switch requires a 
thorough inspection of the critical parts, some of which are non-
redundant. Thorough inspection is best accomplished by operating the 
switch mechanism to allow for a better inspection of these components. 
The phrase ``all positions'' is intended to cover slip switches and lap 
switches.
    In subsection (b), the word ``turnout'' is added after the word 
``switch'' for the same reasons explained above.
    Comments: Comments generally supported the proposed amendments. One 
commenter suggested that all switch mechanisms should be operated 
during inspections required under this section.
    Final rule: FRA believes that a requirement to operate all switch 
mechanisms on a monthly basis would be too burdensome on the industry, 
especially in some geographical locations that are subject to snow, 
ice, and freezing conditions for many months of the year.
    The final rule includes several changes to this section. On 
November 23, 1996, more than three weeks after the Track Working Group 
had submitted its recommendations for revision of the Track Safety 
Standards to the RSAC, an Amtrak passenger train derailed on the 
moveable bridge over the Hackensack River in Secaucus, New Jersey. This 
derailment was the result of a malfunctioning lift rail assembly which 
provides the transition from the moveable span to the fixed span on the 
bridge. Because of this derailment, FRA believes that transition 
devices on moveable bridges should be addressed in the revised Track 
Safety Standards.
    Therefore, this final rule adds moveable bridge lift rail 
assemblies and other transition devices to the inspection requirements 
in this section. This section adds only a requirement to visually 
inspect on foot; it is not intended to impose additional functional 
requirements for bridge lift rail assemblies beyond what is already 
required by the Track Safety Standards. However, FRA considers these 
assemblies to be no less critical than switches or track crossings, and 
they should be subject to monthly on-foot visual inspections by a 
person qualified under Sec. 213.7.
    In addition, this section is restructured in order to reference the 
operation of specified switch operating mechanisms in a separate 
subsection (b). This change is designed to emphasize the importance of 
these non-redundant mechanisms.

Section 213.237--Inspection of Rail

    Proposed rule: Under existing subsection (a), the Track Safety 
Standards require Classes 4 and 5 track, as well as Class 3 track over 
which passenger trains operate, to be tested annually for internal rail 
defects. This requirement was established at a time when main line 
freight traffic was considerably lighter than it is today. At the time 
the original standards were drafted, test frequencies generally equated 
to intervals between 15 and 20 million gross tons (MGTs), although 
there existed some track that carried 40 MGTs or more in one year. As a 
matter of practice, railroads generally test more often than presently 
required under the standards, with intervals between tests typically 
ranging from 20 to 30 MGTs. These typical intervals define a good 
baseline for generally accepted maintenance practices, and the 
industry's rail quality managers consider these limits as points of 
departure for adjustment of test schedules to account for the effects 
of specific track characteristics, maintenance, traffic, and weather.
    The NPRM proposed to leave unchanged the present annual test 
requirement for Classes 4 and 5 track and Class 3 track over which 
passenger trains operate, based on risk factors associated with freight 
train speeds and passenger train operations. However, with the high 
utilization trackage that now exists on Class 1 freight railroads, the 
original requirement based solely on the passage of time, without 
regard to tonnage, is no longer adequate.
    Selecting an appropriate frequency of rail testing is a complex and 
somewhat controversial task involving many different factors including 
temperature differential, curvature, residual stresses, rail sections, 
and cumulative tonnage. Taking into consideration all of the above 
factors, FRA's research suggests

[[Page 34013]]

that 40 MGTs is the maximum tonnage that can be hauled between rail 
tests and still allow a safe window of opportunity for detection of an 
internal rail flaw before it propagates in size to service failure. The 
NPRM proposed that intervals be set at once per year or 40 MGTs, 
whichever is shorter, for Classes 4 and 5 track and for Class 3 track 
over which passenger trains operate.
    The NPRM also proposed that Class 3 trackage not supporting 
passenger traffic be subject to testing for internal rail defects. 
FRA's Accident/Incident data point to a need for inclusion of all Class 
3 trackage in a railroad's rail testing program. Therefore, the NPRM 
proposed to add a requirement that Class 3 track over which passenger 
trains do not operate be tested once a year or once very 30 MGTs, 
whichever is longer.
    The NPRM proposed the limit of once a year or 30 MGTs because a 
more frequent testing cycle or a cycle identical to that proposed for 
Classes 4 and 5 track would be too burdensome for the industry. The 
proposed limits are designed to give short line railroads and low 
tonnage branch lines some relief from the introduction of a new 
regulatory requirement and still reduce the present risks associated 
with not testing Class 3 track at all.
    The NPRM also proposed the addition of subsections (d) and (e). 
Subsection (d) addresses the case where a valid search for internal 
rail defects could not be made because of rail surface conditions. 
Several types of technologies are presently employed to continuously 
search for internal rail defects, some with varying means of displaying 
and monitoring search signals. A continuous search is intended to mean 
an uninterrupted search by whatever technology is being used, so that 
there are no segments of rail which are not tested. If the test is 
interrupted, i.e., as a result of rail surface conditions which inhibit 
the transmission or return of the signal, then the test over that 
segment of rail may not be valid because it was not continuous. 
Therefore, as proposed in the NPRM, a non-test is not defined in 
absolute technical terms. Rather, the provision leaves this judgment to 
the rail test equipment operator who is uniquely qualified on that 
equipment.
    As proposed in the NPRM, subsection (e) specifies the options 
available to a railroad following a non-test due to rail surface 
conditions. These options must be exercised prior to the expiration of 
time or tonnage limits specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendments.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section 213.239--Special Inspections

    Proposed rule: The RSAC recommended no change to this section, and 
likewise, the NPRM proposed no change to the language in the 
regulation. However, the preamble of the NPRM provided an explanation 
of agency policy interpreting the section.
    Comments: One commenter referred to the Notice of Safety Advisory 
97-1, issued by FRA on September 4, 1997. See 62 FR 46793. The 
commenter recommended that the provisions contained in the advisory be 
adopted as regulations under this section.
    Because of a number of fairly recent train derailments caused by 
unexpected track damage from moving water, FRA deemed it appropriate to 
issue the safety advisory to provide railroads with recommended 
procedures that reflect best industry practice for special track 
inspections. The procedures include: (1) prompt notification of 
dispatchers of expected bad weather; (2) limits on train speed on all 
track subject to flood damage, following the issuance of a flash flood 
warning, until special inspection can be performed; (3) identification 
of bridges carrying Class 4 or higher track which are vulnerable to 
flooding and over which passenger trains operate; (4) availability of 
information about each bridge, such as identifying marks, for those who 
may be called to perform a special inspection; (5) training programs 
and refresher training for those who perform special inspections; and 
(6) availability of a bridge maintenance or engineering employee to 
assist the track inspectors in interpreting the inspectors' findings.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM, and does 
not incorporate the procedures outlined in the Notice of Safety 
Advisory 97-1. As it stated in that advisory, FRA believes that this 
section is necessarily general in nature, because it is not practical 
to specify in a minimum safety standard all the conditions which could 
trigger a special inspection, nor the manner in which any particular 
special inspection should be conducted. Of course, all such inspections 
should be conducted so as to effectively prevent derailments, and the 
procedures included in the safety advisory are designed to aid 
railroads in performing effective inspections.
    Although this section contains a sample list of surprise events 
that routinely occur in nature, FRA does not view this provision as 
limited to only the occurrences listed or to only natural disasters. 
The section addresses the need to inspect after ``other occurrences'' 
which include such natural phenomena as temperature extremes, as well 
as unexpected events that are human-made, e.g., a vehicle that falls on 
the tracks from an overhead bridge, a water main break that floods a 
track roadbed, or terrorist activity that damages track. This 
interpretation is not new; FRA has always viewed this section to 
encompass sudden events of all kinds that affect the safety and 
integrity of track.

Section 213.241--Inspection Records

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to change the requirement that 
railroads retain a record of each track inspection at division 
headquarters for at least one year. When this provision in subsection 
(b) was first written, railroads maintained many division headquarters 
throughout their systems, making it relatively convenient for railroads 
to maintain inspection records at these locations. Over the years, 
however, railroads consolidated many of their headquarters, often 
naming only a few locations as ``division headquarters.'' FRA has 
contended that maintaining inspection records in only a few locations 
over a system that may include thousands of miles of track was not in 
keeping with the spirit of the regulation. Railroads have argued, on 
the other hand, that compelling them to maintain headquarters for no 
other purpose than to store records was a burdensome requirement.
    The NPRM proposed to allow railroads to designate a location within 
100 miles of each state where records can be viewed by FRA track 
inspectors following 10 days notice by FRA. The provision does not 
require the railroads to maintain the records at these designated 
locations, only to be able to provide viewing of them at the locations 
within 10 days after notification. The proposal stipulates locations 
within 100 miles of each state, rather than locations in each state, to 
accommodate those railroads whose operations may cross a state's line 
by only a few miles. In those cases, the railroad could designate a 
location in a neighboring state, provided the location is within 100 
miles of that state's border.
    A change to subsection (c) requires a track owner to record any 
locations where a proper rail inspection cannot be performed because of 
rail surface conditions. A new provision at Sec. 213.237(d) specifies 
that if rail surface conditions prohibit the railroad from conducting a 
proper search for rail defects, a test of that rail does not fulfill 
the requirements of Sec. 213.237(a) which requires a search for 
internal defects at

[[Page 34014]]

specific intervals. The new language in subsection (c) of this section 
requires a recordkeeping of those instances.
    The NPRM also proposed to add a provision for maintaining and 
retrieving electronic records of track inspections. Patterned after an 
experimental program successfully tried by the former Atchison Topeka & 
Santa Fe Railroad with oversight by FRA, the provision in subsection 
(e) allows each railroad to design its own electronic system as long as 
the system meets the specified criteria to safeguard the integrity and 
authenticity of each record. The provision also requires that railroads 
make available paper copies of electronic records when needed by FRA or 
by railroad track inspectors.
    Comments: Comments supported the proposed amendments.
    Final rule: The rule is adopted as proposed by the NPRM.

Section by Section Analysis--High Speed Track Standards

Section 213.301--Scope of Subpart

    Proposed rule: Subpart G applies to track required to support the 
passage of passenger and freight equipment in specific speed ranges 
higher than those permitted over Class 5 track. For those speeds above 
Class 5, the track and the vehicles operated on the track must be 
considered as an integral system. Of course, conventional passenger 
equipment has been operated for decades by many railroads at speeds up 
to 110 m.p.h. and on the Northeast Corridor by Amtrak and its 
predecessors at speeds up to 125 m.p.h. This subpart does not apply to 
technologies such as magnetic levitation that do not use flanged wheel 
equipment.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: A minor change in this section clarifies that Subpart G 
begins at a speed greater than 90 miles per hour (not at 91 miles per 
hour) for qualified passenger equipment and a speed greater than 80 
miles per hour (not 81 miles per hour) for qualified freight equipment.

Section 213.303--Responsibility for Compliance

    Proposed rule: Only two response options are available under this 
paragraph. Track owners who know or have notice of non-compliance with 
this subpart may either bring the track into compliance with the 
subpart or halt operations over that track. This section does not offer 
the railroad the option of operating under this subpart with the 
supervision of a qualified person, as in the standards for track 
Classes 1 through 5. Such an option would permit too much opportunity 
for disaster from human error. Under this subpart, if a track does not 
comply with the requirements of its class, it must be repaired 
immediately or train speeds must be reduced to the maximum speed for 
the track class with which the track complies. It may be necessary on 
occasion for the track owner to reduce the class of track to Class 5 or 
below. When this occurs, the requirements for the lower classes (1-5) 
will apply.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: FRA decided to delete the proposed subsection (d), 
which discussed directed service by the Surface Transportation Board, 
because this provision is not needed in the high speed context.
    FRA decided to add a new subsection (d) of this section to include 
in the category of those responsible for compliance with the track 
standards those who perform the function of complying with the 
standards, not just the track owner. This is consistent with the 
counterpart regulation for Classes 1 through 5 track in Sec. 213.5(f). 
It conforms to the authority given FRA by the statute. See 49 U.S.C. 
21301 and 1 U.S.C. 1.

Section 213.305--Designation of Qualified Individuals; General 
Qualifications

    Proposed rule: Work on or about a track structure supporting 
qualified high speed passenger trains demands the highest awareness of 
employees about the need to perform work properly.
    A person may be qualified to perform restorations and renewals 
under this subpart in three ways. First, the person may combine five or 
more years of supervisory experience in track maintenance for track 
Class 4 or higher and the successful completion of a course offered by 
the employer or by a college level engineering program, supplemented by 
special on-the-job training. Second, a person may be qualified by a 
combination of at least one year of supervisory experience in track 
maintenance of Class 4 or higher, 80 hours of specialized training or 
in a college level program, supplemented with on-the-job training. 
Under the third option, a railroad employee with at least two years of 
experience in maintenance of high speed track can achieve qualification 
status by completing 120 hours of specialized training in maintenance 
of high speed track, provided by the employer or by a college level 
engineering program, supplemented by special on-the-job training.
    Similarly, a person may be qualified to perform track inspections 
in Classes 6, 7, 8 and 9 by attaining five or more years of experience 
in inspection in track Class 4 or higher and by completing a course 
taught by the employer or by a college level engineering program, 
supplemented by special on-the-job training. Or, the person may be 
qualified by attaining a combination of at least one year of experience 
in track inspection in Class 4 and higher and by successfully 
completing 80 hours of specialized training in the inspection of high 
speed track provided by the employer or by a college level engineering 
program, supplemented with on-the-job training. Finally, a person may 
be qualified by attaining two years of experience in track maintenance 
in Class 4 and above and by successfully completing 120 hours of 
specialized training in the inspection of high speed track provided by 
the employer or by a college level engineering program, supplemented by 
special on-the-job training provided by the employer with emphasis on 
the inspection of high speed track. The third option is intended to 
provide a way for employees with two years of experience in the 
maintenance of high speed track to gain the necessary training to be 
qualified to inspect track.
    For both categories of qualifications, the person must have 
experience in Class 4 track or above. To properly maintain and inspect 
Class 4 track or higher requires a level of knowledge of track geometry 
and track conditions that are not as readily obtained at lower classes. 
Persons who are qualified for high speed track must know how to work, 
maintain, and measure high quality track. Experience in Class 4 track 
is established as a lower limit to provide a pool of candidates, that 
may be drawn from freight railroads, who would provide the necessary 
experience on well-maintained track.
    This section also includes specific requirements for qualifications 
of persons charged with maintaining and inspecting CWR. Training of 
employees in CWR procedures is essential for high speed operations. 
Each person inspecting and maintaining CWR must understand how CWR 
behaves and how to prevent track buckles and other adverse track 
reactions to thermal and dynamic loading.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: A minor change to subsection (e) has been made to 
clarify that records must be maintained for those employees qualified 
to supervise movements over broken rails.

[[Page 34015]]

Section 213.307--Class of Track: Operating Speed Limits

    Proposed rule: For several years, passenger service on the 
Northeast Corridor has operated at 125 m.p.h. under conditional waivers 
granted by FRA. Amtrak has established specific procedures for this 
category of speed from which the railroad industry has accumulated 
valuable knowledge about track behavior in this speed range. The speed 
of 125 m.p.h. is the natural boundary for the maximum allowable 
operating speed for Class 7 track. Because trainsets have operated in 
this country at speeds up to 160 m.p.h. for periods of several months 
under waivers for testing and evaluation, the maximum limit of 160 
m.p.h. is established for Class 8. In the next several years, certain 
operations may achieve speeds of up to 200 m.p.h. Class 9 track is 
established for this possibility. The exceptions for the maximum 
allowable operating speeds for each class of track parallels the 
standards for the lower classes, except that a speed of 10 m.p.h over 
the maximum intended operating speeds is permitted during the 
qualification phase per Section 213.345.
    Although high speed rail is most often considered in terms of 
passenger travel, non-passenger high speed train service (e.g., the 
mail trains operated by Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor) is also a 
possibility. All equipment, whether used for passenger or freight, must 
demonstrate the same vehicle/track performance and be qualified on the 
high speed track. Hazardous materials, except for limited and small 
quantities, may not move in bulk on trains operated at high speeds. The 
limitations noted are similar to those involved in commercial passenger 
and freight air travel.
    Comments: The Florida Overland eXpress commented that a reference 
to that project in the section-by-section analysis of the NPRM may seem 
to erroneously suggest that the requirements established for Class 9 
track apply to that project.
    Final rule: FRA agrees that the language in the preamble to the 
NPRM may have been confusing. This analysis clarifies that Subpart G is 
not applicable to the Florida Overland eXpress. The proposed rule 
itself did not reference that proposed operation, so the language in 
the rule remains unchanged for the final rule.
    FRA does not presently foresee authorization of mixed passenger and 
conventional freight operations above 150 m.p.h. Accordingly, passenger 
equipment safety standards, as proposed, address equipment for speeds 
only to 150 m.p.h. FRA expects to handle service above 150 m.p.h. 
through rules of particular applicability. Nevertheless, standards 
contained here are useful benchmarks for future planning with respect 
to track/vehicle interaction, track structure, and inspection 
requirements.

Section 213.309--Restoration or Renewal of Track Under Traffic 
Condition

    Proposed rule: This section addresses two elements of concern: (1) 
that the stability of the track structure not be significantly degraded 
and (2) that roadway worker safety not be compromised. For restoration 
under traffic conditions, this section allows only track maintenance 
that does not affect the safe passage of trains and involves the 
replacement of worn, broken, or missing components or fastenings or 
minor levels of spot surfacing.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.311--Measuring Track Under Load; section 213.317 Waivers; 
section 213.319 Drainage

    Proposed rule: Proposed language for these sections is identical to 
the similar sections for track Classes 1 to 5 (Secs. 213.13, 213.17, 
and 213.33).
    Comments: Refer to the corresponding sections in classes 1-5 for 
comments.
    Final rule: The sections as proposed are adopted in this final 
rule, with minor language changes to Sec. 213.317.

Section 213.321--Vegetation

    Proposed rule: These sections are identical to the corresponding 
sections in the standards for track Classes 1 though 5.
    Comments: Refer to the corresponding sections in classes 1-5 for 
comments.
    Final rule: The section as proposed is adopted in this final rule.

Section 213.323--Track Gage

    Proposed rule: This section introduces limits for change in gage. 
Analysis has shown that an abrupt change in gage can produce 
significant wheel forces at high speeds. The minimum and maximum limits 
for gage values Classes 6, 7, 8 and 9 were set to minimize the onset of 
truck hunting.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: With the exception of one minor change, the section as 
proposed is adopted in this final rule. The title of the heading in the 
fourth column of the gage table was changed from ``the change of gage 
in 31 feet'' to ``the change of gage within 31 feet'' to clarify that 
the change of gage parameter applies between two points anywhere within 
a 31-foot distance along the track, including two points exactly 31 
feet apart.

Section 213.327--Alinement

    Proposed rule: Uniformity is established by averaging the offset 
values for nine points centered around each point along the track at a 
spacing specified in the table. Uniformity defined in this way applies 
anywhere--curves, tangent segments, and spirals. Analysis has shown 
that points in transition areas such as around the ``point-of-spiral-
to-curve'' can be included in this averaging technique. No distinction 
is made as to where the uniform calculation takes place. Tangent, 
curve, and spiral transitions have historically been difficult to 
determine in the field. The use of the uniformity filter obviates the 
need to make determinations based on the identification of these 
transitions.
    This section provides three chord lengths for different types of 
vehicle/track interaction modes. Chords of 31-, 62-, and 124-foot 
lengths provide control of single and multiple defects in the 
wavelength bands most likely to affect vehicle dynamics and ride 
quality.
    The 62-foot chord was selected because of its proximity to the 
truck center spacing of most high speed passenger vehicles. In phase 
carbody resonance modes such as bounce, roll and sway are most affected 
by track anomalies with a wavelength that is near the truck center 
spacing. Control of track geometry limits based on the 62-foot chord 
will help reduce the magnitude of such carbody motion. This chord also 
is predominantly used for track Classes 1 through 5 and is familiar to 
track inspection and maintenance personnel.
    The 31-foot chord controls short wavelength defects that can result 
in high wheel forces over a short portion of track. These forces may 
not produce excessive carbody motion, yet their action on the wheels 
and truck may cause derailment. Most foreign high speed railroads use a 
10-meter chord which is approximately equal in length to the 31-foot 
chord required in this section.
    To control longer wavelengths, most foreign high speed railroads 
use a 30- or 40-meter chord. The 124-foot chord, which is approximately 
equal to a 40-meter chord, provides a means to locate and measure 
longer wavelength track anomalies. These long-wavelength

[[Page 34016]]

anomalies provide dynamic input to the high speed rail vehicles and can 
excite carbody resonance modes at high speeds. Excessive carbody motion 
can lead to poor carbody accelerations and wheel/rail forces, and in 
the extreme, may also cause derailment.
    Addition of this chord length allows measurement of anomalies with 
wavelengths up to 300 feet. The Japanese National Railway adopted a 40-
meter chord after recent speed increases on its Tokaido line. Research 
and testing indicated a stronger correlation between carbody motion and 
track geometry limits based on 40-meter mid-chord offsets.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: The final rule includes two changes to limits shown in 
the alinement tables. The permissible limit for track Class 9 for a 
single alinement deviation for a 124-foot chord is changed from one-
half inch to three-quarters inch, and the Class 9 limit for three or 
more non-overlapping deviations for a 124-foot chord is changed from 
three-eighths to one-half inch. The limits for these two parameters 
shown in the NPRM were overly conservative, based on the 
recommendations of the technical experts who worked with the task group 
that developed the proposed high speed standards. These recommendations 
are contained in the report, ``Track and Vehicle-Track Interaction 
Safety Assurance for U.S. High Speed Rail'', July 1997, which is 
contained in the public docket for these proceedings.

Section 213.329--Curves, Elevation and Speed Limitations

    Proposed rule: The determination of the maximum speed that a 
vehicle may operate around a curve is based on the degree of curvature, 
actual elevation, and amount of unbalanced elevation where the actual 
elevation and curvature are derived by a moving average technique. This 
approach is as valid in the high speed regime as in the lower classes. 
The moving average technique recognizes the steady state (one or two 
second duration) nature of the Vmax formula.
    The maximum operating speed for each curve is determined by the 
Vmax formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.000

where:

Vmax = Maximum allowable operating speed (miles per hour).
Ea = Actual elevation of the outside rail (inches).
Eu = Unbalance elevation or cant deficiency
D = Degree of curvature (degrees).

    While the cant deficiency proposed in Classes 1 through 5 is three 
or four inches, cant deficiencies proposed for qualified high speed 
train are considerably higher. FRA has granted waivers for up to nine 
inches for revenue service and up to twelve inches for testing for 
qualified equipment. Higher cant deficiencies are allowed for high 
speed trains that may include tilting systems. The qualification 
testing will ensure that the vehicle will not exceed the vehicle/track 
safety performance limits set forth in this subpart when operating at 
these higher cant deficiencies.
    In order to qualify the vehicle at higher cant deficiencies, the 
railroad must provide technical testing information using the same 
procedures that have been used in past years for waivers for higher 
cant deficiencies. This procedure is commonly called the ``static lean 
test'' where the vehicle is elevated on one side and wheel loads are 
measured and the roll angle is determined. Based on acceptable testing 
information and other technical submissions, FRA will approve the 
higher cant deficiencies for the specific vehicle type.
    The maximum crosslevel on the outside of a curve is established at 
seven inches. Elevation in excess of that amount presents a safety 
consideration for freight trains with high centers of gravity, 
operating at lower speeds in the curve.
    Comments: The Bombardier GEC Alsthom Consortium (Bombardier/GEC) 
commented that this section permits FRA to approve a higher of level of 
cant deficiency, but the same option does not exist for track classes 1 
through 5. Furthermore, Bombardier/GEC urged that the requirements 
concerning the roll angle between the floor of the vehicle and the 
horizontal should be deleted and explained that this method was not 
valid for non-tilting equipment.
    Final rule: FRA agrees that the concept of the roll angle would not 
apply to non-tilting power cars and has changed paragraphs (d)(1) and 
(2) to apply the requirements for the roll angle only to passenger-
carrying equipment. FRA has changed Sec. 213.57 in track Classes 1 
through 5 to address the commenter's concern.
    FRA has deleted footnote 2 from paragraph (f) of this section 
because it is no longer necessary. If a waiver previously has been 
granted to the railroad to operate at a higher level of cant 
deficiency, the railroad or FRA should have the static lean and other 
information readily available for consideration of FRA approval 
required under this section. This will allow the present waiver, 
including conditional requirements not necessarily compatible with 
Subpart G, to be replaced with an FRA approval process which 
incorporates all necessary requirements under this new subpart.
    FRA considered the issue of the difference between a curve that has 
been introduced in high speed track as a result of maintenance or 
geometry degradation and a curve that was introduced by design. In 
either case, superelevation may or may not be present and trains may 
experience an unbalanced condition. FRA believes that the deviations 
from uniform profile and uniform alinement, as outlined in sections 
213.331 and 213.327, will not preclude longer wavelength misalinements 
on the order of 200 feet or greater that resemble the characteristics 
of a curve, from being treated as a curve for which the unbalance 
formula defined in this section will be applied.

Section 213.331--Track Surface

    Proposed rule: The chord lengths in the table are selected for the 
same reasons discussed in Sec. 213.327 (alinement). The multiple chords 
measure different surface anomaly wavelengths.
    The surface table addresses both single and multiple events. 
Studies have shown that the smaller limits are necessary when surface 
anomalies repeat themselves three more times over the specified chord 
length. The parameter commonly called ``warp,'' the difference in 
crosslevel between any two points, does not require a specific limit 
for repeated warp conditions at high speeds.
    Comments: Bombardier/GEC and the French Ministere de l'Equipment, 
des Transports et du Logement separately expressed concerns that the 
limits for track geometry have been extended from the present class 6 
standards, permitting more track defects in the high speed track 
classes. As an example, Bombardier/GEC said that the proposed rule 
would permit a single 1.25 inch mid-ordinate offset on a 62 ft. chord 
for a profile condition, compared to the current requirement of 0.5 
inch. In addition, Bombardier/GEC questioned why the difference in 
crosslevel between two points less than 62 feet apart is lower for 
Classes 4 and 5 track than it is for Classes 6 through 9 track. 
Bombardier/GEC urged that the values for all the geometry limits be 
``verified by industry'' before the rule is

[[Page 34017]]

promulgated. The Bombardier/GEC also pointed out that the titles in the 
tables defining surface requirements should not have the ``inches'' in 
them since class of track is not defined in inches.
    The AAR commented that the NPRM included an inconsistency between 
Sec. 213.63 for track Classes 1 to 5 and Sec. 213.331 in regard to 
repeated low joints. The AAR suggested that footnote 2 to the warp 
parameter (the difference in crosslevel between any two points less 
than 62 feet apart) should apply to Sec. 213.331 for track Classes 6 
through 9. The AAR notes that a condition which is a defect in track 
Classes 1 through 5 should also be a defect in the higher track 
classes.
    Final rule: FRA has adopted the proposed geometry standards except 
for a few changes in the limits for the track profile parameter. The 
changes in the profile parameters are based on a recent study conducted 
at the VNTSC.
    FRA believes it is crucial to revise the standards for Class 6 
track. Years of experience by Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor indicate 
a lack of correlation between the former Class 6 standards and adverse 
vehicle responses. Adverse vehicle response occasionally occurred on 
track that was in compliance; on the other hand, track that was not in 
compliance sometimes did not contribute to any adverse vehicle 
response.
    In response to the concern that the ``warp parameter'' permits a 
greater difference in crosslevel between any two points less than 62 
feet apart for the higher classes than is permitted in the lower 
classes, FRA notes that the limit established for Classes 6 through 9 
track, one and one-half inches, is the same limit established for Class 
5 track. Therefore, FRA does not believe that a discrepancy exists. In 
addition, FRA believes the format in the surface tables in this section 
does not need modification since it is similar to the surface table in 
Sec. 213.63 for the lower classes, a format that has been used in the 
track standards for many years.
    The geometry standards are based on the recommendations of a panel 
of experts who conducted extensive studies, reviewed foreign practice, 
and recommended to the RSAC the safety limits shown in the proposed 
rule. The recommendations of this panel are contained in a working 
paper dated July, 1997, and entitled ``Track and Vehicle Interaction 
Safety Assurance for U.S. High Speed Rail.'' The working paper is part 
of the docket for this proceeding. The proposed high speed standards 
were based on the principle that the high speed track and the equipment 
operating on high speed track are an integral system.
    Following the publication of the NPRM, the VNTSC completed a report 
entitled ``Evaluation of Proposed High Speed Track Surface Geometry 
Specification'', dated November 10, 1997, which is in the docket of 
these proceedings. The study describes an evaluation of the responses 
of different high speed locomotive designs to track profile geometry 
variations. The working paper focuses on a comparative analysis of high 
speed locomotive designs with carbody-mounted traction motors and 
locomotive designs with truck-mounted traction motors. The minimum 
amplitudes of track profile variations required to cause excessive 
vertical accelerations in the operator's cab and to cause suspension 
bottoming are compared with the maximum amplitudes prescribed in the 
proposed high speed standards. The analysis shows that a locomotive 
design with truck-mounted traction motors requires an approximately 33 
percent smaller track profile variation amplitude to cause excessive 
vertical accelerations than a locomotive design with carbody-mounted 
traction motors. These results indicate that a locomotive with truck-
mounted traction motors may exceed the proposed minimum safety limits 
for a single profile event that were proposed in the NPRM for Subpart 
G.
    In light of those findings, FRA has adopted the proposed surface 
limits contained in the NPRM, except that the geometry limits for 
profile are reduced, based on the results of the VNTSC study. This 
final rule requires that the deviation from uniform profile on either 
rail at the midordinate of a 31-foot chord may not exceed one inch for 
track Classes 6 and 7. The deviation from uniform profile on either 
rail at the midordinate of a 62-foot chord has now been set to one inch 
for track Classes 6, 7 and 8 and three-quarters of an inch for track 
Class 9. Similarly, for three or more non-overlapping deviations in 
track surface, each deviation from uniform profile on either rail at 
the midordinate of a 31-foot chord may not exceed three-quarters of an 
inch for track Classes 6 and 7. Also, for three or more non-overlapping 
deviation in track surface, each deviation from uniform profile on 
either rail at the midordinate of a 62-foot chord has been changed to 
three-quarters for track Classes 6, 7 and 8 and one-half inch for track 
Class 9.
    FRA concurs with the comments made by the AAR in regard to repeated 
low joints. For consistency with Sec. 213.63, footnote two with a minor 
modification has been added to the table in Sec. 213.331(a).

Section 213.333--Automated Vehicle Inspection Systems

    Comments were received from Amtrak and from Bombardier/GEC in 
regard to the proposed requirements for automated measurement systems. 
These systems include the track geometry measurement system, the gage 
restraint measurement system, and the systems necessary to monitor 
vehicle/track interaction (acceleration and wheel/rail force 
requirements). Because of the complexity of these systems and the 
technical nature of the comments, the following discussion addresses 
each automated measurement system separately in the order of the 
paragraphs in the proposed rule.

Track Geometry Measurement System (TGMS), Paragraphs (a) Through (g)

    Proposed rule: Railroads that operate trains at speeds above 110 
m.p.h. universally employ automatic track geometry measuring systems to 
generate data to point out train safety hazards in the track structure. 
Reliance upon only visual inspections to locate small track 
irregularities is difficult. In France, track geometry measuring 
vehicles are operated quarterly over high speed lines for the purpose 
of collecting track maintenance data.
    Comments: Comments were received concerning the track geometry 
system.
    Final rule: No changes to paragraphs (a) through (g) were made in 
the final rule.

Gage Restraint Measurement System, Paragraphs (h) and (i)

    Proposed rule: The GRMS is primarily used on timber-tied track of 
certain freight railroads, to evaluate the effectiveness, on a 
continuous basis, of rail/tie fastening systems. This section requires 
the use of GRMS in Classes 8 and 9 to measure the gage restraint of the 
track, including the strength of the ties and the ability of the 
fastenings to maintain gage. Specified safety limits were established 
after testing on the Northeast Corridor where the track is 
predominately concrete-tied with timber tie turnouts. GRMS on concrete 
ties is effective in identifying defective ties and conditions with 
missing fasteners or a relaxation of toe load of gage-side rail 
fasteners. GRMS is required in Classes 8 and 9 to measure the 
resistance of the track to forces generated by wheel flanging in the 
gaging space. The use of the GRMS is necessary to insure sufficient 
gage restraint at the gage limits set to control truck hunting.
    Comments: Bombardier/GEC commented that the GRMS requirements are 
unnecessary. It stated

[[Page 34018]]

that the GRMS could be a beneficial tool when used to inspect lower 
classes of track built with wooden ties, and any requirement for 
regular GRMS inspection should be limited to lower track classes and 
tracks with wooden ties where a cost/safety benefit can be shown.
    Final rule: FRA does not agree with the recommendation that the 
GRMS be restricted to timber-tied track. While most of the industry's 
GRMS experience has been on timber-tied track, FRA and Amtrak jointly 
conducted a program to evaluate the performance of FRA's GRMS on the 
Northeast Corridor, a route with large numbers of concrete ties. This 
joint evaluation program indicated that the GRMS is an important safety 
tool for the measurement of gage restraint in concrete ties, as well as 
timber ties. The evaluation program also concluded that the optimum 
GRMS safety criterion for concrete ties is the gage-widening ratio 
(GWR) which is based on the unloaded track gage, loaded track gage and 
actual lateral load applied.
    The GWR limit to the high speed standards is a completely different 
concept than the application of the GRMS technology discussed for the 
lower track classes. This preamble describes various proposals for 
implementation of GRMS technology for lower track classes, such as the 
use of a GRMS to supplant certain crosstie and fastener requirements in 
the track safety standards. While the GRMS is new to the high speed 
environment, FRA concludes that GRMS inspections in the higher classes 
is important to confirm the safety of crossties and fasteners. The GRMS 
is an important tool which has been proven to identify missing 
fasteners and help locate other conditions that can affect the ability 
of both timber and concrete crossties to maintain track gage.
    Paragraphs (h) and (i) are unchanged from the proposed rule with 
two exceptions. Since there is no requirement to calculate Projected 
Loaded Gage (PLG24) in Classes 8 and 9, the reference to PLG 24 has 
been removed from the final rule. Several other minor word changes have 
been made in the language of the rule text to agree with the current 
language being proposed by the GRMS Task Group.

Vehicle/Track Safety Measurement Systems, Paragraph (j)

    Proposed rule: The proposed rule required functional carbody and 
truck frame accelerometers on at least two vehicles of every train in 
track Classes 8 and 9. The track owner would be required to have in 
effect written procedures when these devices indicate a possible track-
related condition.
    Comments: Both Amtrak and Bombardier/GEC in separate comments state 
that the requirements in paragraph (j) are unnecessary. Both commenters 
objected to the requirement for accelerometers on every train, except 
for lateral truck frame accelerometers, and also objected to the 
requirement for written procedures for the notification of track 
personnel. The commenters argued that such a requirement would likely 
create significant availability problems for various operators due to 
the reliability of such permanently installed equipment.
    In its comments to the docket, Amtrak re-evaluated an earlier 
endorsement of a requirement for carbody accelerometers on every train 
and now recommends that this paragraph be replaced with a requirement 
for written procedures when on-board crews report indication of a 
possible track-related condition. Amtrak said that it had earlier 
assumed that these monitoring systems would be autonomous ``black 
boxes'' that would be on each train and report exception to the 
engineer or directly to the dispatcher. Amtrak said that further 
investigation into the application of this requirement raised doubts 
about the necessity for the frequency of the monitoring as well as the 
ability of an operator to ensure compliance with that frequency because 
``track deterioration is a slow process occurring over long periods of 
time.'' In addition, Amtrak stated that it has had in place for years a 
process by which engineers report rough track when they encounter it.
    Final rule: FRA has received widely differing opinions about the 
use of accelerometers on daily trains. Some experts point out that 
accelerometers on every train would be extremely useful to locate track 
conditions that may need correction. Other experts have differing 
opinions. The French National Railway (SNCF), for example, employs 
lateral truck-mounted accelerometers to address truck hunting on every 
train, but uses vertical and lateral carbody accelerometers only on a 
vehicle which inspects about twice each month. Those who advocate 
accelerometers on two cars in every train believe that they may 
indicate a track-caused response if both vehicles exhibit similar 
readings. On the other hand, if only one vehicle shows a high 
acceleration, the cause may be attributed to the dynamics of that 
vehicle only, not the track. Some experts believe that a requirement to 
equip every train with carbody and truck frame accelerometers would be 
costly to implement and would have questionable safety benefits.
    However, many experts believe that a requirement for carbody and 
truck frame accelerometers on one train per day would accomplish 
several important safety goals that can not be achieved with a periodic 
program such as the one on the SNCF. The principal advantage is that 
conditions such as a culvert this is settling would be identified 
before the next periodic inspection.
    While FRA agrees with the commenters that lateral and vertical 
accelerometers on every train would be unnecessary and that track does 
generally deteriorate slowly, FRA believes that some undesirable track 
geometry conditions may occur between periodic inspections for geometry 
and vehicle/track safety. The engineer's subjective perception of rough 
track conditions would be enhanced with available technology. FRA 
concludes that a requirement for functioning carbody and truck-mounted 
accelerometers on at least one train per day is needed to address those 
conditions that may occur on a daily basis, such as a culvert which has 
settled or a track condition that may be inadvertently introduced 
during track repair. These conditions may not be noticeable to a 
locomotive engineer.
    The final rule is changed to require that at least one vehicle in 
one train per day operating in Classes 8 and 9 shall be equipped with 
functioning on-board truck frame and carbody accelerometers. Each track 
owner shall have in effect written procedures for the notification of 
track personnel when on-board accelerometers on trains in Classes 8 and 
9 indicate a possible track-related condition. The implementation of 
this requirement and the extent of human involvement in the process and 
the specific acceleration levels that would trigger notification of 
track personnel is being left up to the railroad.

Paragraph (k)

    Proposed rule: In paragraph (k), the proposed rule requires that 
for track Classes 7, 8 and 9, an instrumented car having dynamic 
response characteristics representative of other equipment assigned to 
service, or a portable device that monitors on-board instrumentation on 
trains, shall be operated over the track at the revenue speed profile 
at least twice within 60 days with not less than 15 days between 
inspections. The instrumented car or the portable device shall monitor 
vertically and laterally oriented accelerometers on the vehicle's floor 
level and lateral truck-mounted accelerometers. If the carbody lateral, 
carbody vertical, or truck frame lateral safety limits in this section 
are

[[Page 34019]]

exceeded, speeds will be reduced until these safety limits are not 
exceeded.
    Comments: Both Amtrak and Bombardier/GEC were generally supportive 
of this paragraph which requires periodic measurements of truck frame 
and carbody accelerations. Amtrak recommended that two vehicles be 
used, rather than one, and Bombardier/GEC questioned the requirement 
that the accelerometers be mounted above the axle where they would be 
subjected to damage from snow, ballast, and debris. Bombardier/GEC also 
stated that the rule should make clear what the remedial action should 
be taken when these limits are exceeded.
    Final rule: FRA agrees with the comments regarding the placement of 
the accelerometers and has revised the paragraph to clarify the 
remedial action that must be taken when these safety limits are 
exceeded. Paragraph (k) is changed to remove the requirement that the 
accelerometers on the truck frame shall be mounted ``directly above the 
axle.'' Instead the accelerometers must be mounted on the truck frame. 
While Amtrak's recommendation that two vehicles be equipped with the 
accelerometers, FRA concludes that one inspection vehicle when combined 
with the daily monitoring of accelerometers and the other inspection 
requirements in the rule, will provide the necessary level of safety. 
For clarification, the rule is changed to require that ``if the carbody 
lateral, carbody vertical or truck frame lateral safety limits in the 
following table of vehicle/track interaction safety limits are 
exceeded, speeds will be reduced until these safety limits are not 
exceeded.'' These changes clearly indicate that when the vehicle/track 
interaction safety limits are exceeded on the inspection vehicle, the 
speeds of all trains, not just the test train, shall be reduced until 
the source of the exception is corrected, whether track or vehicle-
related.

Paragraph (l)

    Proposed rule: In this proposed section, paragraph (l) would 
require, for track Classes 8 and 9, a car equipped with instrumented 
wheelsets to be operated annually to ensure that the wheel/rail force 
safety limits are not exceeded.
    Comments: Bombardier/GEC stated that the rule as proposed is not 
clear about whether the requirement for an annual measurement of wheel/
rail forces using instrumented wheelsets is intended to ``re-qualify 
the rolling stock, or verify the quality of the track.'' Bombardier/GEC 
stated that, based on the practices of all operators of high speed 
equipment around the world, there is no reason to re-qualify a vehicle 
design once it has been properly qualified. Bombardier/GEC also 
commented that if the intent of the measurement is to verify the 
condition of the track, it will be less effective as an indicator than 
information obtained from the other requirements in the rule that are 
specifically included for that purpose and which are conducted more 
frequently. Bombardier/GEC also recommended a few technical changes to 
the table of vehicle/track interaction safety limits.
    Final rule: The commenter recommends that the measurement of wheel/
rail forces is only necessary during the qualification period and is 
not necessary to be employed for periodic inspections. The SNCF relies 
on accelerometers for the purpose of confirming the safety of its high 
speed system; however, other high speed railroads use instrumented 
wheelsets on a regular basis to monitor wheel/rail forces. The final 
rule establishes safety criteria for both accelerometers and wheel/rail 
forces that must be monitored during the life of the system. FRA does 
not agree with the comment that accelerometer measurements alone will 
ensure safety.
    The vehicle/track interaction safety limits are the cornerstone of 
the high speed standards. Vehicle/track interaction has critical 
consequences in railroad safety, and so establishing safe parameters 
and developing a measurement system to adhere to those parameters is 
highly important for any track safety program. There are several 
hazardous and unacceptable vehicle/track interaction events that are 
well-known in railroad engineering, and for the most part, may occur on 
existing high speed operations, including wheel climb, rail roll-over, 
vehicle overturning, gage widening, and track panel shift.
    The safety limits contained in the Vehicle/Track Interaction Safety 
Limits table are derived from technical literature, years of research, 
experience by foreign railroads, and computer simulation and 
validation. They must not be exceeded either during the qualification 
phase required under Sec. 213.345 or in the periodic measurement of 
accelerations and wheel/rail forces required in this section.
    The minimum vertical wheel load safety limit is 10 percent of the 
static vertical wheel load. The static vertical wheel load is defined 
as the load that the wheel would carry while stationary on level track. 
These safety criteria assure that no excessive wheel unloading is 
experienced by any wheel on the operating vehicle. Significant wheel 
unloading greatly increases the risk of derailment in the dynamic 
environment of a vehicle traveling at high speed.
    The ratio of the lateral force that any wheel exerts on an 
individual rail to the vertical force exerted by the same wheel on the 
rail (L/V ratio) is limited by the Nadal formula. The limit on any 
wheel's L/V ratio ensures that the risk of a wheel climb derailment is 
minimized. The wheel flange angle () referenced in the formula 
should correspond to actual measurements of wheel flange angle as 
provided by the requirements of the vehicle qualification testing 
specified in Sec. 213.345.
    The net axle lateral force exerted by any axle on the track should 
not exceed 50 percent of the static vertical load exerted by the same 
axle. This safety criterion ensures that no excessive track panel shift 
or misalinement is produced by the moving vehicle. For vehicles 
operating at high speeds, track panel shift can produce unsafe carbody 
and/or truck motion and, in the extreme, can cause derailment.
    The ratio of the lateral forces that the wheels on one side of any 
truck exert on an individual rail to the vertical forces exerted by the 
same wheels on that rail must not exceed 0.60. This limit ensures that 
the risk of a rail rollover derailment is minimized.
    The lateral carbody peak-to-peak acceleration (defined by the 
algebraic difference between the two extreme values of measured 
acceleration within a one-second duration) is limited to 0.5 g. Carbody 
lateral accelerations above this limit reflect a very poor ride quality 
and a degraded track and/or vehicle condition.
    The vertical carbody peak-to-peak acceleration (defined by the 
algebraic difference between the two extreme values of measured 
acceleration within a one-second duration) is limited to 0.6 g. Carbody 
vertical accelerations above this limit also reflect a poor ride 
quality and a degraded track and/or vehicle condition.
    The Root Mean Square (RMS) of the lateral truck acceleration for 
any two-second duration is limited to 0.4 g. This safety limit ensures 
that no sustained truck hunting is experienced by the moving vehicle. 
Sustained truck hunting produces undesirable ride quality and 
significantly increases the risk of derailment. The RMS of the lateral 
truck acceleration must be calculated over a two-second window from 
which the mean value of the acceleration has been removed. The vertical 
truck zero-to-peak acceleration

[[Page 34020]]

is limited to 5.0 g. Exceeding this safety limit can indicate 
undesirable short wavelength track anomalies.
    Ultimately, vehicle/track interaction safety is assured by 
controlling wheel/rail forces to safe limits. Appropriate limits for 
track geometry and vehicle response acceleration provide strong 
indications of the likely wheel/forces which would be produced by 
operating trains. Use of an instrumented wheelset also provides a level 
of safety assurance for new and unusual vehicle designs that differ 
from the conventional vehicle dynamic models that were used to develop 
the track geometry and vehicle/track interaction limits.
    FRA believes that an annual inspection using functioning 
instrumented wheelsets must be implemented as part of a high speed 
inspection strategy that includes visual inspections, geometry car 
inspections, periodic carbody and truck-mounted accelerometer 
measurements, and other inspections deemed necessary.
    The measurement of wheel/rail forces and accelerations is necessary 
to confirm that the vehicle/track system is performing within safe 
limits. The Japanese National Railway, for example, employs 
instrumented wheelsets to measure wheel/rail forces at a frequency of 
approximately every three months. The purpose of the periodic 
measurement of wheel/rail forces required in this paragraph is to 
monitor, or in a sense ``requalify,'' the vehicle/track system, not to 
``requalify'' only the track or only the vehicle design. Neither the 
track nor the vehicles on the high speed track can be considered in 
isolation; they must be monitored together as a system.
    The final rule contains a few changes to the table of vehicle/track 
interaction safety limits. A 25 Hz filter is specified so that 
important high speed events will not be filtered from the data and the 
location of truck frame accelerometers is changed in Footnote 3.

Paragraph (m)

    Proposed: Paragraph (m) requires the track owner to maintain a copy 
of the most recent exception printouts for the inspection required 
under paragraphs (k) and (l) of this section.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this paragraph.
    Final rule: The paragraph as proposed is adopted in this final 
rule.

Section 213.335--Crossties

    Proposed rule: Various types of crossties may be installed in high 
speed track provided that the ties maintain the proper gage, surface 
and alinement. Slab track (track imbedded in concrete) or other 
construction may also be used if the construction complies with the 
requirements of this section. Because of the wide use of concrete ties 
in high speed track throughout the world, this section establishes 
safety requirements for concrete ties.
    The requirements for crossties in this subpart differ from those in 
the corresponding section for crossties in Classes 1 through 5. For 
non-concrete-tied construction, the requirements for ties parallel 
those of the lower standards except that permissive lateral movement of 
tie plates is set at \3/8\ inch instead of \1/2\ inch and a requirement 
for rail holding spikes is added.
    For concrete-tied track, effective ties must not exhibit the known 
failure modes listed. These failure modes were derived largely from 
experience in the Northeast Corridor. The number and distribution 
requirements of both non-concrete ties and concrete ties is more 
stringent than the requirements for the lower classes. For example, 14 
effective concrete crossties are required in Class 6, and 16 effective 
concrete ties are required in Classes 7, 8 and 9 in each 39-foot 
segment of track. For both concrete and timber construction, a minimum 
number of non-defective ties is specified on each side of a defective 
tie.
    Comments: The AAR commented that a discrepancy exists in that 
paragraph (e) is inconsistent with the required location of crossties 
at rail joint locations for lower speed operations covered by 
Sec. 213.109.
    Final rule: Review of this section also reveled a typographical 
mistake which is being corrected; in paragraphs (c)(6) and (d)(6), 
``Able'' is changed to ``So unable.'' The discrepancy was inadvertent 
and has been corrected. The measurement is changed from 25 inches to 24 
inches in paragraph (e) to make this subsection consistent with the 
requirements for the lower track classes.

Section 213.337--Defective Rails

    Proposed rule: The requirements for the identification of rail 
flaws and appropriate remedial action are valid in high speed track 
classes as well as the lower track classes. This section is unchanged 
from the standards for the lower classes except that language 
references to specific lower classes are deleted as unnecessary. 
Surface conditions such as corrugation, shelling, spalling and checking 
are not included in the high speed rail defect table since these 
conditions, if they were to progress to a severe level, would 
contribute to dynamic loading conditions that are addressed by the 
requirements for vehicle/track interaction in Sec. 213.333. The 
flattened rail head is especially important to identify in high speed 
track because of the adverse effect on track geometry caused by this 
short anomaly in the surface of the rail head.
    Comments: No comments were received pertaining to this section.
    Final rule: To improve clarity, definitions were added and a small 
change was made to include brackets around some items in the rail flaw 
table so that this section is identical to the corresponding section in 
the lower track classes.

Section 213.339--Inspection of Rail in Service

    Proposed rule: A continuous search for internal rail defects must 
be made of all rail in track in track Classes 6, 7, 8 and 9 at a 
frequency of twice per year. This requirement is consistent with the 
frequency used on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor (essentially, Class 6 and 
7) and as well as the approach used in France which inspects rails 
twice a year.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.341--Initial Inspection of New Rail and Welds

    Proposed rule: This section provides for the initial inspection of 
new rail, either at the mill or within 90 days after installation, and 
for the initial inspection of new welds made in new or used rail. It 
also provides for alternatives for these inspections. Compliance with 
the initial inspection of new rail and welds may be demonstrated by in-
service inspection, mill inspections, welding plant inspections, and 
inspections of field welds.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.343--Continuous Welded Rail (CWR)

    Proposed rule: As with CWR for the lower classes of track, FRA will 
review the railroad's written procedures for the installation, 
adjustment, maintenance and inspection of CWR, and training for the 
application of these procedures.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule is unchanged from the proposed rule for 
this section.

[[Page 34021]]

Section 213.345--Vehicle Qualification Testing

    Proposed rule: All rolling stock, both passenger and freight, must 
be qualified for operation for its intended class. This section 
``grandfathers'' equipment that has already operated in the specified 
classes. Rolling stock operating in Class 6 within one year prior to 
the promulgation of this rule shall be considered as qualified. 
Vehicles operating at Class 7 speeds under conditional waivers prior to 
the promulgation of the rule are qualified for Class 7 at the current 
level of cant deficiency. This includes equipment that is presently 
operating on the Northeast Corridor at Class 7 speeds.
    The qualification testing will ensure that the equipment will not 
exceed the vehicle/track performance limits specified in Sec. 213.333 
at any speed less than 10 m.p.h. above the proposed maximum operating 
speed. Testing at a maximum speed at least 10 m.p.h. above the proposed 
operating speed is required. The test report must include the design 
flange angle of the equipment that will be used for the determination 
of the lateral to vertical wheel load safety limit for the vehicle/
track performance measurements required in Sec. 213.333(k).
    Subsection (d) requires the operator to submit an analysis and 
description of the signal system and operating practices to govern 
operations in Classes 7, 8 and 9. This submission will include a 
statement of sufficiency in these areas for the class of operation 
intended. Based on test results and submissions, FRA will approve a 
maximum train speed and value of cant deficiency for revenue service.
    Comments: Bombardier/GEC stated that this part of the proposed rule 
is intended to be followed to qualify equipment types for their 
intended operation on a specific route, not to determine the operating 
limits of the equipment and track, as stated. Bombardier/GEC said that 
to achieve this, it is recommended that the words ``* * * and conduct a 
test program sufficient to evaluate the operating limits of the track 
and equipment'' be replaced with ``* * * and conduct a test program 
sufficient to evaluate the safe operation of the equipment for the 
intended service.''
    Bombardier/GEC said that it is not practical to include a 
requirement to suspend the vehicle qualification tests at the speed 
where any of the vehicle/track performance limits in Sec. 213.333 are 
exceeded. The qualification tests, according to Bombardier/GEC, should 
be completed to determine the safe operational limits for the equipment 
throughout the route. In addition, the specific location of all 
violations should be recorded and the condition of the track in those 
locations should be checked to determine if the non-compliance is 
related track or equipment.
    Final rule: FRA believes that it is important not to emphasize the 
vehicle component in the qualification testing. The purpose of this 
section is not to conduct a test program to evaluate the safe operation 
of the equipment, but to qualify the vehicle/track system. The 
consideration of the high speed track and the vehicles together as an 
integral system is fundamental to the approach adopted in this final 
rule. To evaluate the system, a test program shall demonstrate vehicle 
dynamic response as speeds are incrementally increased from acceptable 
Class 6 limits to the target maximum test speeds.
    The commenter believes that the tests should not be suspended when 
the safety limits are reached. However, these safety limits are set at 
levels where continued operation could result in a derailment. FRA does 
not believe it would be prudent to continue the testing on that portion 
of track if these safety limits are reached. However, the rule is not 
intended to imply that all testing must be stopped. It can continue, 
but the locations where the limits are reached must be identified and 
test speeds may not be increased at those locations until corrective 
action is taken. This action may be an adjustment in the track, in the 
vehicle, or in both of these system components.
    FRA has considered the consistency of this final rule with the 
proposed Passenger Equipment Safety Standards, Federal Register, 
September 23, 1997, and has changed Sec. 213.345(b) to state that the 
testing will not exceed the wheel/rail force safety limits and the 
truck lateral accelerations specified in Sec. 213.333 and the vertical 
and lateral carbody acceleration levels listed in (b)(1), (2), and (3). 
FRA believes the tighter ride quality limits in the proposed Passenger 
Equipment Safety Standards are more appropriate for a new system. 
However, as the equipment and track wear, those tighter ride quality 
limits which were used at the time of system qualification should be 
used to establish long-term maintenance levels, and the limits 
contained in Sec. 213.333, which are minimum safety levels, should be 
used during the life of the system to monitor safety.
    A small change has been added to Sec. 213.345(a) which now states 
that all rolling stock types which operate at Class 6 and above speeds 
shall be qualified. This change emphasizes that trains which operate at 
Class 5 speeds or lower on the high speed line do not need to be 
qualified to operate on the high speed track.
    The rule in Sec. 213.345(e) requires the railroad to submit an 
analysis and description of the signal system and operating practices 
to govern operations in Classes 7, 8 and 9. FRA has modified 
Sec. 213.345(f) to make it clear that trains shall not operate in 
revenue service until FRA has approved a maximum train speed and value 
of cant deficiency based on FRA's review of the test results and the 
other submissions by the track owner.

Section 213.347--Automotive or Railroad Crossings at Grade and Moveable 
Bridges

    Proposed rule: There are no highway or railroad grade crossings on 
the Amtrak route between Washington, D.C. and New York City. Much of 
this line is operated by revenue passenger trains at 125 m.p.h. (Class 
7 speeds). Highway crossings and railroad crossings at grade (diamonds) 
may not be present in Class 8 and 9 track.
    Technology currently is being developed that would prevent 
inappropriate intrusion of vehicles onto the railroad rights-of-way. 
This technology involves the use of barrier systems with intrusion 
detection and train stop, as well as advance warning systems. Because 
the technology is under development, it would be premature to include 
specific requirements for barrier systems and related technology in 
this section. However, the railroad is required to submit for approval 
a description of the crossing warning system for each crossing.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: A minor addition was added to paragraph (b) to make it 
clear that trains shall not operate at Class 7 speeds unless an FRA-
approved warning/barrier system exists on the track segment and all 
elements of that warning/barrier system are functioning.
    The rule precludes the presence of highway grade crossings and 
rail-to-rail crossings for the highest speed operations, track Classes 
8 and 9. Presently no highway-rail crossings exist on Class 6 track (on 
Amtrak and commuter railroads), although highway-rail crossings existed 
for several years on Class 6 track on the Northeast Corridor. FRA 
believes highway/grade crossings should be limited in the high speed 
regime. Where highway/rail crossings exist at higher speeds, the

[[Page 34022]]

railroad should install the most advance warning/barrier systems 
available.
    FRA is continuing to conduct risk analysis related to treatments 
for high-speed crossings. To date, the analysis demonstrates that risk 
to a motorist is not likely to increase with increasing train speeds 
above 110 m.p.h. On average, collision frequency should not rise 
(although sight distance may be an issue in individual situations). 
Accident severity in the range of 80 m.p.h. is already so high that no 
further increase in the likelihood of fatal injury in the motor vehicle 
should result from increases in train speed.
    However, FRA does not believe that sufficiently refined analytical 
techniques currently exist to predict the effect of increased speeds on 
damage to the passenger train through the initial collision, possible 
derailment, and possible secondary collisions-- including interaction 
among the units in the consist. Collisions with heavy trucks, 
construction equipment and agricultural equipment are an issue of 
particular concern. FRA believes it is prudent to take the safe course 
and ensure against collisions by the most secure means possible, rather 
than risk the occurrence of a catastrophic event involving multiple 
fatalities to crew members and passengers.

Section 213.349--Rail End Mismatch

    Proposed rule: Vertical or horizontal mismatch of rails at joints 
must be less than one-eighth of an inch for Classes 6 through 9. A more 
restrictive criterion is not necessary and would be impractical.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.351--Rail Joints

    Proposed rule: This section is less permissive than its counterpart 
for the lower speed classes. Fracture mechanics tests and analyses 
demonstrate that there is no place in the high speed train operating 
regime for defective joint bars. The propagation rate of a crack large 
enough to be visible in a joint bar is unpredictable. Once a joint bar 
has ruptured, its companion joint bar is immediately in danger of 
overload. Upon discovery of a defective joint bar, the track owner must 
reduce the track class at the location of the defective bar and proceed 
according to the requirements of Subpart D.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.352--Torch Cut Rail

    Proposed rule: This section mirrors the corresponding section 
(Sec. 213.122) track Classes 3 through 5. This provision prohibits 
future torch cutting of rails in high speed track, except for emergency 
situations. When a rail end is torch cut in an emergency situation, 
speed over the rail must not exceed the maximum allowable for Class 2 
track.
    For existing torch cut rails in Class 6 track, all torch cut rails 
must be removed within six months of the issuance of the final rule of 
this proceeding. If after six months from the issuance of the final 
rule of this proceeding any torch cut rail is discovered in Classes 6 
through 9 track, it must be removed within 30 days, and speed over that 
rail must not exceed the maximum allowable speed for Class 2 track 
until it is removed.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: After further review, FRA determined that the proposed 
requirement in Sec. 213.352(a)(2) requiring speeds in existing Class 7, 
8 and 9 track to be reduced to Class 6 until a torch cut rail is 
replaced is unnecessary and has been deleted. For existing torch cut 
rail ends in Class 6 track, all torch cut rail ends, if any, must be 
removed within six months of this rule. Following the six-month period, 
if torch cut rail ends are discovered, train speeds over that rail must 
be reduced to the maximum allowable for Class 2 track until removed.

Section 213.353--Turnouts, Crossovers and Lift Rail Assemblies or Other 
Transition Devices on Moveable Bridges

    Proposed rule: The requirements in this section are similar to 
those in the lower classes. Fastenings must be intact and maintained so 
as to keep the components securely in place. Each switch, frog, and 
guard rail must be free of obstructions that may interfere with the 
passage of wheels. Rail anchoring is required to restrain rail movement 
affecting the position of switch points and frogs.
    Experience in this country with the maintenance of turnouts and 
crossovers in high speed territories is limited. The use of 
conventional switch and frog components in present-day 125 m.p.h. track 
can produce harsh vehicle response which, while not necessarily unsafe, 
is likely to be less and less welcome in the future, particularly at 
train speeds above 125 m.p.h.
    Worldwide, the trend for turnouts and crossovers in high speed 
lines is toward reliance on long switch points and moveable point 
frogs. Amtrak has some limited experience with these features at fairly 
high train speeds, and the western coal railroads have a great deal of 
experience, especially with moveable point frogs, with turnout 
component performance in low speed, cumulative tonnage conditions. This 
section requires that the track owner, intending to operate trains at 
high speeds, to develop a turnout and inspection handbook for the 
instruction of employees involved in this work. Requirements for 
switches, frogs, and spring frogs that are present in the standards for 
the lower classes are not specifically listed, but will be addressed in 
the railroad's Guidebook.
    The purpose of such a document is to encourage formal consideration 
of problems associated with inspection and maintenance of these track 
features and to establish a consistent system approach to the 
performance of related work.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: FRA has added a requirement for the inspection and 
maintenance of lift rail assemblies and other transition devices on 
moveable bridges. By introducing this requirement, FRA is not 
encouraging high speeds over moveable bridges. Currently, the highest 
speed over a moveable bridge is 70 m.p.h. However, in view of the 1997 
accident over a lift rail assembly in New Jersey, FRA believes it 
necessary to introduce a requirement to inspect these transition 
devices in the high speed standards to address the potential that lift 
rail technology may change.

Section 213.355--Frog Guard Rails and Guard Faces; Gage

    Proposed rule: The most restrictive practical measurements for 
these important parameters are included. The limits for guard check and 
guard face gage are set at a limit that permits minimal wear.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.357--Derails

    Proposed rule: Because it is essential that railroad rolling stock 
be prevented from fouling the track in front of a high speed train, 
this section presents strict requirements for derails to be fully 
functional and linked to the signal systems.
    Comments: A railroad supplier commenting on the NPRM suggested that 
derails also serve to prevent encroachment of main tracks by

[[Page 34023]]

locomotives, trains or maintenance-of-way equipment under power, and 
should not be excepted only because of grade characteristics. The 
commenter suggested that a better approach would be to permit this 
exception only where grade characteristics are favorable (significant 
ascent toward the main track) and where trains are not permitted to 
clear the main track. The commenter said that turnouts or crossings 
connecting to yard leads or branch tracks should not be excepted.
    The commenter also recommended that the term ``sidetrack'' be 
better defined or described to make it clear that the term does not 
apply to other main tracks, sidings, or rail-to-rail crossings. The 
commenter was concerned that certain types of derails may be 
ineffective and described an accident that occurred several years ago 
when a train moving at over 50 mph passed over a derail. The commenter 
recommended that the rule include a definition of the term ``derail'' 
and suggested that turnouts, wheel stops, bollards, etc. may be equally 
effective in comparison to a conventional block or split point derail. 
The commenter expressed a concern that gates, chocks, skates, wire 
ropes, wood ties, etc., do not assure the same type of arresting 
action. The commenter asked for FRA's position on the removal of a 
length of rail, a pile of ballast or a bumper post.
    The commenter said that the proposed requirement for each derail to 
be ``interlocked'' with the signal system should be modified and 
included in 49 CFR Part 236 which establishes requirements for hand-
operated switches in ABS and TCS territory. The commenter said that the 
addition of circuit controllers to independent hand-operated derails in 
ABS will be costly and that such a requirement would tend to discourage 
voluntary installation of sidetrack derails on Classes 2 to 6 trackage.
    The commenter also recommended that the term ``interlocked'' be 
replaced with the term ``interconnected'' and suggested that the 
phrases ``interlocked'', ``maximally restrictive'', ``deployed'', and 
``completely functional'' are unfamiliar terms and invite confusion and 
disagreement. The commenter said that there would be little sacrifice 
of safety in allowing display of a ``proceed at restricted speed'' 
aspect on the main train when a sidetrack derail is not in the 
derailing position. Finally, the commenter suggested that this section 
be moved to the signal regulations at 49 CFR Part 236 because 
applicable sections in that part already apply to derails. For example, 
Sec. 236.205(c) sets forth requirements for an independently operated 
fouling point derail equipped with switch circuit controller which is 
not in the derailing position.
    Final rule: FRA does not believe it is necessary to move the entire 
section on derails to the signal rules at 49 CFR Part 236, because the 
subject of derails is appropriate for the track standards. However, FRA 
may wish to consider changes in Part 236 at a later date. FRA agrees 
with many of commenters recommendations.
    The terms ``industrial'' and ``sidetrack'' as proposed may lead to 
confusion. FRA, therefore, has modified the rule to remove these terms 
and use terminology which is more common to the industry. Paragraph (a) 
now requires that each track, other than a main track, which connects 
with a Classes 7, 8 and 9 main track shall be equipped with a 
functioning derail of the correct size and type. The term ``main 
track'' has a familiar meaning in the railroad industry and is defined, 
for example in Sec. 236.831(a) and Sec. 240.7.
    FRA believes the exception to the requirement for derails at 
locations ``where railroad equipment, because of grade characteristics, 
cannot move to foul the main track'' is reasonable. FRA believes it is 
not necessary to go beyond this exception to address every conceivable 
circumstance. FRA points out that Sec. 213.361 requires the railroad to 
submit a right-of-way plan'' for FRA approval. This plan must contain 
provision for the intrusion of vehicles from adjacent tracks.
    The final rule under Sec. 213.357(b) explains that a derail is a 
device which will physically stop or divert movement of railroad 
rolling stock or other railroad on-track equipment past the location of 
the device. Ineffective piles of ballast, wire ropes, chains, or 
similar methods are not sufficient. Other methods may be as effective 
as conventional derails in accomplishing the goal of preventing the 
railroad equipment from moving into the clearance envelope of the high 
speed main track.
    Paragraphs (c) through (f) of this section mirror the derail 
requirements for the lower track classes in Sec. 213.205. FRA agrees 
with the commenter's concern about the term ``interlocked'' because it 
refers to a particular arrangement of signals. FRA concurs with the 
commenter's concern that a requirement for derails to be connected to 
the signal system in Class 6 track would be costly and tend to 
discourage voluntary installation of derails. To address these 
concerns, paragraph (g) is changed to read that ``each derail on a 
track connected to a Class 7, 8 or 9 main track shall be interconnected 
with the signal system.'' The term ``interconnected'' is consistent 
with the signal rules in Sec. 235.205, which requires, in part, that 
circuits shall be installed so that each signal governing train 
movements into a block will display its most restrictive aspect ``when 
an independently operated fouling point derail equipped with a switch 
circuit controller is not in derailing position.''

Section 213.359--Track Stiffness

    Proposed rule: Track must have sufficient vertical strength and 
lateral strength to withstand the maximum loads generated at maximum 
permissible train speeds, cant deficiency and lateral or vertical 
defects so that the track will return to a configuration in compliance 
with the track performance and geometry requirements of this subpart. 
It is imperative that the track structure is structurally qualified to 
accept the loads without unacceptable deformation.
    The track's resistance to track panel shift is difficult to 
quantify. However, FRA believes that at a future date, it may be 
possible, based on ongoing research addressing track panel shift, to 
further refine the safety limit for the Net Axle L/V Ratio in the table 
of vehicle/track interaction safety limits in Sec. 213.333. The present 
limit of 0.5 is based on an extrapolation of the Prud'homme limit and 
experimental data. An FRA sponsored research program is currently in 
place addressing the development of criteria and possible safety limits 
for track shift mitigation which are driven by the proposition that 
lateral loads generated by vehicles operating under maximum speed, cant 
deficiency, thermal loads, and initial line defect conditions should 
not cause the exception of an allowable deflection limit. Depending 
upon the specific track conditions and vehicle characteristics, 
permissible net axle lateral to vertical load ratios for an allowable 
deflection limit can be in the range of 0.4 to 0.6. Key influencing 
parameters are the track lateral resistance characteristics, tie/
ballast friction coefficients, vehicle vertical axle loads, track 
curvature, thermal loads, and constant versus variable lateral axle 
loads.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: This section is unchanged from the proposed rule.

Section 213.361--Right-of-Way

    Proposed rule: This section requires that the track owner to submit 
a barrier plan, termed a ``right-of-way plan,'' to FRA for approval. 
The plan will include, at a minimum, provisions in

[[Page 34024]]

areas of demonstrated need to address the prevention of vandalism by 
trespassers and intrusion of vehicles from adjacent rights of way. A 
particular form of vandalism, the launching of objects from overhead 
bridges or structures, is specifically listed.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule is unchanged from the proposed rule for 
this section.

Section 213.365--Visual Inspections

    Proposed rule: Visual inspections are considered to be an important 
component of the railroad's overall inspection program. The section 
largely parallels the requirements for the lower classes. The 
inspection requirements are twice weekly for Classes 6, 7 and 8 and 
three times per week for Class 9. Turnouts and crossovers must be 
inspected in accordance with the Guidebook required under Sec. 213.353. 
The practice in France of operating a train at reduced speeds following 
a period with no train traffic is adopted in this section.
    Comments: Bombardier/GEC said that the basis to limit the speed of 
trains in paragraph (f) to 100 m.p.h. after a traffic interruption of 
eight hours is not clear. Equipment currently is permitted to run at 
speeds of 110 m.p.h. on Class 6 track, and up to 125 m.p.h. on the 
Northeast Corridor on the first run of the day. The proposed rule would 
limit the speed of these trains to 100 m.p.h. after the track is 
upgraded to Class 8 or Class 9, if the disruption was greater than 
eight hours. Bombardier/GEC recommended that the rule require the speed 
to be reduced to Class 7 speeds if an eight-hour disruption in service 
occurs on Class 8 track.
    Final rule: FRA believes the commenter may be misinterpreting the 
rule which requires that if no train traffic operates for a period of 
eight hours in track Classes 8 or 9, a train shall be operated at less 
than 100 m.p.h. before the resumption of the maximum authorized speed. 
FRA believes the requirement for one train to operate over the track is 
not burdensome and follows the practice on the SNCF lines for an early 
morning pilot train. The rule is unchanged from the proposed rule for 
this section.

Section 213.367--Special Inspections

    Proposed rule: The requirements of this section are the same as 
those for the lower track classes except that the occurrence of 
temperature extremes is specifically listed as an event that requires a 
track inspection.
    Comments: No comments were received concerning this section.
    Final rule: The final rule for this section is unchanged from the 
proposed rule.

Section 213.369--Inspection Records

    Proposed rule: The requirements of this section are the same as 
those for the lower track classes.
    Comments: No comments were received for this section.
    Final rule: FRA has made one small change in paragraph (f). The 
phrase ``Each Track/vehicle Performance record'' has been changed to 
``Each Vehicle/track interaction safety record.'' This change 
corresponds to the change in the title for the table of vehicle/track 
interaction safety limits in Sec. 213.333.

Appendix A

    Proposed rule: The NPRM proposed to add a curving speed chart based 
on four inches unbalance. For many years, the track standards included 
a curving speed chart based only on three inches unbalance. However, 
the NPRM proposed to allow qualified equipment to operate at curving 
speeds based on four inches of unbalance, making an additional chart 
necessary.
    Comments: FRA received no comments on the new chart.
    Final rule: FRA decided that inclusion of the new chart in Appendix 
A is necessary to accommodate the provision in the final rule which 
allows qualified equipment to operate at curving speeds based on four 
inches of unbalance.

Appendix B

    Proposed rule: The NPRM stated that FRA would revise the schedule 
for civil penalty assessment as it found necessary. At the very least, 
the schedule would have to be revised to include civil penalties for 
the new subsections added to the Track Safety Standards. These would 
include penalties for Secs. 213.4(e)(4) and (f) (Excepted track), 
Sec. 213.119 (Continuous welded rail), Sec. 213.122 (Torch cut rails), 
and most of the subsections in Subpart G.
    Comments: FRA received no comments about the penalty schedule.
    Final rule: Under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (Pub. 
L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321-373), FRA is required to adjust civil 
penalties it administers to incorporate the effects of inflation. See 
28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
    FRA added penalties to the Schedule of Civil Penalties to 
accommodate the new subsections of the final rule. The amounts for the 
new penalties were chosen based on penalties that have been used in the 
enforcement of the Track Safety Standards for years. For instance, 
penalties for violations of most of the substantive subsections of the 
track standards are either $2,500 or $5,000, the higher penalty being 
reserved for the more serious violations. For those subsections under 
Subpart G that have counterparts in Subparts A through F, the new 
penalties are the same as those for their counterparts. After some 
consideration, FRA decided not to include generally higher penalties 
for high speed rail because there are currently few track owners to 
which Subpart G will apply. However, FRA will reconsider this decision 
in the future if experience demonstrates the need to assess higher 
penalties for Subpart G.

Regulatory Impact, Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures

    This final rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing 
policies and procedures. The final rule revising the Track Safety 
Standards is considered to be significant under both Executive Order 
12866 and DOT policies and procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979) 
because of substantial public interest and safety implications. FRA has 
prepared and placed in the docket a regulatory analysis addressing the 
economic impact of the rule. Document inspection and copying facilities 
are available at 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Seventh Floor, Washington, 
D.C. Photocopies may also be obtained by submitting a written request 
to the FRA Docket Clerk at the Office Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Mail Stop 10, Washington, 
D.C. 20590.
    Ordinarily, in conducting an analysis of the costs and benefits of 
a proposed or final rule, FRA gathers more extensive economic data than 
was made available in this proceeding. However, in light of the 
consensus in the Track Working Group and the majority vote of the RSAC 
members, FRA does not believe more data is necessary. FRA has relied 
principally on the recommendations and experience of the railroad 
industry and labor representatives who, through the RSAC process, 
helped develop this rule. The working group members provided valuable 
non-quantitative data on their preferences. Thus, their unanimous 
consensus on the contents of the rule allows FRA to conclude that the 
rule is cost beneficial. Although rail labor subsequently withdrew its 
support for this rulemaking, their objection to the rule did not relate 
to the finding that the rule is cost beneficial. Furthermore, the 
railroads, who will bear the burden of

[[Page 34025]]

the costs imposed by the rule, have continued to support the rule. In 
its conclusion, FRA finds that the net effect of the changes to the 
existing rule is an increase in safety and an increase in the burden on 
the railroads, but that the burden on the railroads from the changes is 
not likely to be as great as the benefit, although there was no way to 
quantify the magnitude on the net benefit.
    The Track Working Group formed, reached a consensus on internal 
working procedures, and addressed the issues. Several issues were 
delegated to task groups, which are subgroups of the working group. The 
procedure remained the same. The task groups could make no 
recommendations until they had a consensus. The working group would not 
adopt any recommendation, even if a result of a consensus in the task 
group, until there was a consensus in the working group. The full RSAC 
would make no recommendation to the Administrator until there was a 
majority consensus in the full RSAC, even if there was a consensus in 
the working group.
    An implication of this is that no entity represented would accept a 
consensus agreement, unless the entity he or she represented would be 
at least as well off after the agreement as it had been before. This 
analysis therefore uses as a fundamental assumption that there are no 
provisions which will impose drastic costs on any segment represented 
by members of the working group, and Pareto superiority of the revised 
rule over the current rules. Pareto superiority implies that no party 
would be willing to pay to return to the current standards, although 
some party might be indifferent between the current standards and the 
revised standard. There is no implication that this rule is Pareto 
optimal, although Pareto optimality has not been excluded. Were the 
rule Pareto optimal, there would not exist another possible set of 
rules which at least one party would be willing to pay to adopt, and 
the amount that party would be willing to pay would be sufficient, were 
it given to other parties, to induce them to agree to the set of rules. 
Nor is the final rule assumed to be optimal. Were it optimal the total 
net benefit would be maximized.
    The guidance in E.O. 12866 is that we should select the rule with 
the maximum net benefit. We believe we have done that here, because no 
party who is burdened by the rule objected in comments to the docket 
following publication of the NPRM. What we know is that the revised 
rule is closer to the optimum than the current rules. The guidance in 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act is that we should adopt rules that are 
flexible, that fit in with how businesses actually conduct operations, 
and that are sensitive to the concerns of small businesses. Clearly the 
RSAC process does this. Had we adopted the suggestions of labor 
organizations objecting to the proposed rule in the full RSAC and in 
their comments to the docket, then we would have produced a rule with 
greater benefits and greater costs, which the FRA believes would have 
substantially lower net benefits than the proposed rule or this final 
rule.

Estimated Benefit of Changes to the Track Standards

    In 1995, there were 827 reported train accidents from track-related 
causes, which caused about $62 million in damage to railroad property. 
These accidents also caused 17 injuries and the evacuation of 
approximately 1,000 people. See Tables 22, 65, and 27, Accident/
Incident Bulletin 164, Calendar Year 1995, FRA 1996. If each accident 
resulted in $20,000 in miscellaneous costs, such as rerailing trains, 
providing emergency response, and legal costs, then the total 
miscellaneous cost would have been about $16 million.1 If 
each injury cost $10,000, then the total injury cost would be about 
$170,000.2 If each evacuation cost $1,000, then the total 
evacuation cost would have been about $1 million.3 These 
costs are further documented in FRA's economic analysis, available in 
the public docket. The total for all of these costs would have been 
about $80 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Internal FRA estimates show that it would cost about $2,000 
to rerail a single car, and that it costs about $10,000, 
conservatively, for an emergency response to a small derailment, and 
about $8,000 for about 80 hours of legal time at $100 per hour, 
which is also conservative as a measure of the resources used in 
response to a derailment.
    \2\ Based on an injury between AIS 1, minor, and AIS 2, 
moderate, on the Accidental Injury Severity scale, the society would 
be willing to pay between $5,400 and $41,850 to avoid the injury.
    \3\ Based on about $200 to relocate, house and feed an evacuee 
for one night, plus other costs to society, such as business, school 
and road closures, which come to about four times the individual 
evacuation cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FRA believes it is conservative to estimate that these costs 
will be reduced by five percent, as the revision addresses virtually 
every accident cause found in the bulletin. That would provide an 
estimated benefit of about $4 million per year, or about $40 million in 
net present value over 20 years. This value may be significantly 
higher, as the average cost of accidents in certain categories targeted 
in the rule tends to be above average. For instance, broken rail 
derailments on main lines (internal rail flaw detection provisions) and 
accidents caused by buckled track (CWR provisions) tend to be higher-
speed accidents with large railroad damage totals and greater potential 
for third-party impacts, such as evacuations and disruptions in 
adjacent transportation corridors.
    Using reasonably conservative assumptions, it appears that the net 
burden on railroads will be less than $2 million per year, a very small 
number when compared to total rail revenues ($37.6 billion in 1995 for 
Class 1 railroads only). Railroads will receive a benefit in the form 
of greater certainty over the future of track safety standards as a 
result of their active participation in the RSAC process which provided 
the framework for the revised rule. They will also receive some benefit 
where existing provisions have been made less stringent.
    It is not clear whether that benefit exceeds the burden, although 
it appears from the willingness of railroads to consent to the Track 
Working Group proposal that they would receive a net benefit. Of 
course, the railroads would be even better off if the provisions which 
burden them were removed and those which benefit them remained. Other 
members of the Track Working Group did not accept that proposal. In 
their comments, railroads agreed that they would rather have FRA 
implement the proposed rule as a whole than continue with the current 
standards, although they would prefer that the proposed rule changed 
certain provisions.

 Federalism Implications

    This final rule has been analyzed according to the principles of 
Executive Order 12612 (``Federalism''). It has been determined that 
these amendments to Part 213 do not have federalism implications. As 
noted previously, the U.S. Supreme Court, in CSX v. Easterwood, upheld 
Federal preemption of any state or local attempts to regulate train 
speed. Nothing in this notice proposes to change that relationship. 
Likewise, the addition to Part 213's requirement for vegetation 
maintenance near grade crossings is not intended to preempt any similar 
existing state or local requirements. The provisions that require 
railroads seeking to operate in Classes 8 and 9 to have a program 
addressing vandalism and trespassing are directed only to the 
railroads, and not to state or local governments. If a railroad is 
unable to provide an adequate program to address these issues, it will 
not be allowed to operate at Classes 8 and 9 speeds. For these reasons, 
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not warranted.

[[Page 34026]]

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This notice contains a summary of a regulatory flexibility analysis 
(RFA) as required by the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
at 5 U.S.C. 601-612. FRA completed a RFA as part of an economic 
analysis of costs and benefits, and placed of copy of the RFA in the 
docket for this proceeding.
    1. Why action by the agency is being considered:
    The Rail Safety Enforcement and Review Act of 1992, Public Law 102-
365, 106 Stat. 972 (September 3, 1992), later amended by the Federal 
Railroad Safety Authorization Act of 1994, Public Law 103-440, 108 
Stat. 4615 (November 2, 1994), requires FRA to revise the track safety 
regulations contained in 49 CFR Part 213. Now codified at 49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 20142, the amended statute requires:

    (a) Review of Existing Regulations.--Not later than March 3, 
1993, the Secretary of Transportation shall begin a review of 
Department of Transportation regulations related to track safety 
standards. The review at least shall include an evaluation of--
    (1) Procedures associated with maintaining and installing 
continuous welded rail and its attendant structure, including cold 
weather installation procedures;
    (2) The need for revisions to regulations on track excepted from 
track safety standards; and
    (3) Employee safety.
    (b) Revision of Regulations.--Not later than September 1, 1995, 
the Secretary shall prescribe regulations and issue orders to revise 
track safety standards, considering safety information presented 
during the review under subsection (a) of this section and the 
report of the Comptroller General submitted under subsection ``(c)'' 
of this section.
* * * * *
    (d) Identification of Internal Rail Defects.--In carrying out 
subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall consider whether or not 
to prescribe regulations and issue orders concerning--
    (1) Inspection procedures to identify internal rail defects, 
before they reach imminent failure size, in rail that has 
significant shelling; and
    (2) Any specific actions that should be taken when a rail 
surface condition, such as shelling, prevents the identification of 
internal defects.

The reasons for the actual provisions of the action considered by the 
agency are explained in the body of the analysis.
    2. The objectives and legal basis for the rule:
    The objective of the rule is to enhance the safety of rail 
transportation, protecting both those traveling and working on the 
system, and those off the system who might be adversely affected by a 
rail incident. The legal basis is reflected in the response to ``1.'' 
above and in the preamble.
    3. A description of and an estimate of the number of small entities 
to which the rule would apply:
    The rule would apply to railroads. Small entities among affected 
railroads would all be short line railroads. There are approximately 
700 short line railroads in the United Sates, but many of them are not 
small entities, either because they are large enterprises as railroads, 
or because they are operations of large entities in other industries.
    4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and 
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the 
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and 
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
or record:
    See the Paperwork Reduction Act analysis.
    5. Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the 
rule:
    None.

Significant Alternatives

    In their comments to the NPRM, labor organizations suggested 
certain enhancements. However, the FRA does not believe that their 
suggestions would have made the rule more flexible; rather, they would 
have increased the burden on small entities significantly with 
relatively little commensurate benefit.
    1. Differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables 
which take into account the resources available to small entities:
    In the two sections most likely to affect small entities, 
Sec. 213.4 Excepted Track and Sec. 213.109 Crossties, the final rule 
includes a two year phase-in period.
    2. Clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance 
and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities:
    Although their needs were considered at every step of the process, 
there was no way to reduce the burden on small entities that did not 
apply as well to larger entities.
    3. Use of performance, rather than design standards:
    Where possible, especially in the geometry standards, the standards 
were tied to performance. Although they were expressed as 
specifications, the underlying performance model ensures that they will 
have the same effect as a performance standard would. In the high speed 
standards, vehicle qualification is expressed strictly as a performance 
standard.
    4. Exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
such small entities:
    There was no practicable way to exclude small entities. Further, 
the low volume operations of the largest railroads often serve shippers 
which are small entities, and any additional burden on the low volume 
lines of large railroads would likely have adverse impacts on those 
small shippers.

Definition of Small Entity

    SBREFA incorporates the definition for ``small entity'' that is 
established by existing law (5 U.S.C. 601, 15 U.S.C. 632, 13 CFR Part 
121) for those businesses to be covered by agency policies. Generally, 
a small entity is a business concern that is independently owned and 
operated, and is not dominant in its field of operation. Also, ``small 
governmental jurisdictions'' that serve populations of 50,000 or less 
are small entities. (Commuter railroads are governmental jurisdictions, 
and some may fit within this statutory delineation for small 
governmental jurisdictions, or small entities.) An agency may establish 
one or more other definitions for this term, in consultation with the 
SBA and after opportunity for public comment, that are appropriate to 
the agency's activities.
    Pursuant to its statutory authority, the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) promulgated regulations that clarify the term 
``small entity'' by industry, using number of employees or annual 
income as criteria. See 13 CFR 121.101-108 and 201. In the SBA 
regulations, main line railroads with 1,500 or fewer employees, and 
switching or terminal establishments with 500 or fewer employees 
constitute small entities. The SBA regulations do not address hazardous 
material shippers in the railroad industry.
    Prior to the SBA regulations establishing size categories, the 
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) developed a classification system 
for freight railroads as Class I, II, or III, based on annual operating 
revenue. (The detailed, qualifying criteria for these classifications 
are set forth in 49 CFR part 1201.) The Department of Transportation's 
Surface Transportation Board, which succeeded the ICC, has not changed 
these classifications. The ICC classification system has been used 
pervasively by FRA and the railroad industry to identify entities by 
size. The SBA recognized this classification system as a sound one, and 
concurs with FRA's decision to continue using it, provided the public 
has notice of the classification system in use for any particular 
proceeding and an opportunity to comment on it.
    As explained in detail in the ``Interim Policy Statement Concerning 
Small

[[Page 34027]]

Entities Subject to the Railroad Safety Laws,'' published August 11, 
1997 at 62 Fed. Reg. 43024, FRA has decided to define ``small entity,'' 
on an interim basis, to include only those entities whose revenues 
would bring them within the Class III definition. This definition is 
the basis of the small business analysis for this proceeding.

Effect of This Rule on Small Businesses

    All of the small entities directly affected by this rule are short 
line railroads. They are represented by the ASLRA who participated in 
the Track Working Group. The ASLRA was not, of course, involved in 
developing those standards which would not apply to any of their 
members, for example, the high speed track standards. The ASLRA 
supported the NPRM as drafted by the Track Working Group and 
recommended by the RSAC. All of the individual short line railroads 
that participated directly in the Track Working Group agreed to the 
proposal as well. In addition, the ASLRA and several short line 
railroads participated in all of the workshops hosted by FRA in 1993 
following the publication of the ANPRM in this proceeding.
    Almost every change in this final rule will enhance safety. Some 
provisions serve to reduce burdens, but in most cases, the burden is 
increased, particularly for the railroads. However, the Track Working 
Group considered the impact on small entities at every step, and 
introduced phase-in periods to mitigate the effect on small entities by 
the crosstie standard and the new gage standard for excepted track. 
While there is no clear way to measure the net effect of the final 
rule, it is likely the net benefit will be positive. The RSAC process 
was intended to take rulemaking into areas where data is sparse, and 
the end product, as might be expected, is difficult to quantify.
    FRA did not quantify the estimated annual cost to the average firm, 
nor compare it to average annual revenue or profits, because the 
relative impact of the final rule varies more by condition of the track 
owned by a railroad than by the size of the railroad. Railroads with 
better, safer track will face proportionally much smaller effects from 
the final rule. The average annual total cost is likely to be less than 
$2 million per year for the entire railroad industry, with more than 
half of the cost borne by large railroads. The average burden per small 
railroad is likely therefore to be less than $1,500 per year. The 
burden will be greater on railroads with more track, and lower on 
railroads with less.
    No provision included in this final rule will have a very adverse 
impact on the affected firms. A proposal which would have a large 
beneficial impact is the GRMS as an alternative to the crosstie 
standard. (See previous discussion in the preamble to this notice.) 
Some provisions which at first impression seem to have a significant 
impact, such as an increase in the number of required crossties, in 
fact will have little impact.
    For example, this final rule includes an increase in the number of 
crossties required on curved track. In a worst case, about 30 percent 
of the Class 1 track of a very small entity might not comply with the 
requirement for six ties per 39-foot section of rail. Of this, 80 
percent would not comply with geometry standards or standards affecting 
effective distribution of ties, which likely would be fixed by adding 
enough ties comply or exceed the standard. The remaining track, about 
six percent of all track, would not have sufficient ties to meet the 
revised standard. Some of this track would not meet the current 
standard. One tie per section for six percent of the track would be 
slightly more than eight ties per mile. At a cost of $40 per tie 
installed, this would mean a cost of about $320 per mile, for a worst 
case. A railroad with track this poor would have presented a serious 
safety hazard in the first place, and would not be representative. Most 
small railroads currently exceed the revised standard. A more detailed 
description of the impact is contained in the complete IRFA, found in 
the docket for this proceeding.
    Throughout the discussions of the Track Working Group, and in the 
NPRM for this proceeding, FRA asked for additional information on 
benefits and costs. On occasion, participants shared such data with 
FRA. For example, the ASLRA which conducted a survey of its members to 
analyze the potential impact of increasing the number of crossties 
required in a 39-foot segment of track. At other times, data were not 
shared with FRA, and the agency was unable to determine whether the 
information was withheld for proprietary reasons or whether it simply 
was not available. However, by voting in the Track Working Group and in 
the RSAC to accept a provision in the proposed rule, often as part of a 
compromise with other interested parties, the parties' acceptance of a 
package of compromises revealed that they preferred the compromise 
position to a position of no compromise (the existing rule with the 
possibility of some other rulemaking activity). This implies that the 
burdens which rail management representatives accepted likely were not 
significant. Details of provisions that will have little or no impact 
may be found in the complete IRFA, found in the docket for this 
proceeding.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
The FRA has analyzed the existing burden, and the burden under the 
final rule analyzed here. According to this analysis, the total annual 
burden increases from about $42,000,000 to about $53,000,000. However, 
the overwhelming majority of this apparent increase is due to a change 
in FRA's assumption regarding wages. In an earlier analysis under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, the FRA had assumed a wage of $22 per hour for 
recording track inspections, but in the analysis of this final rule, 
the FRA used an assumed wage of $30 per hour. In addition, the number 
of railroads calculated by FRA to be covered by the regulations 
increased from 500 to 680. The sections that contain the new 
information collection requirements and the estimated time to fulfill 
each requirement are as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                Total   
          CFR section            Respondent  universe    Total annual  responses       Average time per response       Total annual burden      annual  
                                                                                                                              hours          burden cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
213.4--Excepted Track:                                                                                                                                  
    --Designation of track as   160 railroads.........  32 designations.........  15 minutes........................  8 hours..............         $240
     excepted.                                                                                                                                          
    --Notification to FRA       160 railroads.........  40 notifications........  10 minutes........................  7 hours..............          210
     about removal of excepted                                                                                                                          
     track.                                                                                                                                             
213.5--Responsibility of track  620 railroads.........  16 notifications........  8 hours...........................  120 hours............        3,600
 owners.                                                                                                                                                
213.7--Designation of                                                                                                                                   
 qualified persons to                                                                                                                                   
 supervise certain renewals                                                                                                                             
 and inspect track:                                                                                                                                     

[[Page 34028]]

                                                                                                                                                        
    --Designations (fully       620 railroads.........  1,500 names.............  10 minutes........................  250 hours............        7,500
     qualified).                                                                                                                                        
    --Designations (partially   31 railroads..........  300 names...............  10 minutes........................  50 hours.............        1,500
     qualified).                                                                                                                                        
    --Notification and          N/A...................  N/A.....................  Usual and customary procedure.....  N/A..................          N/A
     dispatched to location.                                                                                                                            
213.17--Waivers...............  620 railroads.........  4 petitions.............  24 hours..........................  96 hours.............        2,880
213.57--Curves, elevation and                                                                                                                           
 speed limitations:                                                                                                                                     
    --Request to FRA for        620 railroads.........  3 requests..............  40 hours..........................  120 hours............        3,600
     approval.                                                                                                                                          
    --Notification to FRA with  620 railroads.........  2 notifications.........  45 minutes........................  1.5 hours............           45
     written consent of other                                                                                                                           
     affected track owners.                                                                                                                             
    --Test plan...............  1 railroad............  6 plans.................  16 hours..........................  96 hours.............        2,880
213.119--Continuous welded                                                                                                                              
 rail (CWR), general:                                                                                                                                   
    --Written procedures......  110 railroads.........  110 procedures..........  40 hrs. Class I RRs...............  2,000 hours..........       60,000
    --Training program........  110 railroads.........  110 programs............  16 hrs. Class II RRs..............  1,200 hours..........       36,000
    --Recordkeeping...........  110 railroads.........  4,500 records...........  40 hrs Class I RRs................  750 hours............       22,500
                                                                                  8 hrs Class II RRs................                                    
                                                                                  10 minutes........................                                    
213.122--Torch cut rail.......  20 railroads..........  2,000 records...........  5 minutes.........................  167 hours............        5,010
213.233--Track inspections....  620 railroads.........  2,500 inspections.......  1 minute..........................  41.5 hours...........        1,079
213.237--Inspection of rail...  N/A...................  N/A.....................  Usual and customary procedure.....  N/A..................          N/A
213.241--Inspection records...  620 railroads.........  Varies..................  Varies............................  1,763,991 hours......   52,919,730
213.303--Responsibility for     2 railroads...........  1 petition..............  8 hours...........................  8 hours..............          240
 Compliance.                                                                                                                                            
213.305--Designation of                                                                                                                                 
 qualified individuals;                                                                                                                                 
 general qualifications:                                                                                                                                
    --Designations (fully       2 railroads...........  150 qualifications......  10 minutes........................  25 hours.............          750
     qualified).                                                                                                                                        
    --Designations (partially   2 railroads...........  15 qualifications.......  10 minutes........................  2.5 hours............           75
     qualified).                                                                                                                                        
213.317--Waivers..............  2 railroads...........  1 petition..............  24 hours..........................  24 hours.............          720
213.329--Curves, elevation and                                                                                                                          
 speed limitations:                                                                                                                                     
    --FRA approval of           2 railroads...........  1 notification..........  40 hours..........................  40 hours.............        1,200
     qualified equipment and                                                                                                                            
     higher curving speeds.                                                                                                                             
    --Written notification to   2 railroads...........  1 notification..........  45 minutes........................  45 minutes...........        22.50
     FRA with written consent                                                                                                                           
     of other affected track                                                                                                                            
     owners.                                                                                                                                            
213.333--Automated Vehicle                                                                                                                              
 Inspection System                                                                                                                                      
    --Track Geometry            3 railroads...........  18 reports..............  20 hours..........................  360 hours............        9,360
     Measurement System.                                                                                                                                
    --Track/Vehicle             ......................  ........................  ..................................  .....................  ...........
     Performance Measurement                                                                                                                            
     System.                                                                                                                                            
    --Written procedures......  1 railroad............  1 program...............  8 hours...........................  8 hours..............          240
    --Copies of most recent     2 railroads...........  13 printouts............  20 hours..........................  260 hours............        7,800
     exception printouts.                                                                                                                               
213.339--Inspection of rail in  N/A...................  N/A.....................  Usual and customary procedure.....  N/A..................          N/A
 service.                                                                                                                                               
213.341--Initial inspection of                                                                                                                          
 new rail and welds                                                                                                                                     
    --Mill inspection.........  2 railroads...........  1 report................  8 hours...........................  8 hours..............          240
    --Welding plant inspection  2 railroads...........  2 reports...............  8 hours...........................  16 hours.............          480
    --Inspection of field       2 railroads...........  200 records.............  20 minutes........................  67 hours.............        2,010
     welds.                                                                                                                                             
    --Marking of defective      N/A...................  N/A.....................  Usual and customary procedure.....  N/A..................          N/A
     rail.                                                                                                                                              
213.343--Continuous welded                                                                                                                              
 rail (CWR):                                                                                                                                            
    --Written procedures......  2 railroads...........  2 procedures............  40 hours..........................  80 hours.............        2,400
    --Training program........  2 railroads...........  2 programs..............  40 hours..........................  80 hours.............        2,400
    --Recordkeeping...........  2 railroads...........  200 records.............  10 minutes........................  33 hours.............          990
213.345--Vehicle qualification  1 railroad............  1 report................  16 hours..........................  16 hours.............          480
 testing.                                                                                                                                               
213.347--Automotive or                                                                                                                                  
 railroad crossings at grade                                                                                                                            
    --Protection plans........  1 railroad............  2 plans.................  8 hours...........................  16 hours.............          480
213.353--Turnouts and           1 railroad............  1 guidebook.............  40 hours..........................  40 hours.............        1,200
 crossovers, generally.                                                                                                                                 
213.361--Right of Way.........  1 railroad............  1 plan..................  40 hours..........................  40 hours.............        1,200
213.369--Inspection records:                                                                                                                            
    --Record of inspection....  2 railroads...........  500 records.............  1 minute..........................  8 hours..............          208
    --Designation of location   2 railroads...........  2 designations..........  15 minutes........................  30 minutes...........           15
     where record should be                                                                                                                             
     maintained.                                                                                                                                        

[[Page 34029]]

                                                                                                                                                        
    --Internal defect           2 railroads...........  50 records..............  5 minutes.........................  4 hours..............          104
     inspections and remedial                                                                                                                           
     action taken.                                                                                                                                      
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions; 
searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed 
data; and reviewing the information. For information or a copy of the 
paperwork package submitted to OMB contact Mark Weihofen at 202-632-
3303.
    FRA cannot impose a penalty on persons for violating information 
collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control 
number, if required. The information collection requirements contained 
in this rule have been approved under OMB control number 2130-0010.

Environmental Impact

    FRA has evaluated these track safety regulations in accordance with 
its procedures for ensuring full consideration of the potential 
environmental impacts of FRA actions, as required by the National 
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and related 
directives. These regulations and this statement of policy meet the 
criteria that establish this as a non-major action for environmental 
purposes.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 213

    Penalties, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

The Final Rule

    In consideration of the foregoing, FRA revises part 213, title 49, 
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 213--TRACK SAFETY STANDARDS

Subpart A--General

Sec.
213.1  Scope of part.
213.2  Preemptive effect.
213.3  Application.
6213.4  Excepted track.
213.5  Responsibility for compliance.
213.7  Designation of qualified persons to supervise certain 
renewals and inspect track.
213.9  Classes of track: operating speed limits.
213.11  Restoration or renewal of track under traffic conditions.
213.13  Measuring track not under load.
213.15  Penalties.
213.17  Waivers.
213.19  Information collection.

Subpart B--Roadbed

213.31  Scope.
213.33  Drainage.
213.37  Vegetation.

Subpart C--Track Geometry

213.51  Scope.
213.53  Gage.
213.55  Alinement.
213.57  Curves; elevation and speed limitations.
213.59  Elevation of curved track; runoff.
213.63  Track surface.

Subpart D--Track Structure

213.101  Scope.
213.103  Ballast; general.
213.109  Crossties.
213.113  Defective rails.
213.115  Rail end mismatch.
213.119  Continuous welded rail (CWR); general.
213.121  Rail joints.
213.122  Torch cut rail.
213.123  Tie plates.
213.127  Rail fastening systems.
213.133  Turnouts and track crossings generally.
213.135  Switches.
213.137  Frogs.
213.139  Spring rail frogs.
213.141  Self-guarded frogs.
213.143  Frog guard rails and guard faces; gage.

Subpart E--Track Appliances and Track-Related Devices

213.201  Scope.
213.205  Derails

Subpart F--Inspection

213.231  Scope.
213.233  Track inspections.
213.235  Inspection of switches, track crossings, and lift rail 
assemblies or other transition devices on moveable bridges.
213.237  Inspection of rail.
213.239  Special inspections.
213.241  Inspection records.

Subpart G--Train Operations at Track Classes 6 and Higher

213.301  Scope of subpart.
213.303  Responsibility for compliance.
213.305  Designation of qualified individuals; general 
qualifications.
213.307  Class of track; operating speed limits.
213.309  Restoration or renewal of track under traffic conditions.
213.311  Measuring track not under load.
213.317  Waivers.
213.319  Drainage.
213.321  Vegetation.
213.323  Track gage.
213.327  Alinement.
213.329  Curves, elevation and speed limitations.
213.331  Track surface.
213.333  Automated vehicle inspection systems.
213.334  Ballast; general.
213.335  Crossties.
213.337  Defective rails.
213.339  Inspection of rail in service.
213.341  Initial inspection of new rail and welds.
213.343  Continuous welded rail (CWR).
213.345  Vehicle qualification testing.
213.347  Automotive or railroad crossings at grade.
213.349  Rail end mismatch.
213.351  Rail joints.
213.352  Torch cut rail.
213.353  Turnouts, crossovers, and lift rail assemblies or other 
transition devices on moveable bridges.
213.355  Frog guard rails and guard faces; gage.
213.357  Derails.
213.359  Track stiffness.
213.361  Right of way.
213.365  Visual inspections.
213.367  Special inspections.
213.369  Inspection records.
Appendix A to Part 213--Maximum Allowable Curving Speeds
Appendix B to Part 213--Schedule of Civil Penalties

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102-20114 and 20142; 28 U.S.C. 2461; and 
49 CFR 1.49(m).

Subpart A--General


Sec. 213.1  Scope of part.

    (a) This part prescribes minimum safety requirements for railroad 
track that is part of the general railroad system of transportation. 
The requirements prescribed in this part apply to specific track 
conditions existing in isolation. Therefore, a combination of track 
conditions, none of which individually amounts to a deviation from the 
requirements in this part, may require remedial action to provide for 
safe operations over that track. This part does not restrict a railroad 
from adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent requirements 
not inconsistent with this part.
    (b) Subparts A through F apply to track Classes 1 through 5. 
Subpart G and 213.2, 213.3, and 213.15 apply to track over which trains 
are operated at speeds in excess of those permitted over Class 5 track.


Sec. 213.2  Preemptive effect.

    Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of these regulations preempts any 
State law, regulation, or order covering the

[[Page 34030]]

same subject matter, except an additional or more stringent law, 
regulation, or order that is necessary to eliminate or reduce an 
essentially local safety hazard; is not incompatible with a law, 
regulation, or order of the United States Government; and that does not 
impose an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce.


Sec. 213.3  Application.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this part 
applies to all standard gage track in the general railroad system of 
transportation.
    (b) This part does not apply to track--
    (1) Located inside an installation which is not part of the general 
railroad system of transportation; or
    (2) Used exclusively for rapid transit operations in an urban area 
that are not connected with the general railroad system of 
transportation.


Sec. 213.4  Excepted track.

    A track owner may designate a segment of track as excepted track 
provided that--
    (a) The segment is identified in the timetable, special 
instructions, general order, or other appropriate records which are 
available for inspection during regular business hours;
    (b) The identified segment is not located within 30 feet of an 
adjacent track which can be subjected to simultaneous use at speeds in 
excess of 10 miles per hour;
    (c) The identified segment is inspected in accordance with 
213.233(c) and 213.235 at the frequency specified for Class 1 track;
    (d) The identified segment of track is not located on a bridge 
including the track approaching the bridge for 100 feet on either side, 
or located on a public street or highway, if railroad cars containing 
commodities required to be placarded by the Hazardous Materials 
Regulations (49 CFR part 172), are moved over the track; and
    (e) The railroad conducts operations on the identified segment 
under the following conditions:
    (1) No train shall be operated at speeds in excess of 10 miles per 
hour;
    (2) No occupied passenger train shall be operated;
    (3) No freight train shall be operated that contains more than five 
cars required to be placarded by the Hazardous Materials Regulations 
(49 CFR part 172); and
    (4) The gage on excepted track shall not be more than 4 feet 10\1/
4\ inches. This paragraph (e)(4) is applicable September 21, 1999.
    (f) A track owner shall advise the appropriate FRA Regional Office 
at least 10 days prior to removal of a segment of track from excepted 
status.


Sec. 213.5  Responsibility for compliance.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, any owner 
of track to which this part applies who knows or has notice that the 
track does not comply with the requirements of this part, shall--
    (1) Bring the track into compliance;
    (2) Halt operations over that track; or
    (3) Operate under authority of a person designated under 
Sec. 213.7(a), who has at least one year of supervisory experience in 
railroad track maintenance, subject to conditions set forth in this 
part.
    (b) If an owner of track to which this part applies designates a 
segment of track as ``excepted track'' under the provisions of 
Sec. 213.4, operations may continue over that track without complying 
with the provisions of subparts B, C, D, and E of this part, unless 
otherwise expressly stated.
    (c) If an owner of track to which this part applies assigns 
responsibility for the track to another person (by lease or otherwise), 
written notification of the assignment shall be provided to the 
appropriate FRA Regional Office at least 30 days in advance of the 
assignment. The notification may be made by any party to that 
assignment, but shall be in writing and include the following--
    (1) The name and address of the track owner;
    (2) The name and address of the person to whom responsibility is 
assigned (assignee);
    (3) A statement of the exact relationship between the track owner 
and the assignee;
    (4) A precise identification of the track;
    (5) A statement as to the competence and ability of the assignee to 
carry out the duties of the track owner under this part; and
    (6) A statement signed by the assignee acknowledging the assignment 
to him of responsibility for purposes of compliance with this part.
    (d) The Administrator may hold the track owner or the assignee or 
both responsible for compliance with this part and subject to penalties 
under Sec. 213.15.
    (e) A common carrier by railroad which is directed by the Surface 
Transportation Board to provide service over the track of another 
railroad under 49 U.S.C. 11123 is considered the owner of that track 
for the purposes of the application of this part during the period the 
directed service order remains in effect.
    (f) When any person, including a contractor for a railroad or track 
owner, performs any function required by this part, that person is 
required to perform that function in accordance with this part.


Sec. 213.7  Designation of qualified persons to supervise certain 
renewals and inspect track.

    (a) Each track owner to which this part applies shall designate 
qualified persons to supervise restorations and renewals of track under 
traffic conditions. Each person designated shall have--
    (1) At least--
    (i) 1 year of supervisory experience in railroad track maintenance; 
or
    (ii) A combination of supervisory experience in track maintenance 
and training from a course in track maintenance or from a college level 
educational program related to track maintenance;
    (2) Demonstrated to the owner that he or she--
    (i) Knows and understands the requirements of this part;
    (ii) Can detect deviations from those requirements; and
    (iii) Can prescribe appropriate remedial action to correct or 
safely compensate for those deviations; and
    (3) Written authorization from the track owner to prescribe 
remedial actions to correct or safely compensate for deviations from 
the requirements in this part.
    (b) Each track owner to which this part applies shall designate 
qualified persons to inspect track for defects. Each person designated 
shall have--
    (1) At least--
    (i) 1 year of experience in railroad track inspection; or
    (ii) A combination of experience in track inspection and training 
from a course in track inspection or from a college level educational 
program related to track inspection;
    (2) Demonstrated to the owner that he or she--
    (i) Knows and understands the requirements of this part;
    (ii) Can detect deviations from those requirements; and
    (iii) Can prescribe appropriate remedial action to correct or 
safely compensate for those deviations; and
    (3) Written authorization from the track owner to prescribe 
remedial actions to correct or safely compensate for deviations from 
the requirements of this part, pending review by a qualified person 
designated under paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Persons not fully qualified to supervise certain renewals and 
inspect track as outlined in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, 
but with at least one

[[Page 34031]]

year of maintenance-of-way or signal experience, may pass trains over 
broken rails and pull aparts provided that--
    (1) The track owner determines the person to be qualified and, as 
part of doing so, trains, examines, and re-examines the person 
periodically within two years after each prior examination on the 
following topics as they relate to the safe passage of trains over 
broken rails or pull aparts: rail defect identification, crosstie 
condition, track surface and alinement, gage restraint, rail end 
mismatch, joint bars, and maximum distance between rail ends over which 
trains may be allowed to pass. The sole purpose of the examination is 
to ascertain the person's ability to effectively apply these 
requirements and the examination may not be used to disqualify the 
person from other duties. A minimum of four hours training is adequate 
for initial training;
    (2) The person deems it safe and train speeds are limited to a 
maximum of 10 m.p.h. over the broken rail or pull apart;
    (3) The person shall watch all movements over the broken rail or 
pull apart and be prepared to stop the train if necessary; and
    (4) Person(s) fully qualified under Sec. 213.7 of this part are 
notified and dispatched to the location promptly for the purpose of 
authorizing movements and effecting temporary or permanent repairs.
    (d) With respect to designations under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) 
of this section, each track owner shall maintain written records of--
    (1) Each designation in effect;
    (2) The basis for each designation; and
    (3) Track inspections made by each designated qualified person as 
required by Sec. 213.241. These records shall be kept available for 
inspection or copying by the Federal Railroad Administration during 
regular business hours.


Sec. 213.9  Classes of track: operating speed limits.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section and 
Secs. 213.57(b), 213.59(a), 213.113(a), and 213.137(b) and (c), the 
following maximum allowable operating speeds apply--

                                                                        
                           [In miles per hour]                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       The maximum        The maximum   
 Over track that meets all of the       allowable          allowable    
  requirements prescribed in this    operating speed    operating speed 
            part for--                 for freight       for passenger  
                                       trains is--        trains is--   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excepted track....................                 10                N/A
Class 1 track.....................                 10                 15
Class 2 track.....................                 25                 30
Class 3 track.....................                 40                 60
Class 4 track.....................                 60                 80
Class 5 track.....................                 80                 90
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) If a segment of track does not meet all of the requirements for 
its intended class, it is reclassified to the next lowest class of 
track for which it does meet all of the requirements of this part. 
However, if the segment of track does not at least meet the 
requirements for Class 1 track, operations may continue at Class 1 
speeds for a period of not more than 30 days without bringing the track 
into compliance, under the authority of a person designated under 
Sec. 213.7(a), who has at least one year of supervisory experience in 
railroad track maintenance, after that person determines that 
operations may safely continue and subject to any limiting conditions 
specified by such person.


Sec. 213.11  Restoration or renewal of track under traffic conditions.

    If during a period of restoration or renewal, track is under 
traffic conditions and does not meet all of the requirements prescribed 
in this part, the work on the track shall be under the continuous 
supervision of a person designated under Sec. 213.7(a) who has at least 
one year of supervisory experience in railroad track maintenance, and 
subject to any limiting conditions specified by such person. The term 
``continuous supervision'' as used in this section means the physical 
presence of that person at a job site. However, since the work may be 
performed over a large area, it is not necessary that each phase of the 
work be done under the visual supervision of that person.


Sec. 213.13  Measuring track not under load.

    When unloaded track is measured to determine compliance with 
requirements of this part, the amount of rail movement, if any, that 
occurs while the track is loaded must be added to the measurements of 
the unloaded track.


Sec. 213.15  Penalties.

    (a) Any person who violates any requirement of this part or causes 
the violation of any such requirement is subject to a civil penalty of 
at least $500 and not more than $11,000 per violation, except that: 
Penalties may be assessed against individuals only for willful 
violations, and, where a grossly negligent violation or a pattern of 
repeated violations has created an imminent hazard of death or injury 
to persons, or has caused death or injury, a penalty not to exceed 
$22,000 per violation may be assessed. ``Person'' means an entity of 
any type covered under 1 U.S.C. 1, including but not limited to the 
following: a railroad; a manager, supervisor, official, or other 
employee or agent of a railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or 
lessee of railroad equipment, track, or facilities; any independent 
contractor providing goods or services to a railroad; any employee of 
such owner, manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor; 
and anyone held by the Federal Railroad Administrator to be responsible 
under Sec. 213.5(d) or Sec. 213.303(c). Each day a violation continues 
shall constitute a separate offense. See appendix B to this part for a 
statement of agency civil penalty policy.
    (b) Any person who knowingly and willfully falsifies a record or 
report required by this part may be subject to criminal penalties under 
49 U.S.C. 21311.


Sec. 213.17  Waivers.

    (a) Any owner of track to which this part applies, or other person 
subject to this part, may petition the Federal Railroad Administrator 
for a waiver from any or all requirements prescribed in this part. The 
filing of such a petition does not affect that person's responsibility 
for compliance with that requirement while the petition is being 
considered.
    (b) Each petition for a waiver under this section shall be filed in 
the manner and contain the information required by part 211 of this 
chapter.

[[Page 34032]]

    (c) If the Administrator finds that a waiver is in the public 
interest and is consistent with railroad safety, the Administrator may 
grant the exemption subject to any conditions the Administrator deems 
necessary. Where a waiver is granted, the Administrator publishes a 
notice containing the reasons for granting the waiver.


213.19  Information collection.

    (a) The information collection requirements of this part were 
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and are 
assigned OMB control number 2130-0010.
    (b) The information collection requirements are found in the 
following sections: Secs. 213.4, 213.5, 213.7, 213.17, 213.57, 213.119, 
213.122, 213.233, 213.237, 213.241, 213.303, 213.305, 213.317, 213.329, 
213.333, 213.339, 213.341, 213.343, 213.345, 213.353, 213.361, 213.369.

Subpart B--Roadbed


Sec. 213.31  Scope.

    This subpart prescribes minimum requirements for roadbed and areas 
immediately adjacent to roadbed.


Sec. 213.33  Drainage.

    Each drainage or other water carrying facility under or immediately 
adjacent to the roadbed shall be maintained and kept free of 
obstruction, to accommodate expected water flow for the area concerned.


Sec. 213.37  Vegetation.

    Vegetation on railroad property which is on or immediately adjacent 
to roadbed shall be controlled so that it does not--
    (a) Become a fire hazard to track-carrying structures;
    (b) Obstruct visibility of railroad signs and signals:
    (1) Along the right-of-way, and
    (2) At highway-rail crossings; (This paragraph (b)(2) is applicable 
September 21, 1999.)
    (c) Interfere with railroad employees performing normal trackside 
duties;
    (d) Prevent proper functioning of signal and communication lines; 
or
    (e) Prevent railroad employees from visually inspecting moving 
equipment from their normal duty stations.

Subpart C--Track Geometry


Sec. 213.51  Scope.

    This subpart prescribes requirements for the gage, alinement, and 
surface of track, and the elevation of outer rails and speed 
limitations for curved track.


Sec. 213.53  Gage.

    (a) Gage is measured between the heads of the rails at right-angles 
to the rails in a plane five-eighths of an inch below the top of the 
rail head.
    (b) Gage shall be within the limits prescribed in the following 
table--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Class of track                 The gage must be at least--             But not more than--         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excepted track..........................  N/A............................  4'10\1/4\''.                         
Class 1 track...........................  4'8''..........................  4'10''.                              
Class 2 and 3 track.....................  4'8''..........................  4'9\3/4\''.                          
Class 4 and 5 track.....................  4'8''..........................  4'9\1/2\''.                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213.55  Alinement.

    Alinement may not deviate from uniformity more than the amount 
prescribed in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Tangent track                Curved track            
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
                                                          The deviation of   The deviation of   The deviation of
                                                           the mid-offset    the mid-ordinate   the mid-ordinate
                     Class of track                        from a 62-foot     from a 31-foot     from a 62-foot 
                                                          line\1\ may not    chord\2\ may not   chord\2\ may not
                                                           be more than--     be more than--     be more than-- 
                                                              (inches)           (inches)           (inches)    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 track..........................................                  5            \3\ N/A                  5
Class 2 track..........................................                  3            \3\ N/A                  3
Class 3 track..........................................             1\3/4\             1\1/4\             1\3/4\
Class 4 track..........................................             1\1/2\                  1             1\1/2\
Class 5 track..........................................              \3/4\              \1/2\              \5/8\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ends of the line shall be at points on the gage side of the line rail, five-eighths of an inch below the
  top of the railhead. Either rail may be used as the line rail, however, the same rail shall be used for the   
  full length of that tangential segment of track.                                                              
\2\ The ends of the chord shall be at points on the gage side of the outer rail, five-eighths of an inch below  
  the top of the railhead.                                                                                      
\3\ N/A--Not Applicable.                                                                                        

Sec. 213.57  Curves; elevation and speed limitations.

    (a) The maximum crosslevel on the outside rail of a curve may not 
be more than 8 inches on track Classes 1 and 2 and 7 inches on Classes 
3 through 5. Except as provided in Sec. 213.63, the outside rail of a 
curve may not be lower than the inside rail. (The first sentence of 
paragraph (a) is applicable September 21, 1999.)
    (b)(1) The maximum allowable operating speed for each curve is 
determined by the following formula--
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.001

Where--

Vmax = Maximum allowable operating speed (miles per hour).
Ea = Actual elevation of the outside rail (inches).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Actual elevation for each 155 foot track segment in the body 
of the curve is determined by averaging the elevation for 10 points 
through the segment at 15.5 foot spacing. If the curve length is 
less than 155 feet, average the points through the full length of 
the body of the curve .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D = Degree of curvature (degrees).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Degree of curvature is determined by averaging the degree of 
curvature over the same track segment as the elevation.

    (2) Table 1 of Appendix A is a table of maximum allowable operating 
speed computed in accordance with this formula for various elevations 
and degrees of curvature.
    (c)(1) For rolling stock meeting the requirements specified in 
paragraph (d) of this section, the maximum operating speed for each 
curve may be determined by the following formula--

[[Page 34033]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.002


Where--

Vmax = Maximum allowable operating speed (miles per hour).
Ea = Actual elevation of the outside rail (inches).\1\
D = Degree of curvature (degrees).\2\

    (2) Table 2 of Appendix A is a table of maximum allowable operating 
speed computed in accordance with this formula for various elevations 
and degrees of curvature.
    (d) Qualified equipment may be operated at curving speeds 
determined by the formula in paragraph (c) of this section, provided 
each specific class of equipment is approved for operation by the 
Federal Railroad Administration and the railroad demonstrates that:
    (1) When positioned on a track with a uniform 4-inch 
superelevation, the roll angle between the floor of the equipment and 
the horizontal does not exceed 5.7 degrees; and
    (2) When positioned on a track with a uniform 6 inch 
superelevation, no wheel of the equipment unloads to a value of 60 
percent of its static value on perfectly level track, and the roll 
angle between the floor of the equipment and the horizontal does not 
exceed 8.6 degrees.
    (3) The track owner shall notify the Federal Railroad Administrator 
no less than 30 calendar days prior to the proposed implementation of 
the higher curving speeds allowed under the formula in paragraph (c) of 
this section. The notification shall be in writing and shall contain, 
at a minimum, the following information--
    (i) A complete description of the class of equipment involved, 
including schematic diagrams of the suspension systems and the location 
of the center of gravity above top of rail;
    (ii) A complete description of the test procedure \3\ and 
instrumentation used to qualify the equipment and the maximum values 
for wheel unloading and roll angles which were observed during testing;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The test procedure may be conducted in a test facility 
whereby all the wheels on one side (right or left) of the equipment 
are alternately raised and lowered by 4 and 6 inches and the 
vertical wheel loads under each wheel are measured and a level is 
used to record the angle through which the floor of the equipment 
has been rotated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iii) Procedures or standards in effect which relate to the 
maintenance of the suspension system for the particular class of 
equipment; and
    (iv) Identification of line segment on which the higher curving 
speeds are proposed to be implemented.
    (e) A track owner, or an operator of a passenger or commuter 
service, who provides passenger or commuter service over trackage of 
more than one track owner with the same class of equipment may provide 
written notification to the Federal Railroad Administrator with the 
written consent of the other affected track owners.
    (f) Equipment presently operating at curving speeds allowed under 
the formula in paragraph (c) of this section, by reason of conditional 
waivers granted by the Federal Railroad Administration, shall be 
considered to have successfully complied with the requirements of 
paragraph (d) of this section.
    (g) A track owner or a railroad operating above Class 5 speeds, may 
request approval from the Federal Railroad Administrator to operate 
specified equipment at a level of cant deficiency greater than four 
inches in accordance with Sec. 213.329(c) and (d) on curves in Class 1 
through 5 track which are contiguous to the high speed track provided 
that--
    (1) The track owner or railroad submits a test plan to the Federal 
Railroad Administrator for approval no less than thirty calendar days 
prior to any proposed implementation of the higher curving speeds. The 
test plan shall include an analysis and determination of carbody 
acceleration safety limits for each vehicle type which indicate wheel 
unloading of 60 percent in a steady state condition and 80 percent in a 
transient (point by point) condition. Accelerometers shall be 
laterally-oriented and floor-mounted near the end of a representative 
vehicle of each type;
    (2) Upon FRA approval of a test plan, the track owner or railroad 
conducts incrementally increasing train speed test runs over the curves 
in the identified track segment(s) to demonstrate that wheel unloading 
is within the limits prescribed in paragraph (g)(1) of this section;
    (3) Upon FRA approval of a cant deficiency level, the track owner 
or railroad inspects the curves in the identified track segment with a 
Track Geometry Measurement System (TGMS) qualified in accordance with 
Sec. 213.333 (b) through (g) at an inspection frequency of at least 
twice annually with not less than 120 days interval between 
inspections; and
    (4) The track owner or railroad operates an instrumented car having 
dynamic response characteristics that are representative of other 
equipment assigned to service or a portable device that monitors on-
board instrumentation on trains over the curves in the identified track 
segment at the revenue speed profile at a frequency of at least once 
every 90 days with not less than 30 days interval between inspections. 
The instrumented car or the portable device shall monitor a laterally-
oriented accelerometer placed near the end of the vehicle at the floor 
level. If the carbody lateral acceleration measurement exceeds the 
safety limits prescribed in paragraph (g)(1), the railroad shall 
operate trains at curving speeds in accordance with paragraph (b) or 
(c) of this section; and
    (5) The track owner or railroad shall maintain a copy of the most 
recent exception printouts for the inspections required under 
paragraphs (g)(3) and (4) of this section.


Sec. 213.59  Elevation of curved track; runoff.

    (a) If a curve is elevated, the full elevation shall be provided 
throughout the curve, unless physical conditions do not permit. If 
elevation runoff occurs in a curve, the actual minimum elevation shall 
be used in computing the maximum allowable operating speed for that 
curve under Sec. 213.57(b).
    (b) Elevation runoff shall be at a uniform rate, within the limits 
of track surface deviation prescribed in Sec. 213.63, and it shall 
extend at least the full length of the spirals. If physical conditions 
do not permit a spiral long enough to accommodate the minimum length of 
runoff, part of the runoff may be on tangent track.


Sec. 213.63  Track surface.

    Each owner of the track to which this part applies shall maintain 
the surface of its track within the limits prescribed in the following 
table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Class of track                   
                                                          ------------------------------------------------------
                      Track surface                            1          2          3          4          5    
                                                            (inches)   (inches)   (inches)   (inches)   (inches)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The runoff in any 31 feet of rail at the end of a raise                                                         
 may not be more than....................................     3\1/2\          3          2     1\1/2\          1
The deviation from uniform profile on either rail at the                                                        
 mid-ordinate of a 62-foot chord may not be more than....          3     2\3/4\     2\1/4\          2     1\1/4\

[[Page 34034]]

                                                                                                                
The deviation from zero crosslevel at any point on                                                              
 tangent or reverse crosslevel elevation on curves may                                                          
 not be more than........................................          3          2     1\3/4\     1\1/4\          1
The difference in crosslevel between any two points less                                                        
 than 62 feet apart may not be more than* 1,  2..........          3     2\1/4\          2     1\3/4\     1\1/2\
* Where determined by engineering decision prior to the                                                         
 promulgation of this rule, due to physical restrictions                                                        
 on spiral length and operating practices and experience,                                                       
 the variation in crosslevel on spirals per 31 feet may                                                         
 not be more than........................................          2     1\3/4\     1\1/4\          1      \3/4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Except as limited by Sec.  213.57(a), where the elevation at any point in a curve equals or exceeds 6       
  inches, the difference in crosslevel within 62 feet between that point and a point with greater elevation may 
  not be more than 1\1/2\ inches. (Footnote 1 is applicable December 21, 1999.)                                 
\2\ However, to control harmonics on Class 2 through 5 jointed track with staggered joints, the crosslevel      
  differences shall not exceed 1\1/4\ inches in all of six consecutive pairs of joints, as created by 7 low     
  joints. Track with joints staggered less than 10 feet shall not be considered as having staggered joints.     
  Joints within the 7 low joints outside of the regular joint spacing shall not be considered as joints for     
  purposes of this footnote. (Footnote 2 is applicable September 21, 1999.)                                     

Subpart D--Track Structure


Sec. 213.101  Scope.

    This subpart prescribes minimum requirements for ballast, 
crossties, track assembly fittings, and the physical conditions of 
rails.


Sec. 213.103  Ballast; general.

    Unless it is otherwise structurally supported, all track shall be 
supported by material which will --
    (a) Transmit and distribute the load of the track and railroad 
rolling equipment to the subgrade;
    (b) Restrain the track laterally, longitudinally, and vertically 
under dynamic loads imposed by railroad rolling equipment and thermal 
stress exerted by the rails;
    (c) Provide adequate drainage for the track; and
    (d) Maintain proper track crosslevel, surface, and alinement.


Sec. 213.109  Crossties.

    (a) Crossties shall be made of a material to which rail can be 
securely fastened.
    (b) Each 39 foot segment of track shall have--
    (1) A sufficient number of crossties which in combination provide 
effective support that will--
    (i) Hold gage within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.53(b);
    (ii) Maintain surface within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.63; 
and
    (iii) Maintain alinement within the limits prescribed in 
Sec. 213.55.
    (2) The minimum number and type of crossties specified in 
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section effectively distributed to 
support the entire segment; and
    (3) At least one crosstie of the type specified in paragraphs (c) 
and (d) of this section that is located at a joint location as 
specified in paragraph (f) of this section.
    (c) Each 39 foot segment of: Class 1 track shall have five 
crossties; Classes 2 and 3 track shall have eight crossties; and 
Classes 4 and 5 track shall have 12 crossties, which are not:
    (1) Broken through;
    (2) Split or otherwise impaired to the extent the crossties will 
allow the ballast to work through, or will not hold spikes or rail 
fasteners;
    (3) So deteriorated that the tie plate or base of rail can move 
laterally more than \1/2\ inch relative to the crossties; or
    (4) Cut by the tie plate through more than 40 percent of a ties' 
thickness.
    (d) Each 39 foot segment of track shall have the minimum number and 
type of crossties as indicated in the following table (this paragraph 
(d) is applicable September 21, 2000)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Turnouts
                                                    Tangent       and   
                                                   track and     curved 
                 Class of track                   curves 2      over 2 
                                                    degrees     degrees 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 track..................................            5           6
Class 2 track..................................            8           9
Class 3 track..................................            8          10
Class 4 and 5 track............................           12          14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) Crossties counted to satisfy the requirements set forth in the 
table in paragraph (d) of this section shall not be--
    (1) Broken through;
    (2) Split or otherwise impaired to the extent the crossties will 
allow the ballast to work through, or will not hold spikes or rail 
fasteners;
    (3) So deteriorated that the tie plate or base of rail can move 
laterally \1/2\ inch relative to the crossties; or
    (4) Cut by the tie plate through more than 40 percent of a 
crosstie's thickness this paragraph (e) is applicable September 21, 
2000.
    (f) Class 1 and Class 2 track shall have one crosstie whose 
centerline is within 24 inches of each rail joint location, and Classes 
3 through 5 track shall have one crosstie whose centerline is within 18 
inches of each rail joint location or, two crossties whose centerlines 
are within 24 inches either side of each rail joint location. The 
relative position of these ties is described in the following diagrams:

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P

[[Page 34035]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.003



Each rail joins in Classes 1 and 2 track shall be supported by at least 
one crosstie specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section whose 
centerline is within 48'' shown above.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.004

Each rail joins in Classes 3 through 5 track shall be supported by 
either at least one crosstie specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of 
this section whose centerline is within 36'' shown above, or:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.005

Two crossties, one on each side of the rail joint, whose centerlines 
are within 24'' of the rail joint location shown above.

BILLING CODE 4910-06-C
    (g) For track constructed without crossties, such as slab track, 
track connected directly to bridge structural components and track over 
servicing pits, the track structure shall meet the requirements of 
paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section.


Sec. 213.113  Defective rails.

    (a) When an owner of track to which this part applies learns, 
through inspection or otherwise, that a rail in that track contains any 
of the defects listed in the following table, a person designated under 
Sec. 213.7 shall determine whether or not the track may continue in 
use. If he determines that the track may continue in use, operation 
over the defective rail is not permitted until--
    (1) The rail is replaced; or
    (2) The remedial action prescribed in the table is initiated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Length of defect (inch)                   Percent of rail head cross-                               
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------- sectional area weakened by                                
                                                                                                        defect               If defective rail is not   
              Defect                                                                         ----------------------------   replaced, take the remedial 
                                             More than                But not more than                     But not less     action prescribed in note  
                                                                                                Less than       than                                    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transverse fissure...............  ............................  ...........................            70             5  B.                            
                                                                                                       100            70  A2.                           
                                                                                                                     100  A.                            
Compound fissure.................  ............................  ...........................            70             5  B.                            
                                                                                                       100            70  A2.                           
                                                                                                                     100  A.                            
Detail fracture..................  ............................  ...........................            25             5  C.                            
Engine burn fracture.............  ............................  ...........................            80            25  D.                            

[[Page 34036]]

                                                                                                                                                        
Defective weld...................  ............................  ...........................           100            80  [A2] or [ E and H].           
                                                                                                                     100  [A] or [E and H].             
Horizontal split head............  1...........................  2..........................  ............  ............  H and F.                      
Vertical split head..............  2...........................  4..........................  ............  ............  I and G.                      
Split web........................  4...........................  ...........................  ............  ............  B.                            
Piped rail.......................  (1).........................  (1)........................           (1)  ............  A.                            
Head web separation                ............................  ...........................  ............  ............  ..............................
                                    \1/2\......................  1..........................  ............  ............  H and F.                      
Bolt hole crack..................  1...........................  1\1/2\.....................  ............  ............  H and G.                      
                                   1\1/2\......................  ...........................  ............  ............  B.                            
                                   (1).........................  (1)........................           (1)  ............  A.                            
Broken base......................  1...........................  6..........................  ............  ............  D.                            
                                   6...........................  ...........................  ............  ............  [A] or [E and I].             
Ordinary break...................  ............................  ...........................  ............  ............  A or E.                       
Damaged rail.....................  ............................  ...........................  ............  ............  D.                            
Flattened rail...................  Depth  \3/8\ and   ...........................  ............  ............  H.                            
                                    Length  8.                                                                                               
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Break out in rail head.                                                                                                                             

Notes

    A. Assign person designated under Sec. 213.7 to visually 
supervise each operation over defective rail.
    A2. Assign person designated under Sec. 213.7 to make visual 
inspection. After a visual inspection, that person may authorize 
operation to continue without continuous visual supervision at a 
maximum of 10 m.p.h. for up to 24 hours prior to another such visual 
inspection or replacement or repair of the rail.
    B. Limit operating speed over defective rail to that as 
authorized by a person designated under Sec. 213.7(a), who has at 
least one year of supervisory experience in railroad track 
maintenance. The operating speed cannot be over 30 m.p.h. or the 
maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower.
    C. Apply joint bars bolted only through the outermost holes to 
defect within 20 days after it is determined to continue the track 
in use. In the case of Classes 3 through 5 track, limit operating 
speed over defective rail to 30 m.p.h. until joint bars are applied; 
thereafter, limit speed to 50 m.p.h. or the maximum allowable speed 
under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track concerned, whichever is 
lower. When a search for internal rail defects is conducted under 
Sec. 213.237, and defects are discovered in Classes 3 through 5 
which require remedial action C, the operating speed shall be 
limited to 50 m.p.h., or the maximum allowable speed under 
Sec. 213.9 for the class of track concerned, whichever is lower, for 
a period not to exceed 4 days. If the defective rail has not been 
removed from the track or a permanent repair made within 4 days of 
the discovery, limit operating speed over the defective rail to 30 
m.p.h. until joint bars are applied; thereafter, limit speed to 50 
m.p.h. or the maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class 
of track concerned, whichever is lower.
    D. Apply joint bars bolted only through the outermost holes to 
defect within 10 days after it is determined to continue the track 
in use. In the case of Classes 3 through 5 track, limit operating 
speed over the defective rail to 30 m.p.h. or less as authorized by 
a person designated under Sec. 213.7(a), who has at least one year 
of supervisory experience in railroad track maintenance, until joint 
bars are applied; thereafter, limit speed to 50 m.p.h. or the 
maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower.
    E. Apply joint bars to defect and bolt in accordance with 
Sec. 213.121(d) and (e).
    F. Inspect rail 90 days after it is determined to continue the 
track in use.
    G. Inspect rail 30 days after it is determined to continue the 
track in use.
    H. Limit operating speed over defective rail to 50 m.p.h. or the 
maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower.
    I. Limit operating speed over defective rail to 30 m.p.h. or the 
maximum allowable speed under Sec. 213.9 for the class of track 
concerned, whichever is lower.

    (b) As used in this section--
    (1) Transverse fissure means a progressive crosswise fracture 
starting from a crystalline center or nucleus inside the head from 
which it spreads outward as a smooth, bright, or dark, round or oval 
surface substantially at a right angle to the length of the rail. The 
distinguishing features of a transverse fissure from other types of 
fractures or defects are the crystalline center or nucleus and the 
nearly smooth surface of the development which surrounds it.
    (2) Compound fissure means a progressive fracture originating in a 
horizontal split head which turns up or down in the head of the rail as 
a smooth, bright, or dark surface progressing until substantially at a 
right angle to the length of the rail. Compound fissures require 
examination of both faces of the fracture to locate the horizontal 
split head from which they originate.
    (3) Horizontal split head means a horizontal progressive defect 
originating inside of the rail head, usually one-quarter inch or more 
below the running surface and progressing horizontally in all 
directions, and generally accompanied by a flat spot on the running 
surface. The defect appears as a crack lengthwise of the rail when it 
reaches the side of the rail head.
    (4) Vertical split head means a vertical split through or near the 
middle of the head, and extending into or through it. A crack or rust 
streak may show under the head close to the web or pieces may be split 
off the side of the head.
    (5) Split web means a lengthwise crack along the side of the web 
and extending into or through it.
    (6) Piped rail means a vertical split in a rail, usually in the 
web, due to failure of the shrinkage cavity in the ingot to unite in 
rolling.
    (7) Broken base means any break in the base of the rail.
    (8) Detail fracture means a progressive fracture originating at or 
near the surface of the rail head. These fractures should not be 
confused with transverse fissures, compound fissures, or other defects 
which have internal origins. Detail fractures may arise from shelly 
spots, head checks, or flaking.
    (9) Engine burn fracture means a progressive fracture originating 
in spots where driving wheels have slipped on top of the rail head. In 
developing downward they frequently resemble the compound or even 
transverse fissures with which they should not be confused or 
classified.
    (10) Ordinary break means a partial or complete break in which 
there is no sign

[[Page 34037]]

of a fissure, and in which none of the other defects described in this 
paragraph (b) are found.
    (11) Damaged rail means any rail broken or injured by wrecks, 
broken, flat, or unbalanced wheels, slipping, or similar causes.
    (12) Flattened rail means a short length of rail, not at a joint, 
which has flattened out across the width of the rail head to a depth of 
\3/8\ inch or more below the rest of the rail. Flattened rail 
occurrences have no repetitive regularity and thus do not include 
corrugations, and have no apparent localized cause such as a weld or 
engine burn. Their individual length is relatively short, as compared 
to a condition such as head flow on the low rail of curves.
    (13) Bolt hole crack means a crack across the web, originating from 
a bolt hole, and progressing on a path either inclined upward toward 
the rail head or inclined downward toward the base. Fully developed 
bolt hole cracks may continue horizontally along the head/web or base/
web fillet, or they may progress into and through the head or base to 
separate a piece of the rail end from the rail. Multiple cracks 
occurring in one rail end are considered to be a single defect. 
However, bolt hole cracks occurring in adjacent rail ends within the 
same joint must be reported as separate defects.
    (14) Defective weld means a field or plant weld containing any 
discontinuities or pockets, exceeding 5 percent of the rail head area 
individually or 10 percent in the aggregate, oriented in or near the 
transverse plane, due to incomplete penetration of the weld metal 
between the rail ends, lack of fusion between weld and rail end metal, 
entrainment of slag or sand, under-bead or other shrinkage cracking, or 
fatigue cracking. Weld defects may originate in the rail head, web, or 
base, and in some cases, cracks may progress from the defect into 
either or both adjoining rail ends.
    (15) Head and web separation means a progressive fracture, 
longitudinally separating the head from the web of the rail at the head 
fillet area.


Sec. 213.115  Rail end mismatch.

    Any mismatch of rails at joints may not be more than that 
prescribed by the following table--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Any mismatch of rails at joints may
                                      not be more than the following--  
                                   -------------------------------------
          Class of track             On the tread of    On the gage side
                                      the rail ends     of the rail ends
                                          (inch)             (inch)     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 track.....................              \1/4\              \1/4\
Class 2 track.....................              \1/4\             \3/16\
Class 3 track.....................             \3/16\             \3/16\
Class 4 and 5 track...............              \1/8\              \1/8\
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213.119  Continuous welded rail (CWR); general.

    Each track owner with track constructed of CWR shall have in effect 
and comply with written procedures which address the installation, 
adjustment, maintenance and inspection of CWR, and a training program 
for the application of those procedures, which shall be submitted to 
the Federal Railroad Administration by December 21, 1998. FRA reviews 
each plan for compliance with the following--
    (a) Procedures for the installation and adjustment of CWR which 
include--
    (1) Designation of a desired rail installation temperature range 
for the geographic area in which the CWR is located; and
    (2) De-stressing procedures/methods which address proper attainment 
of the desired rail installation temperature range when adjusting CWR.
    (b) Rail anchoring or fastening requirements that will provide 
sufficient restraint to limit longitudinal rail and crosstie movement 
to the extent practical, and specifically addressing CWR rail anchoring 
or fastening patterns on bridges, bridge approaches, and at other 
locations where possible longitudinal rail and crosstie movement 
associated with normally expected train-induced forces, is restricted.
    (c) Procedures which specifically address maintaining a desired 
rail installation temperature range when cutting CWR including rail 
repairs, in-track welding, and in conjunction with adjustments made in 
the area of tight track, a track buckle, or a pull-apart. Rail repair 
practices shall take into consideration existing rail temperature so 
that--
    (1) When rail is removed, the length installed shall be determined 
by taking into consideration the existing rail temperature and the 
desired rail installation temperature range; and
    (2) Under no circumstances should rail be added when the rail 
temperature is below that designated by paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section, without provisions for later adjustment.
    (d) Procedures which address the monitoring of CWR in curved track 
for inward shifts of alinement toward the center of the curve as a 
result of disturbed track.
    (e) Procedures which control train speed on CWR track when--
    (1) Maintenance work, track rehabilitation, track construction, or 
any other event occurs which disturbs the roadbed or ballast section 
and reduces the lateral or longitudinal resistance of the track; and
    (2) In formulating the procedures under this paragraph (e), the 
track owner shall--
    (i) Determine the speed required, and the duration and subsequent 
removal of any speed restriction based on the restoration of the 
ballast, along with sufficient ballast re-consolidation to stabilize 
the track to a level that can accommodate expected train-induced 
forces. Ballast re-consolidation can be achieved through either the 
passage of train tonnage or mechanical stabilization procedures, or 
both; and
    (ii) Take into consideration the type of crossties used.
    (f) Procedures which prescribe when physical track inspections are 
to be performed to detect buckling prone conditions in CWR track. At a 
minimum, these procedures shall address inspecting track to identify--
    (1) Locations where tight or kinky rail conditions are likely to 
occur;
    (2) Locations where track work of the nature described in paragraph 
(e)(1) of this section have recently been performed; and
    (3) In formulating the procedures under this paragraph (f), the 
track owner shall--
    (i) Specify the timing of the inspection; and

[[Page 34038]]

    (ii) Specify the appropriate remedial actions to be taken when 
buckling prone conditions are found.
    (g) The track owner shall have in effect a comprehensive training 
program for the application of these written CWR procedures, with 
provisions for periodic re-training, for those individuals designated 
under Sec. 213.7 of this part as qualified to supervise the 
installation, adjustment, and maintenance of CWR track and to perform 
inspections of CWR track.
    (h) The track owner shall prescribe recordkeeping requirements 
necessary to provide an adequate history of track constructed with CWR. 
At a minimum, these records must include:
    (1) Rail temperature, location and date of CWR installations. This 
record shall be retained for at least one year; and
    (2) A record of any CWR installation or maintenance work that does 
not conform with the written procedures. Such record shall include the 
location of the rail and be maintained until the CWR is brought into 
conformance with such procedures.
    (i) As used in this section--
    (1) Adjusting/de-stressing means the procedure by which a rail's 
temperature is re-adjusted to the desired value. It typically consists 
of cutting the rail and removing rail anchoring devices, which provides 
for the necessary expansion and contraction, and then re-assembling the 
track.
    (2) Buckling incident means the formation of a lateral mis-
alinement sufficient in magnitude to constitute a deviation from the 
Class 1 requirements specified in Sec. 213.55 of this part. These 
normally occur when rail temperatures are relatively high and are 
caused by high longitudinal compressive forces.
    (3) Continuous welded rail (CWR) means rail that has been welded 
together into lengths exceeding 400 feet.
    (4) Desired rail installation temperature range means the rail 
temperature range, within a specific geographical area, at which forces 
in CWR should not cause a buckling incident in extreme heat, or a pull-
apart during extreme cold weather.
    (5) Disturbed track means the disturbance of the roadbed or ballast 
section, as a result of track maintenance or any other event, which 
reduces the lateral or longitudinal resistance of the track, or both.
    (6) Mechanical stabilization means a type of procedure used to 
restore track resistance to disturbed track following certain 
maintenance operations. This procedure may incorporate dynamic track 
stabilizers or ballast consolidators, which are units of work equipment 
that are used as a substitute for the stabilization action provided by 
the passage of tonnage trains.
    (7) Rail anchors means those devices which are attached to the rail 
and bear against the side of the crosstie to control longitudinal rail 
movement. Certain types of rail fasteners also act as rail anchors and 
control longitudinal rail movement by exerting a downward clamping 
force on the upper surface of the rail base.
    (8) Rail temperature means the temperature of the rail, measured 
with a rail thermometer.
    (9) Tight/kinky rail means CWR which exhibits minute alinement 
irregularities which indicate that the rail is in a considerable amount 
of compression.
    (10) Train-induced forces means the vertical, longitudinal, and 
lateral dynamic forces which are generated during train movement and 
which can contribute to the buckling potential.
    (11) Track lateral resistance means the resistance provided to the 
rail/crosstie structure against lateral displacement.
    (12) Track longitudinal resistance means the resistance provided by 
the rail anchors/rail fasteners and the ballast section to the rail/
crosstie structure against longitudinal displacement.


Sec. 213.121  Rail joints.

    (a) Each rail joint, insulated joint, and compromise joint shall be 
of a structurally sound design and dimensions for the rail on which it 
is applied.
    (b) If a joint bar on Classes 3 through 5 track is cracked, broken, 
or because of wear allows excessive vertical movement of either rail 
when all bolts are tight, it shall be replaced.
    (c) If a joint bar is cracked or broken between the middle two bolt 
holes it shall be replaced.
    (d) In the case of conventional jointed track, each rail shall be 
bolted with at least two bolts at each joint in Classes 2 through 5 
track, and with at least one bolt in Class 1 track.
    (e) In the case of continuous welded rail track, each rail shall be 
bolted with at least two bolts at each joint.
    (f) Each joint bar shall be held in position by track bolts 
tightened to allow the joint bar to firmly support the abutting rail 
ends and to allow longitudinal movement of the rail in the joint to 
accommodate expansion and contraction due to temperature variations. 
When no-slip, joint-to-rail contact exists by design, the requirements 
of this paragraph do not apply. Those locations when over 400 feet in 
length, are considered to be continuous welded rail track and shall 
meet all the requirements for continuous welded rail track prescribed 
in this part.
    (g) No rail shall have a bolt hole which is torch cut or burned in 
Classes 2 through 5 track. For Class 2 track, this paragraph (g) is 
applicable September 21, 1999.
    (h) No joint bar shall be reconfigured by torch cutting in Classes 
3 through 5 track.


Sec. 213.122  Torch cut rail.

    (a) Except as a temporary repair in emergency situations no rail 
having a torch cut end shall be used in Classes 3 through 5 track. When 
a rail end is torch cut in emergency situations, train speed over that 
rail end shall not exceed the maximum allowable for Class 2 track. For 
existing torch cut rail ends in Classes 3 through 5 track the following 
shall apply--
    (1) Within one year of September 21, 1998, all torch cut rail ends 
in Class 5 track shall be removed;
    (2) Within two years of September 21, 1998, all torch cut rail ends 
in Class 4 track shall be removed; and
    (3) Within one year of September 21, 1998, all torch cut rail ends 
in Class 3 track over which regularly scheduled passenger trains 
operate, shall be inventoried by the track owner.
    (b) Following the expiration of the time limits specified in 
paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (3) of this section, any torch cut rail end 
not removed from Classes 4 and 5 track, or any torch cut rail end not 
inventoried in Class 3 track over which regularly scheduled passenger 
trains operate, shall be removed within 30 days of discovery. Train 
speed over that rail end shall not exceed the maximum allowable for 
Class 2 track until removed.


Sec. 213.123  Tie plates.

    (a) In Classes 3 through 5 track where timber crossties are in use 
there shall be tie plates under the running rails on at least eight of 
any 10 consecutive ties.
    (b) In Classes 3 through 5 track no metal object which causes a 
concentrated load by solely supporting a rail shall be allowed between 
the base of the rail and the bearing surface of the tie plate. This 
paragraph (b) is applicable September 21, 1999.)


Sec. 213.127  Rail fastening systems.

    Track shall be fastened by a system of components which effectively 
maintains gage within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.53(b). Each 
component of each such system shall be evaluated to determine whether 
gage is effectively being maintained.

[[Page 34039]]

Sec. 213.133  Turnouts and track crossings generally.

    (a) In turnouts and track crossings, the fastenings shall be intact 
and maintained so as to keep the components securely in place. Also, 
each switch, frog, and guard rail shall be kept free of obstructions 
that may interfere with the passage of wheels.
    (b) Classes 3 through 5 track shall be equipped with rail anchoring 
through and on each side of track crossings and turnouts, to restrain 
rail movement affecting the position of switch points and frogs. For 
Class 3 track, this paragraph (b) is applicable September 21, 1999.)
    (c) Each flangeway at turnouts and track crossings shall be at 
least 1\1/2\ inches wide.


Sec. 213.135  Switches.

    (a) Each stock rail must be securely seated in switch plates, but 
care shall be used to avoid canting the rail by overtightening the rail 
braces.
    (b) Each switch point shall fit its stock rail properly, with the 
switch stand in either of its closed positions to allow wheels to pass 
the switch point. Lateral and vertical movement of a stock rail in the 
switch plates or of a switch plate on a tie shall not adversely affect 
the fit of the switch point to the stock rail. Broken or cracked switch 
point rails will be subject to the requirements of Sec. 213.113, except 
that where remedial actions C, D, or E require the use of joint bars, 
and joint bars cannot be placed due to the physical configuration of 
the switch, remedial action B will govern, taking into account any 
added safety provided by the presence of reinforcing bars on the switch 
points.
    (c) Each switch shall be maintained so that the outer edge of the 
wheel tread cannot contact the gage side of the stock rail.
    (d) The heel of each switch rail shall be secure and the bolts in 
each heel shall be kept tight.
    (e) Each switch stand and connecting rod shall be securely fastened 
and operable without excessive lost motion.
    (f) Each throw lever shall be maintained so that it cannot be 
operated with the lock or keeper in place.
    (g) Each switch position indicator shall be clearly visible at all 
times.
    (h) Unusually chipped or worn switch points shall be repaired or 
replaced. Metal flow shall be removed to insure proper closure.
    (i) Tongue & Plain Mate switches, which by design exceed Class 1 
and excepted track maximum gage limits, are permitted in Class 1 and 
excepted track.


Sec. 213.137  Frogs.

    (a) The flangeway depth measured from a plane across the wheel-
bearing area of a frog on Class 1 track shall not be less than 1\3/8\ 
inches, or less than 1\1/2\ inches on Classes 2 through 5 track.
    (b) If a frog point is chipped, broken, or worn more than five-
eighths inch down and 6 inches back, operating speed over the frog 
shall not be more than 10 m.p.h..
    (c) If the tread portion of a frog casting is worn down more than 
three-eighths inch below the original contour, operating speed over 
that frog shall not be more than 10 m.p.h..
    (d) Where frogs are designed as flange-bearing, flangeway depth may 
be less than that shown for Class 1 if operated at Class 1 speeds.


Sec. 213.139  Spring rail frogs.

    (a) The outer edge of a wheel tread shall not contact the gage side 
of a spring wing rail.
    (b) The toe of each wing rail shall be solidly tamped and fully and 
tightly bolted.
    (c) Each frog with a bolt hole defect or head-web separation shall 
be replaced.
    (d) Each spring shall have compression sufficient to hold the wing 
rail against the point rail.
    (e) The clearance between the holddown housing and the horn shall 
not be more than one-fourth of an inch.


Sec. 213.141  Self-guarded frogs.

    (a) The raised guard on a self-guarded frog shall not be worn more 
than three-eighths of an inch.
    (b) If repairs are made to a self-guarded frog without removing it 
from service, the guarding face shall be restored before rebuilding the 
point.


Sec. 213.143  Frog guard rails and guard faces; gage.

    The guard check and guard face gages in frogs shall be within the 
limits prescribed in the following table--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Guard check gage  The distance                                       
                                          between the gage line of a frog                                       
                                            to the guard line \1\ of its    Guard face gage The distance between
             Class of track                 guard rail or guarding face,    guard lines \1\, measured across the
                                            measured across the track at     track at right angles to the gage  
                                           right angles to the gage line      line \2\, may not be more than--  
                                            \2\, may not be less than--                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 track...........................  4' 6\1/8\''....................  4' 5\1/4\''                          
Class 2 track...........................  4' 6\1/4\''....................  4' 5\1/8\''                          
Class 3 and 4 track.....................  4' 6\3/8\''....................  4' 5\1/8\''                          
Class 5 track...........................  4' 6\1/2\''....................  4' 5''                               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A line along that side of the flangeway which is nearer to the center of the track and at the same elevation
  as the gage line.                                                                                             
\2\ A line \5/8\ inch below the top of the center line of the head of the running rail, or corresponding        
  location of the tread portion of the track structure.                                                         


BILLING CODE 4910-06-P

[[Page 34040]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.006


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.007


BILLING CODE 4910-06-C

Subpart E--Track Appliances and Track-Related Devices


Sec. 213.201  Scope.

    This subpart prescribes minimum requirements for certain track 
appliances and track-related devices.


Sec. 213.205  Derails.

    (a) Each derail shall be clearly visible.
    (b) When in a locked position, a derail shall be free of lost 
motion which would prevent it from performing its intended function.
    (c) Each derail shall be maintained to function as intended.
    (d) Each derail shall be properly installed for the rail to which 
it is applied. (This paragraph (d) is applicable September 21, 1999.)

Subpart F--Inspection


Sec. 213.231  Scope.

    This subpart prescribes requirements for the frequency and manner 
of inspecting track to detect deviations from the standards prescribed 
in this part.


Sec. 213.233  Track inspections.

    (a) All track shall be inspected in accordance with the schedule 
prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section by a person designated 
under Sec. 213.7.
    (b) Each inspection shall be made on foot or by riding over the 
track in a vehicle at a speed that allows the person making the 
inspection to visually inspect the track structure for compliance with 
this part. However, mechanical, electrical, and other track inspection 
devices may be used to supplement visual inspection. If a vehicle is 
used for visual inspection, the speed of the vehicle may not be more 
than 5 miles per hour when passing over track crossings and turnouts, 
otherwise, the inspection vehicle speed shall be at the sole discretion 
of the inspector, based on track conditions and inspection 
requirements. When riding over the track in a vehicle, the inspection 
will be subject to the following conditions--
    (1) One inspector in a vehicle may inspect up to two tracks at one 
time provided that the inspector's visibility remains unobstructed by 
any cause and that the second track is not centered more than 30 feet 
from the track upon which the inspector is riding;
    (2) Two inspectors in one vehicle may inspect up to four tracks at 
a time provided that the inspectors' visibility remains unobstructed by 
any cause and that each track being inspected is centered within 39 
feet from the track upon which the inspectors are riding;
    (3) Each main track is actually traversed by the vehicle or 
inspected on foot at least once every two weeks, and each siding is 
actually traversed by the vehicle or inspected on foot at least once 
every month. On high density commuter railroad lines where track time 
does not permit an on track vehicle inspection, and where track centers 
are 15 foot or less, the requirements of this paragraph (b)(3) will not 
apply; and
    (4) Track inspection records shall indicate which track(s) are 
traversed by the vehicle or inspected on foot as outlined in paragraph 
(b)(3) of this section.
    (c) Each track inspection shall be made in accordance with the 
following schedule--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Class of track                   Type of track                       Required frequency              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excepted track and Class 1, 2, and   Main track and sidings.....  Weekly with at least 3 calendar days interval 
 3 track.                                                          between inspections, or before use, if the   
                                                                   track is used less than once a week, or twice
                                                                   weekly with at least 1 calendar day interval 
                                                                   between inspections, if the track carries    
                                                                   passenger trains or more than 10 million     
                                                                   gross tons of traffic during the preceding   
                                                                   calendar year.                               
Excepted track and Class 1, 2, and   Other than main track and    Monthly with at least 20 calendar days        
 3 track.                             sidings.                     interval between inspections.                

[[Page 34041]]

                                                                                                                
Class 4 and 5 track................  ...........................  Twice weekly with at least 1 calendar day     
                                                                   interval between inspections.                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) If the person making the inspection finds a deviation from the 
requirements of this part, the inspector shall immediately initiate 
remedial action.

    Note to Sec. 213.233: Except as provided in paragraph (b) of 
this section, no part of this section will in any way be construed 
to limit the inspector's discretion as it involves inspection speed 
and sight distance.


Sec. 213.235  Inspection of switches, track crossings, and lift rail 
assemblies or other transition devices on moveable bridges.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each 
switch, turnout, track crossing, and moveable bridge lift rail assembly 
or other transition device shall be inspected on foot at least monthly.
    (b) Each switch in Classes 3 through 5 track that is held in 
position only by the operating mechanism and one connecting rod shall 
be operated to all of its positions during one inspection in every 3 
month period.
    (c) In the case of track that is used less than once a month, each 
switch, turnout, track crossing, and moveable bridge lift rail assembly 
or other transition device shall be inspected on foot before it is 
used.


Sec. 213.237  Inspection of rail.

    (a) In addition to the track inspections required by Sec. 213.233, 
a continuous search for internal defects shall be made of all rail in 
Classes 4 through 5 track, and Class 3 track over which passenger 
trains operate, at least once every 40 million gross tons (mgt) or once 
a year, whichever interval is shorter. On Class 3 track over which 
passenger trains do not operate such a search shall be made at least 
once every 30 mgt or once a year, whichever interval is longer. (This 
paragraph (a) is applicable January 1, 1999.
    (b) Inspection equipment shall be capable of detecting defects 
between joint bars, in the area enclosed by joint bars.
    (c) Each defective rail shall be marked with a highly visible 
marking on both sides of the web and base.
    (d) If the person assigned to operate the rail defect detection 
equipment being used determines that, due to rail surface conditions, a 
valid search for internal defects could not be made over a particular 
length of track, the test on that particular length of track cannot be 
considered as a search for internal defects under paragraph (a) of this 
section. (This paragraph (d) is not retroactive to tests performed 
prior to September 21, 1998.
    (e) If a valid search for internal defects cannot be conducted for 
reasons described in paragraph (d) of this section, the track owner 
shall, before the expiration of time or tonnage limits--
    (1) Conduct a valid search for internal defects;
    (2) Reduce operating speed to a maximum of 25 miles per hour until 
such time as a valid search for internal defects can be made; or
    (3) Remove the rail from service.


Sec. 213.239  Special inspections.

    In the event of fire, flood, severe storm, or other occurrence 
which might have damaged track structure, a special inspection shall be 
made of the track involved as soon as possible after the occurrence 
and, if possible, before the operation of any train over that track.


Sec. 213.241  Inspection records.

    (a) Each owner of track to which this part applies shall keep a 
record of each inspection required to be performed on that track under 
this subpart.
    (b) Each record of an inspection under Secs. 213.4, 213.233, and 
213.235 shall be prepared on the day the inspection is made and signed 
by the person making the inspection. Records shall specify the track 
inspected, date of inspection, location and nature of any deviation 
from the requirements of this part, and the remedial action taken by 
the person making the inspection. The owner shall designate the 
location(s) where each original record shall be maintained for at least 
one year after the inspection covered by the record. The owner shall 
also designate one location, within 100 miles of each state in which 
they conduct operations, where copies of records which apply to those 
operations are either maintained or can be viewed following 10 days 
notice by the Federal Railroad Administration.
    (c) Rail inspection records shall specify the date of inspection, 
the location and nature of any internal defects found, the remedial 
action taken and the date thereof, and the location of any intervals of 
track not tested per Sec. 213.237(d). The owner shall retain a rail 
inspection record for at least two years after the inspection and for 
one year after remedial action is taken.
    (d) Each owner required to keep inspection records under this 
section shall make those records available for inspection and copying 
by the Federal Railroad Administration.
    (e) For purposes of compliance with the requirements of this 
section, an owner of track may maintain and transfer records through 
electronic transmission, storage, and retrieval provided that--
    (1) The electronic system be designed so that the integrity of each 
record is maintained through appropriate levels of security such as 
recognition of an electronic signature, or other means, which uniquely 
identify the initiating person as the author of that record. No two 
persons shall have the same electronic identity;
    (2) The electronic storage of each record shall be initiated by the 
person making the inspection within 24 hours following the completion 
of that inspection;
    (3) The electronic system shall ensure that each record cannot be 
modified in any way, or replaced, once the record is transmitted and 
stored;
    (4) Any amendment to a record shall be electronically stored apart 
from the record which it amends. Each amendment to a record shall be 
uniquely identified as to the person making the amendment;
    (5) The electronic system shall provide for the maintenance of 
inspection records as originally submitted without corruption or loss 
of data;
    (6) Paper copies of electronic records and amendments to those 
records, that may be necessary to document compliance with this part 
shall be made available for inspection and copying by the Federal 
Railroad Administration at the locations specified in paragraph (b) of 
this section; and
    (7) Track inspection records shall be kept available to persons who 
performed the inspections and to persons performing subsequent 
inspections.

Subpart G--Train Operations at Track Classes 6 and Higher


Sec. 213.301  Scope of subpart.

    This subpart applies to all track used for the operation of trains 
at a speed greater than 90 m.p.h. for passenger equipment and greater 
than 80 m.p.h. for freight equipment.

[[Page 34042]]

Sec. 213.303  Responsibility for compliance.

    (a) Any owner of track to which this subpart applies who knows or 
has notice that the track does not comply with the requirements of this 
subpart, shall--
    (1) Bring the track into compliance; or
    (2) Halt operations over that track.
    (b) If an owner of track to which this subpart applies assigns 
responsibility for the track to another person (by lease or otherwise), 
notification of the assignment shall be provided to the appropriate FRA 
Regional Office at least 30 days in advance of the assignment. The 
notification may be made by any party to that assignment, but shall be 
in writing and include the following--
    (1) The name and address of the track owner;
    (2) The name and address of the person to whom responsibility is 
assigned (assignee);
    (3) A statement of the exact relationship between the track owner 
and the assignee;
    (4) A precise identification of the track;
    (5) A statement as to the competence and ability of the assignee to 
carry out the duties of the track owner under this subpart;
    (6) A statement signed by the assignee acknowledging the assignment 
to that person of responsibility for purposes of compliance with this 
subpart.
    (c) The Administrator may hold the track owner or the assignee or 
both responsible for compliance with this subpart and subject to the 
penalties under Sec. 213.15.
    (d) When any person, including a contractor for a railroad or track 
owner, performs any function required by this part, that person is 
required to perform that function in accordance with this part.


Sec. 213.305  Designation of qualified individuals; general 
qualifications.

    Each track owner to which this subpart applies shall designate 
qualified individuals responsible for the maintenance and inspection of 
track in compliance with the safety requirements prescribed in this 
subpart. Each individual, including a contractor or an employee of a 
contractor who is not a railroad employee, designated to:
    (a) Supervise restorations and renewals of track shall meet the 
following minimum requirements:
    (1) At least;
    (i) Five years of responsible supervisory experience in railroad 
track maintenance in track Class 4 or higher and the successful 
completion of a course offered by the employer or by a college level 
engineering program, supplemented by special on the job training 
emphasizing the techniques to be employed in the supervision, 
restoration, and renewal of high speed track; or
    (ii) A combination of at least one year of responsible supervisory 
experience in track maintenance in Class 4 or higher and the successful 
completion of a minimum of 80 hours of specialized training in the 
maintenance of high speed track provided by the employer or by a 
college level engineering program, supplemented by special on the job 
training provided by the employer with emphasis on the maintenance of 
high speed track; or
    (iii) A combination of at least two years of experience in track 
maintenance in track Class 4 or higher and the successful completion of 
a minimum of 120 hours of specialized training in the maintenance of 
high speed track provided by the employer or by a college level 
engineering program supplemented by special on the job training 
provided by the employer with emphasis on the maintenance of high speed 
track.
    (2) Demonstrate to the track owner that the individual:
    (i) Knows and understands the requirements of this subpart;
    (ii) Can detect deviations from those requirements; and
    (iii) Can prescribe appropriate remedial action to correct or 
safely compensate for those deviations; and
    (3) Be authorized in writing by the track owner to prescribe 
remedial actions to correct or safely compensate for deviations from 
the requirements of this subpart and successful completion of a 
recorded examination on this subpart as part of the qualification 
process.
    (b) Inspect track for defects shall meet the following minimum 
qualifications:
    (1) At least:
    (i) Five years of responsible experience inspecting track in Class 
4 or above and the successful completion of a course offered by the 
employer or by a college level engineering program, supplemented by 
special on the job training emphasizing the techniques to be employed 
in the inspection of high speed track; or
    (ii) A combination of at least one year of responsible experience 
in track inspection in Class 4 or above and the successful completion 
of a minimum of 80 hours of specialized training in the inspection of 
high speed track provided by the employer or by a college level 
engineering program, supplemented by special on the job training 
provided by the employer with emphasis on the inspection of high speed 
track.
    (iii) A combination of at least two years of experience in track 
maintenance in Class 4 or above and the successful completion of a 
minimum of 120 hours of specialized training in the inspection of high 
speed track provided by the employer or from a college level 
engineering program, supplemented by special on the job training 
provided by the employer with emphasis on the inspection of high speed 
track.
    (2) Demonstrate to the track owner that the individual:
    (i) Knows and understands the requirements of this subpart;
    (ii) Can detect deviations from those requirements; and
    (iii) Can prescribe appropriate remedial action to correct or 
safely compensate for those deviations; and
    (3) Be authorized in writing by the track owner to prescribe 
remedial actions to correct or safely compensate for deviations from 
the requirements in this subpart and successful completion of a 
recorded examination on this subpart as part of the qualification 
process.
    (c) Individuals designated under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this 
section that inspect continuous welded rail (CWR) track or supervise 
the installation, adjustment, and maintenance of CWR in accordance with 
the written procedures established by the track owner shall have:
    (1) Current qualifications under either paragraph (a) or (b) of 
this section;
    (2) Successfully completed a training course of at least eight 
hours duration specifically developed for the application of written 
CWR procedures issued by the track owner; and
    (3) Demonstrated to the track owner that the individual:
    (i) Knows and understands the requirements of those written CWR 
procedures;
    (ii) Can detect deviations from those requirements; and
    (iii) Can prescribe appropriate remedial action to correct or 
safely compensate for those deviations; and
    (4) Written authorization from the track owner to prescribe 
remedial actions to correct or safely compensate for deviations from 
the requirements in those procedures and successful completion of a 
recorded examination on those procedures as part of the qualification 
process. The recorded examination may be written, or it may be a 
computer file with the results of an interactive training course.
    (d) Persons not fully qualified to supervise certain renewals and 
inspect track as outlined in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this 
section, but with at least one year of maintenance of way or

[[Page 34043]]

signal experience, may pass trains over broken rails and pull aparts 
provided that--
    (1) The track owner determines the person to be qualified and, as 
part of doing so, trains, examines, and re-examines the person 
periodically within two years after each prior examination on the 
following topics as they relate to the safe passage of trains over 
broken rails or pull aparts: rail defect identification, crosstie 
condition, track surface and alinement, gage restraint, rail end 
mismatch, joint bars, and maximum distance between rail ends over which 
trains may be allowed to pass. The sole purpose of the examination is 
to ascertain the person's ability to effectively apply these 
requirements and the examination may not be used to disqualify the 
person from other duties. A minimum of four hours training is adequate 
for initial training;
    (2) The person deems it safe, and train speeds are limited to a 
maximum of 10 m.p.h. over the broken rail or pull apart;
    (3) The person shall watch all movements over the broken rail or 
pull apart and be prepared to stop the train if necessary; and
    (4) Person(s) fully qualified under Sec. 213.305 of this subpart 
are notified and dispatched to the location as soon as practicable for 
the purpose of authorizing movements and effectuating temporary or 
permanent repairs.
    (e) With respect to designations under paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and 
(d) of this section, each track owner shall maintain written records 
of:
    (1) Each designation in effect;
    (2) The basis for each designation, including but not limited to:
    (i) The exact nature of any training courses attended and the dates 
thereof;
    (ii) The manner in which the track owner has determined a 
successful completion of that training course, including test scores or 
other qualifying results;
    (3) Track inspections made by each individual as required by 
Sec. 213.369. These records shall be made available for inspection and 
copying by the Federal Railroad Administration during regular business 
hours.


Sec. 213.307  Class of track: operating speed limits.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section and 
Secs. 213.329, 213.337(a) and 213.345(c), the following maximum 
allowable operating speeds apply:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Over track that meets all of the          The maximum allowable    
 requirements prescribed in this subpart    operating speed for trains 1
                  for--                                 is--            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 6 track............................  110 m.p.h.                   
Class 7 track............................  125 m.p.h.                   
Class 8 track............................  160 m.p.h.\2\                
Class 9 track............................  200 m.p.h.                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Freight may be transported at passenger train speeds if the following 
  conditions are met:                                                   
(1) The vehicles utilized to carry such freight are of equal dynamic    
  performance and have been qualified in accordance with Sections       
  213.345 and 213.329(d) of this subpart.                               
(2) The load distribution and securement in the freight vehicle will not
  adversely affect the dynamic performance of the vehicle. The axle     
  loading pattern is uniform and does not exceed the passenger          
  locomotive axle loadings utilized in passenger service operating at   
  the same maximum speed.                                               
(3) No carrier may accept or transport a hazardous material, as defined 
  at 49 CFR 171.8, except as provided in Column 9A of the Hazardous     
  Materials Table (49 CFR 172.101) for movement in the same train as a  
  passenger-carrying vehicle or in Column 9B of the Table for movement  
  in a train with no passenger-carrying vehicles.                       
2 Operating speeds in excess of 150 m.p.h. are authorized by this part  
  only in conjunction with a rule of particular applicability addressing
  other safety issues presented by the system.                          

    (b) If a segment of track does not meet all of the requirements for 
its intended class, it is to be reclassified to the next lower class of 
track for which it does meet all of the requirements of this subpart. 
If a segment does not meet all of the requirements for Class 6, the 
requirements for Classes 1 through 5 apply.


Sec. 213.309  Restoration or renewal of track under traffic conditions.

    (a) Restoration or renewal of track under traffic conditions is 
limited to the replacement of worn, broken, or missing components or 
fastenings that do not affect the safe passage of trains.
    (b) The following activities are expressly prohibited under traffic 
conditions:
    (1) Any work that interrupts rail continuity, e.g., as in joint bar 
replacement or rail replacement;
    (2) Any work that adversely affects the lateral or vertical 
stability of the track with the exception of spot tamping an isolated 
condition where not more than 15 lineal feet of track are involved at 
any one time and the ambient air temperature is not above 95 degrees 
Fahrenheit; and
    (3) Removal and replacement of the rail fastenings on more than one 
tie at a time within 15 feet.


Sec. 213.311  Measuring track not under load.

    When unloaded track is measured to determine compliance with 
requirements of this subpart, evidence of rail movement, if any, that 
occurs while the track is loaded shall be added to the measurements of 
the unloaded track.


Sec. 213.317  Waivers.

    (a) Any owner of track to which this subpart applies may petition 
the Federal Railroad Administrator for a waiver from any or all 
requirements prescribed in this subpart.
    (b) Each petition for a waiver under this section shall be filed in 
the manner and contain the information required by Secs. 211.7 and 
211.9 of this chapter.
    (c) If the Administrator finds that a waiver is in the public 
interest and is consistent with railroad safety, the Administrator may 
grant the waiver subject to any conditions the Administrator deems 
necessary. Where a waiver is granted, the Administrator publishes a 
notice containing the reasons for granting the waiver.


Sec. 213.319  Drainage.

    Each drainage or other water carrying facility under or immediately 
adjacent to the roadbed shall be maintained and kept free of 
obstruction, to accommodate expected water flow for the area concerned.


Sec. 213.321  Vegetation.

    Vegetation on railroad property which is on or immediately adjacent 
to roadbed shall be controlled so that it does not --
    (a) Become a fire hazard to track-carrying structures;
    (b) Obstruct visibility of railroad signs and signals:
    (1) Along the right of way, and
    (2) At highway-rail crossings;
    (c) Interfere with railroad employees performing normal trackside 
duties;
    (d) Prevent proper functioning of signal and communication lines; 
or
    (e) Prevent railroad employees from visually inspecting moving 
equipment from their normal duty stations.


Sec. 213.323  Track gage.

    (a) Gage is measured between the heads of the rails at right-angles 
to the rails in a plane five-eighths of an inch below the top of the 
rail head.
    (b) Gage shall be within the limits prescribed in the following 
table:

[[Page 34044]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   The  
                                                                  change
                                                                 of gage
                                                                  within
         Class of track           The gage must   But not more   31 feet
                                  be at least--      than--        must 
                                                                  not be
                                                                 greater
                                                                  than--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6..............................  4'8''.........  4'9\1/4\''....  \1/2\''
7..............................  4'8''.........  4'9\1/4\''....  \1/2\''
8..............................  4'8''.........  4'9\1/4\''....  \1/2\''
9..............................  4'8\1/4\''....  4'9\1/4\''....  \1/2\''
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213327  Alinement.

    (a) Uniformity at any point along the track is established by 
averaging the measured mid-chord offset values for nine consecutive 
points centered around that point and which are spaced according to the 
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Chord length                           Spacing          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
31'........................................  7'9''                      
62'........................................  15'6''                     
124'.......................................  31'0''                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) For a single deviation, alinement may not deviate from 
uniformity more than the amount prescribed in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   The deviation   The deviation   The deviation
                                                                       from            from            from     
                                                                   uniformity of   uniformity of   uniformity of
                                                                   the mid-chord   the mid-chord   the mid-chord
                         Class of track                            offset for a    offset for a    offset for a 
                                                                   31-foot chord   62-foot chord  124-foot chord
                                                                    may not be      may not be      may not be  
                                                                    more than--     more than--     more than-- 
                                                                     (inches)        (inches)        (inches)   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6...............................................................           \1/2\           \3/4\          1\1/2\
7...............................................................           \1/2\           \1/2\          1\1/4\
8...............................................................           \1/2\           \1/2\           \3/4\
9...............................................................           \1/2\           \1/2\           \3/4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) For three or more non-overlapping deviations from uniformity in 
track alinement occurring within a distance equal to five times the 
specified chord length, each of which exceeds the limits in the 
following table, each owner of the track to which this subpart applies 
shall maintain the alinement of the track within the limits prescribed 
for each deviation:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   The deviation   The deviation   The deviation
                                                                       from            from            from     
                                                                   uniformity of   uniformity of   uniformity of
                                                                   the mid-chord   the mid-chord   the mid-chord
                         Class of track                            offset for a    offset for a    offset for a 
                                                                   31-foot chord   62-foot chord  124-foot chord
                                                                    may not be      may not be      may not be  
                                                                    more than--     more than--     more than-- 
                                                                     (inches)        (inches)        (inches)   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6...............................................................           \3/8\           \1/2\               1
7...............................................................           \3/8\           \3/8\           \7/8\
8...............................................................           \3/8\           \3/8\           \1/2\
9...............................................................           \3/8\           \3/8\           \1/2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213.329  Curves, elevation and speed limitations.

    (a) The maximum crosslevel on the outside rail of a curve may not 
be more than 7 inches. The outside rail of a curve may not be more than 
\1/2\ inch lower than the inside rail.
    (b) (1) The maximum allowable operating speed for each curve is 
determined by the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.008

Where--

Vmax = Maximum allowable operating speed (miles per hour).
Ea = Actual elevation of the outside rail (inches) \4\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Actual elevation for each 155 foot track segment in the body 
of the curve is determined by averaging the elevation for 10 points 
through the segment at 15.5 foot spacing. If the curve length is 
less than 155 feet, average the points through the full length of 
the body of the curve. If Eu exceeds 4 inches, the Vmax 
formula applies to the spirals on both ends of the curve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D = Degree of curvature (degrees) \5\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Degree of curvature is determined by averaging the degree of 
curvature over the same track segment as the elevation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 = 3 inches of unbalance.

    (2) Appendix A includes tables showing maximum allowable operating 
speeds computed in accordance with this formula for various elevations 
and degrees of curvature for track speeds greater than 90 m.p.h.
    (c) For rolling stock meeting the requirements specified in 
paragraph (d) of this section, the maximum operating speed for each 
curve may be determined by the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.009

Where--

Vmax = Maximum allowable operating speed (miles per hour).
Ea = Actual elevation of the outside rail (inches) \4\.
D = Degree of curvature (degrees) \5\.
Eu = Unbalanced elevation (inches).

    (d) Qualified equipment may be operated at curving speeds 
determined by the formula in paragraph (c) of this section, provided 
each specific class of equipment is approved for operation by

[[Page 34045]]

the Federal Railroad Administration and the railroad demonstrates 
that--
    (1) When positioned on a track with uniform superelevation, 
Ea, reflecting the intended target cant deficiency, 
Eu, no wheel of the equipment unloads to a value of 60 
percent or less of its static value on perfectly level track and, for 
passenger-carrying equipment, the roll angle between the floor of the 
vehicle and the horizontal does not exceed 5.7 degrees.
    (2) When positioned on a track with a uniform 7-inch 
superelevation, no wheel unloads to a value less than 60% of its static 
value on perfectly level track and, for passenger-carrying equipment, 
the angle, measured about the roll axis, between the floor of the 
vehicle and the horizontal does not exceed 8.6 degrees.
    (e) The track owner shall notify the Federal Railroad Administrator 
no less than thirty calendar days prior to any proposed implementation 
of the higher curving speeds allowed when the ``Eu'' term, 
above, will exceed three inches. This notification shall be in writing 
and shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:
    (1) A complete description of the class of equipment involved, 
including schematic diagrams of the suspension system and the location 
of the center of gravity above top of rail;
    (2) A complete description of the test procedure \6\ and 
instrumentation used to qualify the equipment and the maximum values 
for wheel unloading and roll angles which were observed during testing;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The test procedure may be conducted in a test facility 
whereby all wheels on one side (right or left) of the equipment are 
raised or lowered by six and then seven inches, the vertical wheel 
loads under each wheel are measured and a level is used to record 
the angle through which the floor of the vehicle has been rotated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) Procedures or standards in effect which relate to the 
maintenance of the suspension system for the particular class of 
equipment;
    (4) Identification of line segment on which the higher curving 
speeds are proposed to be implemented.
    (f) A track owner, or an operator of a passenger or commuter 
service, who provides passenger or commuter service over trackage of 
more than one track owner with the same class of equipment, may provide 
written notification to the Federal Railroad Administrator with the 
written consent of the other affected track owners.


Sec. 213.331  Track surface.

    (a) For a single deviation in track surface, each owner of the 
track to which this subpart applies shall maintain the surface of its 
track within the limits prescribed in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Class of track              
                             -------------------------------------------
        Track surface             6          7          8          9    
                               (inches)   (inches)   (inches)   (inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The deviation from uniform                                              
 \1\ profile on either rail                                             
 at the midordinate of a 31-                                            
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................          1          1      \3/4\      \1/2\
The deviation from uniform                                              
 profile on either rail at                                              
 the midordinate of a 62-                                               
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................          1          1          1      \3/4\
The deviation from uniform                                              
 profile on either rail at                                              
 the midordinate of a 124-                                              
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................     1\3/4\     1\1/2\     1\1/4\     1\1/4\
The difference in crosslevel                                            
 between any two points less                                            
 than 62 feet apart may not                                             
 be more than \2\...........     1\1/2\     1\1/2\     1\1/2\     1\1/2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Uniformity for profile is established by placing the midpoint of the
  specified chord at the point of maximum measurement.                  
\2\ However, to control harmonics on jointed track with staggered       
  joints, the crosslevel differences shall not exceed 1\1/4\ inches in  
  all of six consecutive pairs of joints, as created by 7 joints. Track 
  with joints staggered less than 10 feet shall not be considered as    
  having staggered joints. Joints within the 7 low joints outside of the
  regular joint spacing shall not be considered as joints for purposes  
  of this footnote.                                                     

    (b) For three or more non-overlapping deviations in track surface 
occurring within a distance equal to five times the specified chord 
length, each of which exceeds the limits in the following table, each 
owner of the track to which this subpart applies shall maintain the 
surface of the track within the limits prescribed for each deviation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Class of track              
                             -------------------------------------------
        Track surface             6          7          8          9    
                               (inches)   (inches)   (inches)   (inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The deviation from uniform                                              
 profile on either rail at                                              
 the midordinate of a 31-                                               
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................      \3/4\      \3/4\      \1/2\      \3/8\
The deviation from uniform                                              
 profile on either rail at                                              
 the midordinate of a 62-                                               
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................      \3/4\      \3/4\      \3/4\      \1/2\
The deviation from uniform                                              
 profile on either rail at                                              
 the midordinate of a 124-                                              
 foot chord may not be more                                             
 than.......................     1\1/4\          1      \7/8\      \7/8\
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213.333  Automated vehicle inspection systems.

    (a) For track Class 7, a qualifying Track Geometry Measurement 
System (TGMS) vehicle shall be operated at least twice within 120 
calendar days with not less than 30 days between inspections. For track 
Classes 8 and 9, it shall be operated at least twice within 60 days 
with not less than 15 days between inspections.
    (b) A qualifying TGMS shall meet or exceed minimum design 
requirements which specify that--
    (1) Track geometry measurements shall be taken no more than 3 feet 
away from the contact point of wheels carrying a vertical load of no 
less than 10,000 pounds per wheel;
    (2) Track geometry measurements shall be taken and recorded on a 
distance-based sampling interval which shall not exceed 2 feet; and
    (3) Calibration procedures and parameters are assigned to the 
system which assure that measured and recorded values accurately 
represent track conditions. Track geometry measurements recorded by the 
system shall not differ on repeated runs at the same site at the same 
speed more than 1/8 inch.
    (c) A qualifying TGMS shall be capable of measuring and processing 
the necessary track geometry parameters, at an interval of no more than 
every 2 feet,

[[Page 34046]]

which enables the system to determine compliance with: Sec. 213.323, 
Track gage; Sec. 213.327, Alinement; Sec. 213.329, Curves; elevation 
and speed limitations; and Sec. 213.331, Track surface.
    (d) A qualifying TGMS shall be capable of producing, within 24 
hours of the inspection, output reports that --
    (1) Provide a continuous plot, on a constant-distance axis, of all 
measured track geometry parameters required in paragraph (c) of this 
section;
    (2) Provide an exception report containing a systematic listing of 
all track geometry conditions which constitute an exception to the 
class of track over the segment surveyed.
    (e) The output reports required under paragraph (c) of this section 
shall contain sufficient location identification information which 
enable field forces to easily locate indicated exceptions.
    (f) Following a track inspection performed by a qualifying TGMS, 
the track owner shall, within two days after the inspection, field 
verify and institute remedial action for all exceptions to the class of 
track.
    (g) The track owner shall maintain for a period of one year 
following an inspection performed by a qualifying TGMS, copy of the 
plot and the exception printout for the track segment involved, and 
additional records which:
    (1) Specify the date the inspection was made and the track segment 
involved; and
    (2) Specify the location, remedial action taken, and the date 
thereof, for all listed exceptions to the class.
    (h) For track Classes 8 and 9, a qualifying Gage Restraint 
Measurement System (GRMS) shall be operated at least once annually with 
at least 180 days between inspections to continuously compare loaded 
track gage to unloaded gage under a known loading condition. The 
lateral capacity of the track structure shall not permit a gage 
widening ratio (GWR) greater than 0.5 inches.
    (i) A GRMS shall meet or exceed minimum design requirements which 
specify that--
    (1) Gage restraint shall be measured between the heads of the 
rail--
    (i) At an interval not exceeding 16 inches;
    (ii) Under an applied vertical load of no less than 10,000 pounds 
per rail;
    (iii) Under an applied lateral load which provides for lateral/
vertical load ratio of between 0.5 and 1.25 \7\, and a load severity 
greater than 3,000 pounds but less than 8,000 pounds per rail. Load 
severity is defined by the formula--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ GRMS equipment using load combinations developing L/V ratios 
which exceed 0.8 shall be operated with caution to protect against 
the risk of wheel climb by the test wheelset.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S = L -cV

where:

S = Load severity, defined as the lateral load applied to the fastener 
system (pounds).
L = Actual lateral load applied (pounds).
c = Coefficient of friction between rail/tie which is assigned a 
nominal value of (0.4).
V = Actual vertical load applied (pounds).

    (2) The measured gage value shall be converted to a gage widening 
ratio (GWR) as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22JN98.010

Where:

UTG=Unloaded track gage measured by the GRMS vehicle at a point no less 
than 10 feet from any lateral or vertical load application.
LTG=Loaded track gage measured by the GRMS vehicle at the point of 
application of the lateral load.
L=Actual lateral load applied (pounds).
    (j) At least one vehicle in one train per day operating in Classes 
8 and 9 shall be equipped with functioning on-board truck frame and 
carbody accelerometers. Each track owner shall have in effect written 
procedures for the notification of track personnel when on-board 
accelerometers on trains in Classes 8 and 9 indicate a possible track-
related condition.
    (k) For track Classes 7 , 8 and 9, an instrumented car having 
dynamic response characteristics that are representative of other 
equipment assigned to service or a portable device that monitors on-
board instrumentation on trains shall be operated over the track at the 
revenue speed profile at a frequency of at least twice within 60 days 
with not less than 15 days between inspections. The instrumented car or 
the portable device shall monitor vertically and laterally oriented 
accelerometers placed near the end of the vehicle at the floor level. 
In addition, accelerometers shall be mounted on the truck frame. If the 
carbody lateral, carbody vertical, or truck frame lateral safety limits 
in the following table of vehicle/track interaction safety limits are 
exceeded, speeds will be reduced until these safety limits are not 
exceeded.
    (l) For track Classes 8 and 9, an instrumented car having dynamic 
response characteristics that are representative of other equipment 
assigned to service shall be operated over the track at the revenue 
speed profile annually with not less than 180 days between inspections. 
The instrumented car shall be equipped with functioning instrumented 
wheelsets to measure wheel/rail forces. If the wheel/rail force limits 
in the following table of vehicle/track interaction safety limits are 
exceeded, speeds will be reduced until these safety limits are not 
exceeded.
    (m) The track owner shall maintain a copy of the most recent 
exception printouts for the inspections required under paragraphs (k) 
and (l) of this section.

                                                                                                                
                                     Vehicle/Track Interaction Safety Limits                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Parameter                      Safety limit               Filter/window             Requirements     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Wheel/Rail Forces \1\                                                                                      
Single Wheel Vertical Load       0.1...............  5 ft...................  No wheel of the        
 Ratio.                                                                                   equipment shall be    
                                                                                          permitted to unload to
                                                                                          less than 10% of the  
                                                                                          static vertical wheel 
                                                                                          load. The static      
                                                                                          vertical wheel load is
                                                                                          defined as the load   
                                                                                          that the wheel would  
                                                                                          carry when stationary 
                                                                                          on level track. The   
                                                                                          vertical wheel load   
                                                                                          limit shall be        
                                                                                          increased by the      
                                                                                          amount of measurement 
                                                                                          error.                
Single Wheel L/V Ratio.........   tan--.5   5 ft...................  The ratio of the       
                                  1 + .5tan.                                     lateral force that any
                                                                                          wheel exerts on an    
                                                                                          individual rail to the
                                                                                          vertical force exerted
                                                                                          by the same wheel on  
                                                                                          the rail shall be less
                                                                                          than the safety limit 
                                                                                          calculated for the    
                                                                                          wheel's flange angle  
                                                                                          ().          

[[Page 34047]]

                                                                                                                
Net Axle L/V Ratio.............   0.5..............  5 ft...................  The net lateral force  
                                                                                          exerted by any axle on
                                                                                          the track shall not   
                                                                                          exceed 50% of the     
                                                                                          static vertical load  
                                                                                          that the axle exerts  
                                                                                          on the track.         
Truck Side L/V Ratio...........   0.6..............  5 ft...................  The ratio of the       
                                                                                          lateral forces that   
                                                                                          the wheels on one side
                                                                                          of any truck exert on 
                                                                                          an individual rail to 
                                                                                          the vertical forces   
                                                                                          exerted by the same   
                                                                                          wheels on that rail   
                                                                                          shall be less than    
                                                                                          0.6.                  
         Accelerations                                                                                          
Carbody Lateral \2\............   0.5 g peak-to-     10 Hz 1 sec window.....  The peak-to-peak       
                                  peak.                                                   accelerations,        
                                                                                          measured as the       
                                                                                          algebraic difference  
                                                                                          between the two       
                                                                                          extreme values of     
                                                                                          measured acceleration 
                                                                                          in a one second time  
                                                                                          period, shall not     
                                                                                          exceed 0.5 g.         
Carbody Vertical \2\...........   0.6 g peak-to-     10 Hz 1 sec window.....  The peak-to-peak       
                                  peak.                                                   accelerations,        
                                                                                          measured as the       
                                                                                          algebraic difference  
                                                                                          between the two       
                                                                                          extreme values of     
                                                                                          measured acceleration 
                                                                                          in a one-second time  
                                                                                          period, shall not     
                                                                                          exceed 0.6 g.         
Truck Lateral \3\ .............   0.4 g RMS mean-    10 Hz 2 sec window.....  Truck hunting \4\ shall
                                  removed.                                                not develop below the 
                                                                                          maximum authorized    
                                                                                          speed.                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The lateral and vertical wheel forces shall be measured with instrumented wheelsets with the measurements   
  processed through a low pass filter with a minimum cut-off frequency of 25 Hz. The sample rate for wheel force
  data shall be at least 250 samples/sec.                                                                       
\2\ Carbody lateral and vertical accelerations shall be measured near the car ends at the floor level.          
\3\ Truck accelerations in the lateral direction shall be measured on the truck frame. The measurements shall be
  processed through a filter having a pass band of 0.5 to 10 Hz.                                                
\4\ Truck hunting is defined as a sustained cyclic oscillation of the truck which is evidenced by lateral       
  accelerations in excess of 0.4 g root mean square (mean-removed) for 2 seconds.                               

Sec. 213.334  Ballast; general.

    Unless it is otherwise structurally supported, all track shall be 
supported by material which will--
    (a) Transmit and distribute the load of the track and railroad 
rolling equipment to the subgrade;
    (b) Restrain the track laterally, longitudinally, and vertically 
under dynamic loads imposed by railroad rolling equipment and thermal 
stress exerted by the rails;
    (c) Provide adequate drainage for the track; and
    (d) Maintain proper track crosslevel, surface, and alinement.


Sec. 213.335  Crossties.

    (a) Crossties shall be made of a material to which rail can be 
securely fastened.
    (b) Each 39 foot segment of track shall have--
    (1) A sufficient number of crossties which in combination provide 
effective support that will--
    (i) Hold gage within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.323(b);
    (ii) Maintain surface within the limits prescribed in Sec. 213.331; 
and
    (iii) Maintain alinement within the limits prescribed in 
Sec. 213.327.
    (2) The minimum number and type of crossties specified in paragraph 
(c) of this section effectively distributed to support the entire 
segment; and
    (3) Crossties of the type specified in paragraph (c) of this 
section that are(is) located at a joint location as specified in 
paragraph (e) of this section.
    (c) For non-concrete tie construction, each 39 foot segment of 
Class 6 track shall have fourteen crossties; Classes 7, 8 and 9 shall 
have 18 crossties which are not--
    (1) Broken through;
    (2) Split or otherwise impaired to the extent the crossties will 
allow the ballast to work through, or will not hold spikes or rail 
fasteners;
    (3) So deteriorated that the tie plate or base of rail can move 
laterally \3/8\ inch relative to the crossties;
    (4) Cut by the tie plate through more than 40 percent of a 
crosstie's thickness;
    (5) Configured with less than 2 rail holding spikes or fasteners 
per tie plate; or
    (6) So unable, due to insufficient fastener toeload, to maintain 
longitudinal restraint and maintain rail hold down and gage.
    (d) For concrete tie construction, each 39 foot segment of Class 6 
track shall have fourteen crossties, Classes 7, 8 and 9 shall have 16 
crossties which are not--
    (1) So deteriorated that the prestress strands are ineffective or 
withdrawn into the tie at one end and the tie exhibits structural 
cracks in the rail seat or in the gage of track;
    (2) Configured with less than 2 fasteners on the same rail;
    (3) So deteriorated in the vicinity of the rail fastener such that 
the fastener assembly may pull out or move laterally more than \3/8\ 
inch relative to the crosstie;
    (4) So deteriorated that the fastener base plate or base of rail 
can move laterally more than \3/8\ inch relative to the crossties;
    (5) So deteriorated that rail seat abrasion is sufficiently deep so 
as to cause loss of rail fastener toeload;
    (6) Completely broken through; or
    (7) So unable, due to insufficient fastener toeload, to maintain 
longitudinal restraint and maintain rail hold down and gage.
    (e) Class 6 track shall have one non-defective crosstie whose 
centerline is within 18 inches of the rail joint location or two 
crossties whose center lines are within 24 inches either side of the 
rail joint location. Class 7, 8, and 9 track shall have two non-
defective ties within 24 inches each side of the rail joint.
    (f) For track constructed without crossties, such as slab track and 
track connected directly to bridge structural components, the track 
structure shall meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (ii), 
and (iii) of this section.
    (g) In Classes 7, 8 and 9 there shall be at least three non-
defective ties each side of a defective tie.
    (h) Where timber crossties are in use there shall be tie plates 
under the running rails on at least nine of 10 consecutive ties.

[[Page 34048]]

    (i) No metal object which causes a concentrated load by solely 
supporting a rail shall be allowed between the base of the rail and the 
bearing surface of the tie plate.


Sec. 213.337  Defective rails.

    (a) When an owner of track to which this part applies learns, 
through inspection or otherwise, that a rail in that track contains any 
of the defects listed in the following table, a person designated under 
Sec. 213.305 shall determine whether or not the track may continue in 
use. If the person determines that the track may continue in use, 
operation over the defective rail is not permitted until--
    (1) The rail is replaced; or
    (2) The remedial action prescribed in the table is initiated--

                                                                     Remedial Action                                                                    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Length of defect (inch)                       Percent of rail head                                 
                                ----------------------------------------------------------------   cross-sectional area                                 
                                                                                                    weakened by defect        If defective rail is not  
             Defect                                                                   But not   --------------------------  replaced, take the remedial 
                                                     More than                       more than                  But not      action prescribed in note  
                                                                                                  Less than    less than                                
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transverse fissure.............                                                                           70            5  B.                           
                                                                                                         100           70  A2.                          
                                                                                                                      100  A.                           
Compound fissure...............                                                                           70            5  B.                           
                                                                                                         100           70  A2.                          
                                                                                                                      100  A.                           
Detail fracture Engine burn                                                                               25            5  C.                           
 fracture Defective weld.                                                                                 80           25  D.                           
                                                                                                         100           80  [A2] or [E and H.]           
                                                                                                                      100  [A] or [E and H].            
Horizontal split head Vertical   1................................................            2                            H and F.                     
 split head Split web Piped      2................................................            4                            I and G.                     
 rail.                           4................................................                                         B.                           
Head web separation              (\1\)............................................        (\1\)        (\1\)               A.                           
                                 \1/2\............................................            1                            H and F.                     
Bolt hole crack................  1................................................       1\1/2\                            H and G.                     
                                 1\1/2\...........................................                                         A.                           
                                 (\1\)............................................        (\1\)        (\1\)               A.                           
Broken base....................  1................................................            6                            D.                           
                                 6................................................                                         [A] or [E and I].            
 Ordinary break................                                                                                            A or E.                      
Damaged rail...................                                                                                            D.                           
Flattened rail.................  Depth  \3/8\ and......................                                         H.                           
                                 Length  8.............................                                                                      
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(\1\) Break out in rail head.                                                                                                                           

    Notes: 
    A. Assign person designated under Sec. 213.305 to visually 
supervise each operation over defective rail.
    A2. Assign person designated under Sec. 213.305 to make visual 
inspection. That person may authorize operation to continue without 
visual supervision at a maximum of 10 m.p.h. for up to 24 hours 
prior to another such visual inspection or replacement or repair of 
the rail.
    B. Limit operating speed over defective rail to that as 
authorized by a person designated under Sec. 213.305(a)(1)(i) or 
(ii). The operating speed cannot be over 30 m.p.h.
    C. Apply joint bars bolted only through the outermost holes to 
defect within 20 days after it is determined to continue the track 
in use. Limit operating speed over defective rail to 30 m.p.h. until 
joint bars are applied; thereafter, limit speed to 50 m.p.h. When a 
search for internal rail defects is conducted under Sec. 213.339 and 
defects are discovered which require remedial action C, the 
operating speed shall be limited to 50 m.p.h., for a period not to 
exceed 4 days. If the defective rail has not been removed from the 
track or a permanent repair made within 4 days of the discovery, 
limit operating speed over the defective rail to 30 m.p.h. until 
joint bars are applied; thereafter, limit speed to 50 m.p.h.
    D. Apply joint bars bolted only through the outermost holes to 
defect within 10 days after it is determined to continue the track 
in use. Limit operating speed over the defective rail to 30 m.p.h. 
or less as authorized by a person designated under 
Sec. 213.305(a)(1)(i) or (ii) until joint bars are applied; 
thereafter, limit speed to 50 m.p.h.
    E. Apply joint bars to defect and bolt in accordance with 
Sec. 213.351(d) and (e).
    F. Inspect rail 90 days after it is determined to continue the 
track in use.
    G. Inspect rail 30 days after it is determined to continue the 
track in use.
    H. Limit operating speed over defective rail to 50 m.p.h.
    I. Limit operating speed over defective rail to 30 m.p.h.

    (b) As used in this section--
    (1) Transverse fissure means a progressive crosswise fracture 
starting from a crystalline center or nucleus inside the head from 
which it spreads outward as a smooth, bright, or dark, round or oval 
surface substantially at a right angle to the length of the rail. The 
distinguishing features of a transverse fissure from other types of 
fractures or defects are the crystalline center or nucleus and the 
nearly smooth surface of the development which surrounds it.
    (2) Compound fissure means a progressive fracture originating in a 
horizontal split head which turns up or down in the head of the rail as 
a smooth, bright, or dark surface progressing until substantially at a 
right angle to the length of the rail. Compound fissures require 
examination of both faces of the fracture to locate the horizontal 
split head from which they originate.
    (3) Horizontal split head means a horizontal progressive defect 
originating inside of the rail head, usually one-quarter inch or more 
below the running surface and progressing horizontally in all 
directions, and generally accompanied by a flat spot on the running 
surface. The defect appears as a crack lengthwise of the rail when it 
reaches the side of the rail head.
    (4) Vertical split head means a vertical split through or near the 
middle of the head, and extending into or

[[Page 34049]]

through it. A crack or rust streak may show under the head close to the 
web or pieces may be split off the side of the head.
    (5) Split web means a lengthwise crack along the side of the web 
and extending into or through it.
    (6) Piped rail means a vertical split in a rail, usually in the 
web, due to failure of the shrinkage cavity in the ingot to unite in 
rolling.
    (7) Broken base means any break in the base of the rail.
    (8) Detail fracture means a progressive fracture originating at or 
near the surface of the rail head. These fractures should not be 
confused with transverse fissures, compound fissures, or other defects 
which have internal origins. Detail fractures may arise from shelly 
spots, head checks, or flaking.
    (9) Engine burn fracture means a progressive fracture originating 
in spots where driving wheels have slipped on top of the rail head. In 
developing downward they frequently resemble the compound or even 
transverse fissures with which they should not be confused or 
classified.
    (10) Ordinary break means a partial or complete break in which 
there is no sign of a fissure, and in which none of the other defects 
described in this paragraph (b) are found.
    (11) Damaged rail means any rail broken or injured by wrecks, 
broken, flat, or unbalanced wheels, slipping, or similar causes.
    (12) Flattened rail means a short length of rail, not a joint, 
which has flattened out across the width of the rail head to a depth of 
\3/8\ inch or more below the rest of the rail. Flattened rail 
occurrences have no repetitive regularity and thus do not include 
corrugations, and have no apparent localized cause such as a weld or 
engine burn. Their individual length is relatively short, as compared 
to a condition such as head flow on the low rail of curves.
    (13) Bolt hole crack means a crack across the web, originating from 
a bolt hole, and progressing on a path either inclined upward toward 
the rail head or inclined downward toward the base. Fully developed 
bolt hole cracks may continue horizontally along the head/web or base/
web fillet, or they may progress into and through the head or base to 
separate a piece of the rail end from the rail. Multiple cracks 
occurring in one rail end are considered to be a single defect. 
However, bolt hole cracks occurring in adjacent rail ends within the 
same joint shall be reported as separate defects.
    (14) Defective weld means a field or plant weld containing any 
discontinuities or pockets, exceeding 5 percent of the rail head area 
individually or 10 percent in the aggregate, oriented in or near the 
transverse plane, due to incomplete penetration of the weld metal 
between the rail ends, lack of fusion between weld and rail end metal, 
entrainment of slag or sand, under-bead or other shrinkage cracking, or 
fatigue cracking. Weld defects may originate in the rail head, web, or 
base, and in some cases, cracks may progress from the defect into 
either or both adjoining rail ends.
    (15) Head and web separation means a progressive fracture, 
longitudinally separating the head from the web of the rail at the head 
fillet area.


Sec. 213.339  Inspection of rail in service.

    (a) A continuous search for internal defects shall be made of all 
rail in track at least twice annually with not less than 120 days 
between inspections.
    (b) Inspection equipment shall be capable of detecting defects 
between joint bars, in the area enclosed by joint bars.
    (c) Each defective rail shall be marked with a highly visible 
marking on both sides of the web and base.
    (d) If the person assigned to operate the rail defect detection 
equipment being used determines that, due to rail surface conditions, a 
valid search for internal defects could not be made over a particular 
length of track, the test on that particular length of track cannot be 
considered as a search for internal defects under Sec. 213.337(a).
    (e) If a valid search for internal defects cannot be conducted for 
reasons described in paragraph (d) of this section, the track owner 
shall, before the expiration of time limits--
    (1) Conduct a valid search for internal defects;
    (2) Reduce operating speed to a maximum of 25 miles per hour until 
such time as a valid search for internal defects can be made; or
    (3) Remove the rail from service.


Sec. 213.341  Initial inspection of new rail and welds.

    The track owner shall provide for the initial inspection of newly 
manufactured rail, and for initial inspection of new welds made in 
either new or used rail. A track owner may demonstrate compliance with 
this section by providing for:
    (a) In-service inspection--A scheduled periodic inspection of rail 
and welds that have been placed in service, if conducted in accordance 
with the provisions of Sec. 213.339, and if conducted not later than 90 
days after installation, shall constitute compliance with paragraphs 
(b) and (c) of this section;
    (b) Mill inspection--A continuous inspection at the rail 
manufacturer's mill shall constitute compliance with the requirement 
for initial inspection of new rail, provided that the inspection 
equipment meets the applicable requirements specified in Sec. 213.339. 
The track owner shall obtain a copy of the manufacturer's report of 
inspection and retain it as a record until the rail receives its first 
scheduled inspection under Sec. 213.339;
    (c) Welding plant inspection--A continuous inspection at a welding 
plant, if conducted in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) 
of this section, and accompanied by a plant operator's report of 
inspection which is retained as a record by the track owner, shall 
constitute compliance with the requirements for initial inspection of 
new rail and plant welds, or of new plant welds made in used rail; and
    (d) Inspection of field welds--An initial inspection of field 
welds, either those joining the ends of CWR strings or those made for 
isolated repairs, shall be conducted not less than one day and not more 
than 30 days after the welds have been made. The initial inspection may 
be conducted by means of portable test equipment. The track owner shall 
retain a record of such inspections until the welds receive their first 
scheduled inspection under Sec. 213.339.
    (e) Each defective rail found during inspections conducted under 
paragraph (a) or (d) of this section shall be marked with highly 
visible markings on both sides of the web and base and the remedial 
action as appropriate under Sec. 213.337 will apply.


Sec. 213.343  Continuous welded rail (CWR).

    Each track owner with track constructed of CWR shall have in effect 
written procedures which address the installation, adjustment, 
maintenance and inspection of CWR, and a training program for the 
application of those procedures, which shall be submitted to the 
Federal Railroad Administration within six months following the 
effective date of this rule. FRA reviews each plan for compliance with 
the following--
    (a) Procedures for the installation and adjustment of CWR which 
include--
    (1) Designation of a desired rail installation temperature range 
for the geographic area in which the CWR is located; and
    (2) De-stressing procedures/methods which address proper attainment 
of the desired rail installation temperature range when adjusting CWR.

[[Page 34050]]

    (b) Rail anchoring or fastening requirements that will provide 
sufficient restraint to limit longitudinal rail and crosstie movement 
to the extent practical, and specifically addressing CWR rail anchoring 
or fastening patterns on bridges, bridge approaches, and at other 
locations where possible longitudinal rail and crosstie movement 
associated with normally expected train-induced forces, is restricted.
    (c) Procedures which specifically address maintaining a desired 
rail installation temperature range when cutting CWR including rail 
repairs, in-track welding, and in conjunction with adjustments made in 
the area of tight track, a track buckle, or a pull-apart. Rail repair 
practices shall take into consideration existing rail temperature so 
that--
    (1) When rail is removed, the length installed shall be determined 
by taking into consideration the existing rail temperature and the 
desired rail installation temperature range; and
    (2) Under no circumstances should rail be added when the rail 
temperature is below that designated by paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section, without provisions for later adjustment.
    (d) Procedures which address the monitoring of CWR in curved track 
for inward shifts of alinement toward the center of the curve as a 
result of disturbed track.
    (e) Procedures which control train speed on CWR track when --
    (1) Maintenance work, track rehabilitation, track construction, or 
any other event occurs which disturbs the roadbed or ballast section 
and reduces the lateral and/or longitudinal resistance of the track; 
and
    (2) In formulating the procedures under this paragraph (e), the 
track owner shall--
    (i) Determine the speed required, and the duration and subsequent 
removal of any speed restriction based on the restoration of the 
ballast, along with sufficient ballast re-consolidation to stabilize 
the track to a level that can accommodate expected train-induced 
forces. Ballast re-consolidation can be achieved through either the 
passage of train tonnage or mechanical stabilization procedures, or 
both; and
    (ii) Take into consideration the type of crossties used.
    (f) Procedures which prescribe when physical track inspections are 
to be performed to detect buckling prone conditions in CWR track. At a 
minimum, these procedures shall address inspecting track to identify --
    (1) Locations where tight or kinky rail conditions are likely to 
occur;
    (2) Locations where track work of the nature described in paragraph 
(e)(1) of this section have recently been performed; and
    (3) In formulating the procedures under this paragraph (f), the 
track owner shall--
    (i) Specify the timing of the inspection; and
    (ii) Specify the appropriate remedial actions to be taken when 
buckling prone conditions are found.
    (g) The track owner shall have in effect a comprehensive training 
program for the application of these written CWR procedures, with 
provisions for periodic re-training, for those individuals designated 
under Sec. 213.305(c) of this part as qualified to supervise the 
installation, adjustment, and maintenance of CWR track and to perform 
inspections of CWR track.
    (h) The track owner shall prescribe recordkeeping requirements 
necessary to provide an adequate history of track constructed with CWR. 
At a minimum, these records shall include:
    (1) Rail temperature, location and date of CWR installations. This 
record shall be retained for at least one year; and
    (2) A record of any CWR installation or maintenance work that does 
not conform with the written procedures. Such record shall include the 
location of the rail and be maintained until the CWR is brought into 
conformance with such procedures.
    (i) As used in this section--
    (1) Adjusting/de-stressing means the procedure by which a rail's 
temperature is re-adjusted to the desired value. It typically consists 
of cutting the rail and removing rail anchoring devices, which provides 
for the necessary expansion and contraction, and then re-assembling the 
track.
    (2) Buckling incident means the formation of a lateral mis-
alinement sufficient in magnitude to constitute a deviation of 5 inches 
measured with a 62-foot chord. These normally occur when rail 
temperatures are relatively high and are caused by high longitudinal 
compressive forces.
    (3) Continuous welded rail (CWR) means rail that has been welded 
together into lengths exceeding 400 feet.
    (4) Desired rail installation temperature range means the rail 
temperature range, within a specific geographical area, at which forces 
in CWR should not cause a buckling incident in extreme heat, or a pull-
apart during extreme cold weather.
    (5) Disturbed track means the disturbance of the roadbed or ballast 
section, as a result of track maintenance or any other event, which 
reduces the lateral or longitudinal resistance of the track, or both.
    (6) Mechanical stabilization means a type of procedure used to 
restore track resistance to disturbed track following certain 
maintenance operations. This procedure may incorporate dynamic track 
stabilizers or ballast consolidators, which are units of work equipment 
that are used as a substitute for the stabilization action provided by 
the passage of tonnage trains.
    (7) Rail anchors means those devices which are attached to the rail 
and bear against the side of the crosstie to control longitudinal rail 
movement. Certain types of rail fasteners also act as rail anchors and 
control longitudinal rail movement by exerting a downward clamping 
force on the upper surface of the rail base.
    (8) Rail temperature means the temperature of the rail, measured 
with a rail thermometer.
    (9) Tight/kinky rail means CWR which exhibits minute alinement 
irregularities which indicate that the rail is in a considerable amount 
of compression.
    (10) Train-induced forces means the vertical, longitudinal, and 
lateral dynamic forces which are generated during train movement and 
which can contribute to the buckling potential.
    (11) Track lateral resistance means the resistance provided to the 
rail/crosstie structure against lateral displacement.
    (12) Track longitudinal resistance means the resistance provided by 
the rail anchors/rail fasteners and the ballast section to the rail/
crosstie structure against longitudinal displacement.


Sec. 213.345  Vehicle qualification testing.

    (a) All rolling stock types which operate at Class 6 speeds and 
above shall be qualified for operation for their intended track classes 
in order to demonstrate that the vehicle dynamic response to track 
alinement and geometry variations are within acceptable limits to 
assure safe operation. Rolling stock operating in Class 6 within one 
year prior to the promulgation of this subpart shall be considered as 
being successfully qualified for Class 6 track and vehicles presently 
operating at Class 7 speeds by reason of conditional waivers shall be 
considered as qualified for Class 7.
    (b) The qualification testing shall ensure that, at any speed less 
than 10 m.p.h. above the proposed maximum operating speed, the 
equipment will not exceed the wheel/rail force safety limits and the 
truck lateral accelerations

[[Page 34051]]

specified in Sec. 213.333, and the testing shall demonstrate the 
following:
    (1) The vertical acceleration, as measured by a vertical 
accelerometer mounted on the car floor, shall be limited to no greater 
than 0.55g single event, peak-to-peak.
    (2) The lateral acceleration, as measured by a lateral 
accelerometer mounted on the car floor, shall be limited to no greater 
than 0.3g single event, peak-to-peak; and
    (3) The combination of the lateral acceleration (L) and the 
vertical acceleration (V) within any period of two consecutive seconds 
as expressed by the square root of (V2 + L2) 
shall be limited to no greater than 0.604, where L may not exceed 0.3g 
and V may not exceed 0.55g.
    (c) To obtain the test data necessary to support the analysis 
required in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the track owner 
shall have a test plan which shall consider the operating practices and 
conditions, signal system, road crossings and trains on adjacent tracks 
during testing. The track owner shall establish a target maximum 
testing speed (at least 10 m.p.h. above the maximum proposed operating 
speed) and target test and operating conditions and conduct a test 
program sufficient to evaluate the operating limits of the track and 
equipment. The test program shall demonstrate vehicle dynamic response 
as speeds are incrementally increased from acceptable Class 6 limits to 
the target maximum test speeds. The test shall be suspended at that 
speed where any of the safety limits specified in paragraph (b) are 
exceeded.
    (d) At the end of the test, when maximum safe operating speed is 
known along with permissible levels of cant deficiency, an additional 
run shall be made with the subject equipment over the entire route 
proposed for revenue service at the speeds the railroad will request 
FRA to approve for such service and a second run again at 10 m.p.h. 
above this speed. A report of the test procedures and results shall be 
submitted to FRA upon the completions of the tests. The test report 
shall include the design flange angle of the equipment which shall be 
used for the determination of the lateral to vertical wheel load safety 
limit for the track/vehicle interaction safety measurements required 
per Sec. 213.333(k).
    (e) As part of the submittal required in paragraph (d) of the 
section, the operator shall include an analysis and description of the 
signal system and operating practices to govern operations in Classes 7 
and 8. This statement shall include a statement of sufficiency in these 
areas for the class of operation. Operation at speeds in excess of 150 
m.p.h. is authorized only in conjunction with a rule of particular 
applicability addressing other safety issues presented by the system.
    (f) Based on test results and submissions, FRA will approve a 
maximum train speed and value of cant deficiency for revenue service.


Sec. 213.347  Automotive or railroad crossings at grade.

    (a) There shall be no at-grade (level) highway crossings, public or 
private, or rail-to-rail crossings at-grade on Class 8 and 9 track.
    (b) If train operation is projected at Class 7 speed for a track 
segment that will include rail-highway grade crossings, the track owner 
shall submit for FRA's approval a complete description of the proposed 
warning/barrier system to address the protection of highway traffic and 
high speed trains. Trains shall not operate at Class 7 speeds over any 
track segment having highway-rail grade crossings unless:
    (1) An FRA-approved warning/barrier system exists on that track 
segment; and
    (2) All elements of that warning/barrier system are functioning.


Sec. 213.349  Rail end mismatch.

    Any mismatch of rails at joints may not be more than that 
prescribed by the following table--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Any mismatch of rails at   
                                            joints may not be more than 
                                                  the following--       
                                         -------------------------------
             Class of track                                 On the gage 
                                           On the tread     side of the 
                                            of the rail      rail ends  
                                            ends (inch)       (inch)    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 6, 7, 8 and 9.....................           \1/8\           \1/8\
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 213.351  Rail joints.

    (a) Each rail joint, insulated joint, and compromise joint shall be 
of a structurally sound design and dimensions for the rail on which it 
is applied.
    (b) If a joint bar is cracked, broken, or because of wear allows 
excessive vertical movement of either rail when all bolts are tight, it 
shall be replaced.
    (c) If a joint bar is cracked or broken between the middle two bolt 
holes it shall be replaced.
    (d) Each rail shall be bolted with at least two bolts at each 
joint.
    (e) Each joint bar shall be held in position by track bolts 
tightened to allow the joint bar to firmly support the abutting rail 
ends and to allow longitudinal movement of the rail in the joint to 
accommodate expansion and contraction due to temperature variations. 
When no-slip, joint-to-rail contact exists by design, the requirements 
of this section do not apply. Those locations, when over 400 feet long, 
are considered to be continuous welded rail track and shall meet all 
the requirements for continuous welded rail track prescribed in this 
subpart.
    (f) No rail shall have a bolt hole which is torch cut or burned.
    (g) No joint bar shall be reconfigured by torch cutting.


Sec. 213.352  Torch cut rail.

    (a) Except as a temporary repair in emergency situations no rail 
having a torch cut end shall be used. When a rail end with a torch cut 
is used in emergency situations, train speed over that rail shall not 
exceed the maximum allowable for Class 2 track. All torch cut rail ends 
in Class 6 shall be removed within six months of September 21, 1998.
    (b) Following the expiration of the time limits specified in 
paragraph (a) of this section, any torch cut rail end not removed shall 
be removed within 30 days of discovery. Train speed over that rail 
shall not exceed the maximum allowable for Class 2 track until removed.


Sec. 213.353  Turnouts, crossovers and lift rail assemblies or other 
transition devices on moveable bridges.

    (a) In turnouts and track crossings, the fastenings must be intact 
and maintained so as to keep the components securely in place. Also, 
each switch, frog, and guard rail shall be kept free of obstructions 
that may interfere with the passage of wheels. Use of rigid rail 
crossings at grade is limited per Sec. 213.347.

[[Page 34052]]

    (b) Track shall be equipped with rail anchoring through and on each 
side of track crossings and turnouts, to restrain rail movement 
affecting the position of switch points and frogs. Elastic fasteners 
designed to restrict longitudinal rail movement are considered rail 
anchoring.
    (c) Each flangeway at turnouts and track crossings shall be at 
least 1\1/2\ inches wide.
    (d) For all turnouts and crossovers, and lift rail assemblies or 
other transition devices on moveable bridges, the track owner shall 
prepare an inspection and maintenance Guidebook for use by railroad 
employees which shall be submitted to the Federal Railroad 
Administration. The Guidebook shall contain at a minimum--
    (1) Inspection frequency and methodology including limiting 
measurement values for all components subject to wear or requiring 
adjustment.
    (2) Maintenance techniques.
    (e) Each hand operated switch shall be equipped with a redundant 
operating mechanism for maintaining the security of switch point 
position.


Sec. 213.355  Frog guard rails and guard faces; gage.

    The guard check and guard face gages in frogs shall be within the 
limits prescribed in the following table--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Guard check gage--The distance                                       
                                          between the gage line of a frog                                       
                                             to the guard line 1 of its    Guard face gage--The distance between
             Class of track                 guard rail or guarding face,     guard lines,1 measured across the  
                                            measured across the track at     track at right angles to the gage  
                                          right angles to the gage line,2      line,2 may not be more than--    
                                               may not be less than--                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 6 track...........................  4' 6\1/2\''....................  4' 5''                               
Class 7 track...........................  4' 6\1/2\''....................  4' 5''                               
Class 8 track...........................  4' 6\1/2\''....................  4' 5''                               
Class 9 track...........................  4' 6\1/2\''....................  4' 5''                               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 A line along that side of the flangeway which is nearer to the center of the track and at the same elevation  
  as the gage line.                                                                                             
2 A line \5/8\ inch below the top of the center line of the head of the running rail, or corresponding location 
  of the tread portion of the track structure.                                                                  

Sec. 213.357  Derails.

    (a) Each track, other than a main track, which connects with a 
Class 7, 8 or 9 main track shall be equipped with a functioning derail 
of the correct size and type, unless railroad equipment on the track, 
because of grade characteristics cannot move to foul the main track.
    (b) For the purposes of this section, a derail is a device which 
will physically stop or divert movement of railroad rolling stock or 
other railroad on-track equipment past the location of the device.
    (c) Each derail shall be clearly visible. When in a locked 
position, a derail shall be free of any lost motion which would prevent 
it from performing its intended function.
    (d) Each derail shall be maintained to function as intended.
    (e) Each derail shall be properly installed for the rail to which 
it is applied.
    (f) If a track protected by a derail is occupied by standing 
railroad rolling stock, the derail shall be in derailing position.
    (g) Each derail on a track which is connected to a Class 7, 8 or 9 
main track shall be interconnected with the signal system.


Sec. 213.359  Track stiffness.

    (a) Track shall have a sufficient vertical strength to withstand 
the maximum vehicle loads generated at maximum permissible train 
speeds, cant deficiencies and surface defects. For purposes of this 
section, vertical track strength is defined as the track capacity to 
constrain vertical deformations so that the track shall return 
following maximum load to a configuration in compliance with the 
vehicle/track interaction safety limits and geometry requirements of 
this subpart.
    (b) Track shall have sufficient lateral strength to withstand the 
maximum thermal and vehicle loads generated at maximum permissible 
train speeds, cant deficiencies and lateral alinement defects. For 
purposes of this section lateral track strength is defined as the track 
capacity to constrain lateral deformations so that track shall return 
following maximum load to a configuration in compliance with the 
vehicle/track interaction safety limits and geometry requirements of 
this subpart.


Sec. 213.361  Right of way.

    The track owner in Class 8 and 9 shall submit a barrier plan, 
termed a ``right-of-way plan,'' to the Federal Railroad Administration 
for approval. At a minimum, the plan will contain provisions in areas 
of demonstrated need for the prevention of--
    (a) Vandalism;
    (b) Launching of objects from overhead bridges or structures into 
the path of trains; and
    (c) Intrusion of vehicles from adjacent rights of way.


Sec. 213.365  Visual inspections.

    (a) All track shall be visually inspected in accordance with the 
schedule prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section by a person 
designated under Sec. 213.305.
    (b) Each inspection shall be made on foot or by riding over the 
track in a vehicle at a speed that allows the person making the 
inspection to visually inspect the track structure for compliance with 
this part. However, mechanical, electrical, and other track inspection 
devices may be used to supplement visual inspection. If a vehicle is 
used for visual inspection, the speed of the vehicle may not be more 
than 5 miles per hour when passing over track crossings and turnouts, 
otherwise, the inspection vehicle speed shall be at the sole discretion 
of the inspector, based on track conditions and inspection 
requirements. When riding over the track in a vehicle, the inspection 
will be subject to the following conditions--
    (1) One inspector in a vehicle may inspect up to two tracks at one 
time provided that the inspector's visibility remains unobstructed by 
any cause and that the second track is not centered more than 30 feet 
from the track upon which the inspector is riding;
    (2) Two inspectors in one vehicle may inspect up to four tracks at 
a time provided that the inspector's visibility remains unobstructed by 
any cause and that each track being inspected is centered within 39 
feet from the track upon which the inspectors are riding;

[[Page 34053]]

    (3) Each main track is actually traversed by the vehicle or 
inspected on foot at least once every two weeks, and each siding is 
actually traversed by the vehicle or inspected on foot at least once 
every month. On high density commuter railroad lines where track time 
does not permit an on track vehicle inspection, and where track centers 
are 15 foot or less, the requirements of this paragraph (b)(3) will not 
apply; and
    (4) Track inspection records shall indicate which track(s) are 
traversed by the vehicle or inspected on foot as outlined in paragraph 
(b)(3) of this section.
    (c) Each track inspection shall be made in accordance with the 
following schedule--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Class of track                     Required frequency      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6, 7, and 8............................  Twice weekly with at least 2   
                                          calendar-day's interval       
                                          between inspections.          
9......................................  Three times per week.          
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) If the person making the inspection finds a deviation from the 
requirements of this part, the person shall immediately initiate 
remedial action.
    (e) Each switch, turnout, crossover, and lift rail assemblies on 
moveable bridges shall be inspected on foot at least weekly. The 
inspection shall be accomplished in accordance with the Guidebook 
required under Sec. 213.353.
    (f) In track Classes 8 and 9, if no train traffic operates for a 
period of eight hours, a train shall be operated at a speed not to 
exceed 100 miles per hour over the track before the resumption of 
operations at the maximum authorized speed.


Sec. 213.367  Special inspections.

    In the event of fire, flood, severe storm, temperature extremes or 
other occurrence which might have damaged track structure, a special 
inspection shall be made of the track involved as soon as possible 
after the occurrence and, if possible, before the operation of any 
train over that track.


Sec. 213.369  Inspection records.

    (a) Each owner of track to which this part applies shall keep a 
record of each inspection required to be performed on that track under 
this subpart.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, each 
record of an inspection under Sec. 213.365 shall be prepared on the day 
the inspection is made and signed by the person making the inspection. 
Records shall specify the track inspected, date of inspection, location 
and nature of any deviation from the requirements of this part, and the 
remedial action taken by the person making the inspection. The owner 
shall designate the location(s) where each original record shall be 
maintained for at least one year after the inspection covered by the 
record. The owner shall also designate one location, within 100 miles 
of each state in which they conduct operations, where copies of record 
which apply to those operations are either maintained or can be viewed 
following 10 days notice by the Federal Railroad Administration.
    (c) Rail inspection records shall specify the date of inspection, 
the location and nature of any internal defects found, the remedial 
action taken and the date thereof, and the location of any intervals of 
track not tested per Sec. 213.339(d). The owner shall retain a rail 
inspection record for at least two years after the inspection and for 
one year after remedial action is taken.
    (d) Each owner required to keep inspection records under this 
section shall make those records available for inspection and copying 
by the Federal Railroad Administrator.
    (e) For purposes of compliance with the requirements of this 
section, an owner of track may maintain and transfer records through 
electronic transmission, storage, and retrieval provided that--
    (1) The electronic system be designed such that the integrity of 
each record maintained through appropriate levels of security such as 
recognition of an electronic signature, or other means, which uniquely 
identify the initiating person as the author of that record. No two 
persons shall have the same electronic identity;
    (2) The electronic storage of each record shall be initiated by the 
person making the inspection within 24 hours following the completion 
of that inspection;
    (3) The electronic system shall ensure that each record cannot be 
modified in any way, or replaced, once the record is transmitted and 
stored;
    (4) Any amendment to a record shall be electronically stored apart 
from the record which it amends. Each amendment to a record shall be 
uniquely identified as to the person making the amendment;
    (5) The electronic system shall provide for the maintenance of 
inspection records as originally submitted without corruption or loss 
of data; and
    (6) Paper copies of electronic records and amendments to those 
records, that may be necessary to document compliance with this part, 
shall be made available for inspection and copying by the FRA and track 
inspectors responsible under Sec. 213.305. Such paper copies shall be 
made available to the track inspectors and at the locations specified 
in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (7) Track inspection records shall be kept available to persons who 
performed the inspection and to persons performing subsequent 
inspections.
    (f) Each vehicle/track interaction safety record required under 
Sec. 213.333 (g), and (m) shall be made available for inspection and 
copying by the FRA at the locations specified in paragraph (b) of this 
section.

Appendix A to Part 213--Maximum Allowable Curving Speeds

                                                            Table 1.--Three Inches Unbalance                                                            
                                                           [Elevation of outer rail (inches)]                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Degree of curvature             0      \1/2\      1      1\1/2\     2      2\1/2\     3      3\1/2\     4      4\1/2\     5      5\1/2\     6   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                        
(12)Maximum allowable operating                                                                                                                         
 speed (mph)                                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                        
0 deg.30'..........................       93      100      107      113      120      125      131      136      141      146      151      156      160
0 deg.40'..........................       80       87       93       98      103      109      113      118      122      127      131      135      139
0 deg.50'..........................       72       78       83       88       93       97      101      106      110      113      117      121      124
1 deg.00'..........................       66       71       76       80       85       89       93       96      100      104      107      110      113
1 deg.15'..........................       59       63       68       72       76       79       83       86       89       93       96       99      101
1 deg.30'..........................       54       58       62       66       69       72       76       79       82       85       87       90       93
1 deg.45'..........................       50       54       57       61       64       67       70       73       76       78       81       83       86
2 deg.00'..........................       46       50       54       57       60       63       66       68       71       73       76       78       80
2 deg.15'..........................       44       47       50       54       56       59       62       64       67       69       71       74       76
2 deg.30'..........................       41       45       48       51       54       56       59       61       63       66       68       70       72
2 deg.45'..........................       40       43       46       48       51       54       56       58       60       62       65       66       68
3 deg.00'..........................       38       41       44       46       49       51       54       56       58       60       62       64       66

[[Page 34054]]

                                                                                                                                                        
3 deg.15'..........................       36       39       42       45       47       49       51       54       56       57       59       61       63
3 deg.30'..........................       35       38       40       43       45       47       50       52       54       55       57       59       61
3 deg.45'..........................       34       37       39       41       44       46       48       50       52       54       55       57       59
4 deg.00'..........................       33       35       38       40       42       44       46       48       50       52       54       55       57
4 deg.30'..........................       31       33       36       38       40       42       44       45       47       49       50       52       54
5 deg.00'..........................       29       32       34       36       38       40       41       43       45       46       48       49       51
5 deg.30'..........................       28       30       32       34       36       38       40       41       43       44       46       47       48
6 deg.00'..........................       27       29       31       33       35       36       38       39       41       42       44       45       46
6 deg.30'..........................       26       28       30       31       33       35       36       38       39       41       42       43       45
7 deg.00...........................       25       27       29       30       32       34       35       36       38       39       40       42       43
8 deg.00'..........................       23       25       27       28       30       31       33       34       35       37       38       39       40
9 deg.00'..........................       22       24       25       27       28       30       31       32       33       35       36       37       38
10 deg.00'.........................       21       22       24       25       27       28       29       31       32       33       34       35       36
11 deg.00'.........................       20       21       23       24       26       27       28       29       30       31       32       33       34
12 deg.00'.........................       19       20       22       23       24       26       27       28       29       30       31       32       33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                             Table 2.--Four Inches Unbalance                                                            
                                                           [Elevation of outer rail (inches)]                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Degree of curvature             0      \1/2\      1      1\1/2\     2      2\1/2\     3      3\1/2\     4      4\1/2\     5      5\1/2\     6   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                        
(12)Maximum allowable operating                                                                                                                         
 speed (mph)                                                                                                                                            
0 deg.30'..........................      107      113      120      125      131      136      141      146      151      156      160      165      169
0 deg.40'..........................       93       98      104      109      113      118      122      127      131      135      139      143      146
0 deg.50'..........................       83       88       93       97      101      106      110      113      117      121      124      128      131
1 deg.00'..........................       76       80       85       89       93       96      100      104      107      110      113      116      120
1 deg.15'..........................       68       72       76       79       83       86       89       93       96       99      101      104      107
1 deg.30'..........................       62       65       69       72       76       79       82       85       87       90       93       95       98
1 deg.45'..........................       57       61       64       67       70       73       76       78       81       83       86       88       90
2 deg.00'..........................       53       57       60       63       65       68       71       73       76       78       80       82       85
2 deg.15'..........................       50       53       56       59       62       64       67       69       71       73       76       78       80
2 deg.30'..........................       48       51       53       56       59       61       63       65       68       70       72       74       76
2 deg.45'..........................       46       48       51       53       56       58       60       62       64       66       68       70       72
3 deg.00'..........................       44       46       49       51       53       56       58       60       62       64       65       67       69
3 deg.15'..........................       42       44       47       49       51       53       55       57       59       61       63       65       66
3 deg.30'..........................       40       43       45       47       49       52       53       55       57       59       61       62       64
3 deg.45'..........................       39       41       44       46       48       50       52       53       55       57       59       60       62
4 deg.00'..........................       38       40       42       44       46       48       50       52       53       55       57       58       60
4 deg.30'..........................       36       38       40       42       44       45       47       49       50       52       53       55       56
5 deg.00'..........................       34       36       38       40       41       43       45       46       48       49       51       52       53
5 deg.30'..........................       32       34       36       38       39       41       43       44       46       47       48       50       51
6 deg.00'..........................       31       33       35       36       38       39       41       42       44       45       46       48       49
6 deg.30'..........................       30       31       33       35       36       38       39       41       42       43       44       46       47
7 deg.00'..........................       29       30       32       34       35       36       38       39       40       42       43       44       45
8 deg.00'..........................       27       28       30       31       33       34       35       37       38       39       40       41       42
9 deg.00'..........................       25       27       28       30       31       32       33       35       36       37       38       39       40
10 deg.00'.........................       24       25       27       28       29       30       32       33       34       35       36       37       38
11 deg.00'.........................       23       24       25       27       28       29       30       31       32       33       34       35       36
12 deg.00'.........................       22       23       24       26       27       28       29       30       31       32       33       34       35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix B to Part 213--Schedule of Civil Penalties

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Willful   
                 Section                     Violation     Violation \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A--General:                                                     
    213.4(a) Excepted track \2\.........          $2,500          $5,000
    213.4(b) Excepted track \2\.........           2,500           5,000
    213.4(c) Excepted track \2\.........           2,500           5,000
    213.4(d) Excepted track \2\.........           2,500           5,000
    213.4(e):                                                           
        (1) Excepted track \2\..........           5,000           7,500
        (2) Excepted track \2\..........           7,000          10,000
        (3) Excepted track \2\..........           7,000          10,000
        (4) Excepted track \2\..........           5,000           7,500
    213.4(f) Excepted track.............           2,000           4,000
    213.7 Designation of qualified                                      
     persons to supervise certain                                       
     renewals and inspect track.........           1,000           2,000
    213.9 Classes of track: Operating                                   
     speed limits.......................           2,500           2,500
    213.11 Restoration or renewal of                                    
     track under traffic conditions.....           2,500           2,500
    213.13 Measuring track not under                                    
     load...............................           1,000           2,000
Subpart B--Roadbed:                                                     
    213.33 Drainage.....................           2,500           5,000
    213.37 Vegetation...................           1,000           2,000

[[Page 34055]]

                                                                        
Subpart C--Track Geometry:                                              
    213.53 Gage.........................           5,000           7,500
    13.55 Alinement.....................           5,000           7,500
    213.57 Curves; elevation and speed                                  
     limitations........................           2,500           5,000
    213.59 Elevation of curved track;                                   
     runoff.............................           2,500           2,500
213.63 Track surface....................           5,000           7,500
Subpart D--Track surface:                                               
    213.103 Ballast; general............           2,500           5,000
    213.109 Crossties                                                   
        (a) Material used...............           1,000           2,000
        (b) Distribution of ties........           2,500           5,000
        (c) Sufficient number of                                        
         nondefective ties..............           1,000           2,000
        (d) Joint ties..................           2,500           5,000
        (e) Track constructed without                                   
         crossties......................           2,500           5,000
    213.113 Defective rails.............           5,000           7,500
    213.115 Rail end mismatch...........           2,500           5,000
    213.119 Continuous welded rail                                      
        (a) through (h).................           5,000           7,500
    213.121 (a) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (b) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (c) Rail joints.............           5,000           7,500
    213.121 (d) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (e) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (f) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (g) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.121 (h) Rail joints.............           5,000           7,500
    213.122 Torch cut rail..............           2,500           5,000
    213.123 Tie plates..................           1,000           2,000
    213.127 Rail fastenings.............           2,500           5,000
    213.133 Turnouts and track                                          
     crossings, generally...............           1,000           1,000
    213.135 Switches:                                                   
        (a) through (g).................           2,500           5,000
        (h) chipped or worn points......           5,000           7,500
    213.137 Frogs.......................           2,500           5,000
    213.139 Spring rail frogs...........           2,500           5,000
    213.141 Self-guarded frogs..........           2,500           5,000
    213.143 Frog guard rails and guard                                  
     faces; gage........................           2,500           5,000
Subpart E--Track appliances and track-                                  
 related devices:                                                       
    213.205 Derails.....................           2,500           5,000
Subpart F--Inspection:                                                  
    213.233 Track inspections...........           2,000           4,000
    213.235 Switches, crossings,                                        
     transition devices.................           2,000           4,000
    213.237 Inspection of rail..........           2,500           5,000
    213.239 Special inspections.........           2,500           5,000
    213.241 Inspection records..........           1,000           1,000
Subpart G--High Speed:                                                  
    213.305 Designation of qualified                                    
     individuals; general qualifications           1,000           2,000
    213.307 Class of track; operating                                   
     speed limits.......................           2,500           5,000
    213.309 Restoration or renewal of                                   
     track under traffic conditions.....           2,500           5,000
    213.311 Measuring track not under                                   
     load...............................           1,000           2,000
    213.319 Drainage....................           2,500           5,000
    213.321 Vegetation..................           1,000           2,000
    213.323 Track gage..................           5,000           7,500
    213.327 Alinement...................           5,000           7,500
    213.329 Curves, elevation and speed                                 
     limits.............................           2,500           5,000
    213.331 Track surface...............           5,000           7,500
    213.333 Automated vehicle inspection                                
     systems............................           5,000           7,500
    213.335 Crossties                                                   
        (a) Material used...............           1,000           2,000
        (b) Distribution of ties........           2,500           5,000
        (c) Sufficient number of                                        
         nondefective ties, non-concrete           1,000           2,000
        (d) Sufficient number of                                        
         nondefective concrete ties.....           1,000           2,000
        (e) Joint ties..................           2,500           5,000
        (f) Track constructed without                                   
         crossties......................           2,500           5,000
        (g) Non-defective ties                                          
         surrounding defective ties.....           2,500           5,000
        (h) Tie plates..................           2,500           5,000
        (i) Tie plates..................           1,000           2,000
    213.337 Defective rails.............           5,000           7,500
    213.339 Inspection of rail in                                       
     service............................           2,500           5,000
    213.341 Inspection of new rail......           2,500           5,000
    213.343 Continuous welded rail (a)                                  
     through (h)........................           5,000           7,500
    213.345 Vehicle qualification                                       
     testing (a) through (b)............           5,000           7,500
        (c) through (e).................           2,500           5,000

[[Page 34056]]

                                                                        
    213.347 Automotive or railroad                                      
     crossings at grade.................           5,000           7,500
    213.349 Rail end mismatch...........           2,500           5,000
    213.351 (a) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.351 (b) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.351 (c) Rail joints.............           5,000           7,500
     213.351 (d) Rail joints............           2,500           5,000
    213.351 (e) Rail joints.............           2,500           5,000
    213.351 (f) Rail joints.............           5,000           7,500
    213.351 (g) Rail joints.............           5,000           7,500
    213. 352 Torch cut rails............           2,500           5,000
    213.353 Turnouts, crossovers,                                       
     transition devices.................           1,000           2,000
    213.355 Frog guard rails and guard                                  
     faces; gage........................           2,500           5,000
    213.357 Derails.....................           2,500           5,000
    213.359 Track stiffness.............           5,000           7,500
    213.361 Right of way................           5,000           7,500
    213.365 Visual inspections..........           2,500           5,000
    213.367 Special inspections.........           2,500           5,000
    213.369 Inspections records.........           2,000          4,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A penalty may be assessed against an individual only for a willful  
  violation. The Administrator reserves the right to assess a penalty of
  up to $22,000 for any violation where circumstances warrant. See 49   
  CFR Part 209, Appendix A.                                             
\2\ In addition to assessment of penalties for each instance of         
  noncompliance with the requirements identified by this footnote, track
  segments designated as excepted track that are or become ineligible   
  for such designation by virtue of noncompliance with any of the       
  requirements to which this footnote applies are subject to all other  
  requirements of Part 213 until such noncompliance is remedied.        

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on June 10, 1998.
Jolene M. Molitoris,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-15932 Filed 6-19-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P