[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 49, Volume 4]
[Revised as of October 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 49CFR222.59]
[Page 276-299]
TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION
CHAPTER II--FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
PART 222_USE OF LOCOMOTIVE HORNS AT PUBLIC HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS
--Table of Contents
Subpart C_Exceptions to the Use of the Locomotive Horn
Sec. 222.59 When may a wayside horn be used?
(a) Notwithstanding any provisions in this part to the contrary:
(1) A wayside horn conforming to the requirements of Appendix E of
this part may be used in lieu of a locomotive horn at any highway-rail
grade crossing equipped with an active warning system consisting of, at
a minimum, flashing lights and gates; and
(2) A wayside horn conforming to the requirements of Appendix E of
this part may be installed within a quiet zone. For purposes of
calculating the length of a quiet zone, the presence of a wayside horn
at a highway-grade crossing within a quiet zone shall be considered in
the same manner as a grade crossing treated with an SSM. A grade
crossing equipped with a wayside horn shall not be considered in
calculating the Quiet Zone Risk Index or Crossing Corridor Risk Index.
(b) A public authority installing a wayside horn at a grade crossing
within a quiet zone shall identify by both the U.S. DOT National
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Inventory Number and street or highway name
the grade crossing equipped with such wayside horn in its notice to
railroads and other parties required by Sec. 222.43.
(c) A public authority installing a wayside horn at a grade crossing
outside a quiet zone shall provide written notice to the Associate
Administrator and to each railroad operating over the grade crossing
that a wayside horn is being installed and the date on which the wayside
horn will be operational. The grade crossing shall be identified by both
the U.S. DOT National Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Inventory Number and
street or highway name. The public authority shall provide notification
of the operational date at least 21 days in advance.
(d) A railroad operating over a grade crossing equipped with an
operational wayside horn installed within a quiet zone pursuant to this
section shall cease routine locomotive horn use at the grade crossing. A
railroad operating over a grade crossing equipped with an operational
wayside horn installed outside of a quiet zone may cease routine
locomotive horn use by agreement with the public authority.
Appendix A to Part 222--Approved Supplementary Safety Measures
1. Temporary Closure of a Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossing: Close
the crossing to highway traffic during designated quiet periods.
Effectiveness: 1.0.
Because an effective closure system prevents vehicle entrance onto
the crossing, the probability of a collision with a train at the
crossing is zero during the period the crossing is closed. Effectiveness
would therefore equal 1. However, analysis should take into
consideration that traffic would need to be redistributed among adjacent
crossings or
[[Page 277]]
grade separations for the purpose of estimating risk following the
silencing of train horns, unless the particular ``closure'' was
accomplished by a grade separation.
Required:
a. The closure system must completely block highway traffic from
entering the crossing.
b. The crossing must be closed during the same hours every day.
c. The crossing may only be closed during one period each 24-hours.
d. Barricades and signs used for closure of the roadway shall
conform to the standards contained in the MUTCD.
e. Daily activation and deactivation of the system is the
responsibility of the public authority responsible for maintenance of
the street or highway crossing the railroad. The entity may provide for
third party activation and deactivation; however, the public authority
shall remain fully responsible for compliance with the requirements of
this part.
f. The system must be tamper and vandal resistant to the same extent
as other traffic control devices.
Recommended:
Signs for alternate highway traffic routes should be erected in
accordance with MUTCD and State and local standards and should inform
pedestrians and motorists that the streets are closed, the period for
which they are closed, and that alternate routes must be used.
2. Four-Quadrant Gate System: Install gates at a crossing sufficient
to fully block highway traffic from entering the crossing when the gates
are lowered, including at least one gate for each direction of traffic
on each approach.
Effectiveness:
Four-quadrant gates only, no presence detection: .82.
Four-quadrant gates only, with presence detection: .77.
Four-quadrant gates with traffic channelization of at least 60 feet
(with or without presence detection): .92.
Required:
Four-quadrant gate systems shall conform to the standards for four-
quadrant gates contained in the MUTCD, and shall in addition comply with
the following:
a. When a train is approaching, all highway approach and exit lanes
on both sides of the highway-rail crossing must be spanned by gates,
thus denying to the highway user the option of circumventing the
conventional approach lane gates by switching into the opposing
(oncoming) traffic lane in order to enter the crossing and cross the
tracks.
b. Crossing warning systems must be activated by use of constant
warning time devices unless existing conditions at the crossing would
prevent the proper operation of the constant warning time devices.
c. Crossing warning systems must be equipped with power-out
indicators.
Note: Requirements b and c apply only to New Quiet Zones. Constant
warning time devices and power-out indicators are not required to be
added to existing warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones. However, if
warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones are upgraded, or new warning
systems are installed, constant warning time devices, if reasonably
practical, and power-out indicators are required.
d. The gap between the ends of the entrance and exit gates (on the
same side of the railroad tracks) when both are in the fully lowered, or
down, position must be less than two feet if no median is present. If
the highway approach is equipped with a median or a channelization
device between the approach and exit lanes, the lowered gates must reach
to within one foot of the median or channelization device, measured
horizontally across the road from the end of the lowered gate to the
median or channelization device or to a point over the edge of the
median or channelization device. The gate and the median top or
channelization device do not have to be at the same elevation.
e. ``Break-away'' channelization devices must be frequently
monitored to replace broken elements.
Recommendations for new installations only:
f. Gate timing should be established by a qualified traffic engineer
based on site specific determinations. Such determination should
consider the need for and timing of a delay in the descent of the exit
gates (following descent of the conventional entrance gates). Factors to
be considered may include available storage space between the gates that
is outside the fouling limits of the track(s) and the possibility that
traffic flows may be interrupted as a result of nearby intersections.
g. A determination should be made as to whether it is necessary to
provide vehicle presence detectors (VPDs) to open or keep open the exit
gates until all vehicles are clear of the crossing. VPD should be
installed on one or both sides of the crossing and/or in the surface
between the rails closest to the field. Among the factors that should be
considered are the presence of intersecting roadways near the crossing,
the priority that the traffic crossing the railroad is given at such
intersections, the types of traffic control devices at those
intersections, and the presence and timing of traffic signal preemption.
h. Highway approaches on one or both sides of the highway-rail
crossing may be provided with medians or channelization devices between
the opposing lanes. Medians should be defined by a non-traversable curb
or traversable curb, or by reflectorized channelization devices, or by
both.
[[Page 278]]
i. Remote monitoring (in addition to power-out indicators, which are
required) of the status of these crossing systems is preferable. This is
especially important in those areas in which qualified railroad signal
department personnel are not readily available.
3. Gates with Medians or Channelization Devices: Install medians or
channelization devices on both highway approaches to a public highway-
rail grade crossing denying to the highway user the option of
circumventing the approach lane gates by switching into the opposing
(oncoming) traffic lane in order to drive around lowered gates to cross
the tracks.
Effectiveness:
Channelization devices--.75
Non-traversable curbs with or without channelization devices--.80.
Required:
a. Opposing traffic lanes on both highway approaches to the crossing
must be separated by either: (1) Medians bounded by non-traversable
curbs or (2) channelization devices.
b. Medians or channelization devices must extend at least 100 feet
from the gate arm, or if there is an intersection within 100 feet of the
gate, the median or channelization device must extend at least 60 feet
from the gate arm.
c. Intersections of two or more streets, or a street and an alley,
that are within 60 feet of the gate arm must be closed or relocated.
Driveways for private, residential properties (up to four units) within
60 feet of the gate arm are not considered to be intersections under
this part and need not be closed. However, consideration should be given
to taking steps to ensure that motorists exiting the driveways are not
able to move against the flow of traffic to circumvent the purpose of
the median and drive around lowered gates. This may be accomplished by
the posting of ``no left turn'' signs or other means of notification.
For the purpose of this part, driveways accessing commercial properties
are considered to be intersections and are not allowed. It should be
noted that if a public authority can not comply with the 60 feet or 100
feet requirement, it may apply to FRA for a quiet zone under Sec.
222.39(b), ``Public authority application to FRA.'' Such arrangement may
qualify for a risk reduction credit in calculation of the Quiet Zone
Risk Index. Similarly, if a public authority finds that it is feasible
to only provide channelization on one approach to the crossing, it may
also apply to FRA for approval under Sec. 222.39(b). Such an
arrangement may also qualify for a risk reduction credit in calculation
of the Quiet Zone Risk Index.
d. Crossing warning systems must be activated by use of constant
warning time devices unless existing conditions at the crossing would
prevent the proper operation of the constant warning time devices.
e. Crossing warning systems must be equipped with power-out
indicators. Note: Requirements b and c apply only to New Quiet Zones.
Constant warning time devices and power-out indicators are not required
to be added to existing warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
However, if warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones are upgraded, or new
warning systems are installed, constant warning time devices, if
reasonably practical, and power-out indicators are required.
f. The gap between the lowered gate and the curb or channelization
device must be one foot or less, measured horizontally across the road
from the end of the lowered gate to the curb or channelization device or
to a point over the curb edge or channelization device. The gate and the
curb top or channelization device do not have to be at the same
elevation.
g. ``Break-away'' channelization devices must be frequently
monitored to replace broken elements
4. One Way Street with Gate(s): Gate(s) must be installed such that
all approaching highway lanes to the public highway-rail grade crossing
are completely blocked.
Effectiveness: .82.
Required:
a. Gate arms on the approach side of the crossing should extend
across the road to within one foot of the far edge of the pavement. If a
gate is used on each side of the road, the gap between the ends of the
gates when both are in the lowered, or down, position must be no more
than two feet.
b. If only one gate is used, the edge of the road opposite the gate
mechanism must be configured with a non-traversable curb extending at
least 100 feet.
c. Crossing warning systems must be activated by use of constant
warning time devices unless existing conditions at the crossing would
prevent the proper operation of the constant warning time devices.
d. Crossing warning systems must be equipped with power-out
indicators. Note: Requirements c and d apply only to New Quiet Zones.
Constant warning time devices and power-out indicators are not required
to be added to existing warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
However, if warning systems in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones are upgraded, or new
warning systems are installed, constant warning time devices, if
reasonably practical, and power-out indicators are required.
Appendix B to Part 222--Alternative Safety Measures
Introduction
A public authority seeking approval of a quiet zone under public
authority application to FRA (Sec. 222.39(b)) may include in its
[[Page 279]]
proposal ASMs listed in this appendix. Credit will be given for closing
of public highway-rail grade crossings provided the baseline severity
risk index at other crossings is appropriately adjusted by increasing
traffic counts at neighboring crossings as input data to the severity
risk formula (except to the extent that nearby grade separations are
expected to carry that traffic). FRA Regional Managers for Grade
Crossing Safety can assist in performing the required analysis.
Appendix B addresses two types of ASMs: Modified SSMs and non-
engineering ASMs. Modified SSMs are SSMs that do not fully comply with
the provisions listed in appendix A. Depending on the resulting
configuration, non-compliant SSMs may still provide a substantial
reduction in risk and can contribute to the creation of quiet zones.
Non-engineering ASMs are programmed enforcement, public education and
awareness, and photo enforcement that may be used to reduce risk in the
creation of a quiet zone. The public authority must receive written FRA
approval of the quiet zone application prior to the silencing of train
horns. The public authority is strongly encouraged to submit the
application to FRA for review and comment before the appendix B
treatments are initiated to ensure that the proposed modified SSMs and/
or non-engineering ASMs will meet with FRA's approval. If non-
engineering ASMs are proposed, the public authority may wish to confirm
with FRA that the sampling methods are appropriate.
I. Modified SSMs
a. If there are unique circumstances pertaining to a specific
crossing or number of crossings which prevent SSMs from being fully
compliant with all of the SSM requirements listed in Appendix A, those
SSM requirements may be adjusted or revised. In that case, the SSM, as
modified by the pubic authority, will be treated as an ASM under this
Appendix B, and not as an SSM under Appendix A. FRA will review the
safety effects of the modified SSMs and the proposed quiet zone, and
will approve the proposal if it finds that the Quiet Zone Risk Index is
reduced to the level that would be expected with the sounding of the
train horns or to a level at, or below the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold, whichever is greater.
b. A public authority may provide estimates of effectiveness based
upon adjustments from the effectiveness levels provided in Appendix A or
from actual field data derived from the crossing sites. The specific
crossing and applied mitigation measure will be assessed to determine
the effectiveness of the modified SSM. FRA will continue to develop and
make available effectiveness estimates and data from experience under
the final rule.
c. If one or more of the requirements associated with an SSM as
listed in Appendix A is revised or deleted, data or analysis supporting
the revision or deletion must be provided to FRA for review. The
following engineering types of ASMs may be included in a proposal for
approval by FRA for creation of a quiet zone: (1) Temporary Closure of a
Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossing, (2) Four-Quadrant Gate System, (3)
Gates With Medians or Channelization Devices, and (4) One-Way Street
With Gate(s).
II. Non-Engineering ASMs
A. The following non-engineering ASMs may be used in the creation of
a Quiet Zone: (The method for determining the effectiveness of the non-
engineering ASMs, the implementation of the quiet zone, subsequent
monitoring requirements, and provision for dealing with an unacceptable
effectiveness rate is provided in paragraph B.
1. Programmed Enforcement: Community and law enforcement officials
commit to a systematic and measurable crossing monitoring and traffic
law enforcement program at the public highway-rail grade crossing, alone
or in combination with the Public Education and Awareness ASM.
Required:
a. Subject to audit, a statistically valid baseline violation rate
must be established through automated or systematic manual monitoring or
sampling at the subject crossing(s); and
b. A law enforcement effort must be defined, established and
continued along with continual or regular monitoring that provides a
statistically valid violation rate that indicates the effectiveness of
the law enforcement effort.
2. Public Education and Awareness: Conduct, alone or in combination
with programmed law enforcement, a program of public education and
awareness directed at motor vehicle drivers, pedestrians and residents
near the railroad to emphasize the risks associated with public highway-
rail grade crossings and applicable requirements of state and local
traffic laws at those crossings.
Requirements:
a. Subject to audit, a statistically valid baseline violation rate
must be established through automated or systematic manual monitoring or
sampling at the subject crossing(s); and
b. A sustainable public education and awareness program must be
defined, established and continued along with continual or regular
monitoring that provides a statistically valid violation rate that
indicates the effectiveness of the law enforcement effort. This program
shall be provided and supported primarily through local resources.
3. Photo Enforcement: This ASM entails automated means of gathering
valid photographic or video evidence of traffic law violations at a
public highway-rail grade crossing
[[Page 280]]
together with follow-through by law enforcement and the judiciary.
Required:
a. State law authorizing use of photographic or video evidence both
to bring charges and sustain the burden of proof that a violation of
traffic laws concerning public highway-rail grade crossings has
occurred, accompanied by commitment of administrative, law enforcement
and judicial officers to enforce the law;
b. Sanction includes sufficient minimum fine (e.g., $100 for a first
offense, ``points'' toward license suspension or revocation) to deter
violations;
c. Means to reliably detect violations (e.g., loop detectors, video
imaging technology);
d. Photographic or video equipment deployed to capture images
sufficient to document the violation (including the face of the driver,
if required to charge or convict under state law).
Note: This does not require that each crossing be continually
monitored. The objective of this option is deterrence, which may be
accomplished by moving photo/video equipment among several crossing
locations, as long as the motorist perceives the strong possibility that
a violation will lead to sanctions. Each location must appear identical
to the motorist, whether or not surveillance equipment is actually
placed there at the particular time. Surveillance equipment should be in
place and operating at each crossing at least 25 percent of each
calendar quarter.
e. Appropriate integration, testing and maintenance of the system to
provide evidence supporting enforcement;
f. Public awareness efforts designed to reinforce photo enforcement
and alert motorists to the absence of train horns;
g. Subject to audit, a statistically valid baseline violation rate
must be established through automated or systematic manual monitoring or
sampling at the subject crossing(s); and
h. A law enforcement effort must be defined, established and
continued along with continual or regular monitoring.
B. The effectiveness of an ASM will be determined as follows:
1. Establish the quarterly (3 months) baseline violation rates for
each crossing in the proposed quiet zone.
a. A violation in this context refers to a motorist not complying
with the automatic warning devices at the crossing (not stopping for the
flashing lights and driving over the crossing after the gate arms have
started to descend, or driving around the lowered gate arms). A
violation does not have to result in a traffic citation for the
violation to be considered.
b. Violation data may be obtained by any method that can be shown to
provide a statistically valid sample. This may include the use of video
cameras, other technologies (e.g. inductive loops), or manual
observations that capture driver behavior when the automatic warning
devices are operating.
c. If data is not collected continuously during the quarter,
sufficient detail must be provided in the application in order to
validate that the methodology used results in a statistically valid
sample. FRA recommends that at least a minimum of 600 samples (one
sample equals one gate activation) be collected during the baseline and
subsequent quarterly sample periods.
d. The sampling methodology must take measures to avoid biases in
their sampling technique. Potential sampling biases could include:
sampling on certain days of the week but not others; sampling during
certain times of the day but not others; sampling immediately after
implementation of an ASM while the public is still going through an
adjustment period; or applying one sample method for the baseline rate
and another for the new rate.
e. The baseline violation rate should be expressed as the number of
violations per gate activations in order to normalize for unequal gate
activations during subsequent data collection periods.
f. All subsequent quarterly violation rate calculations must use the
same methodology as in this paragraph unless FRA authorizes another
methodology.
2. The ASM should then be initiated for each crossing. Train horns
are still being sounded during this time period.
3. In the calendar quarter following initiation of the ASM,
determine a new quarterly violation rate using the same methodology as
in paragraph (1) above.
4. Determine the violation rate reduction for each crossing by the
following formula:
Violation rate reduction = (new rate-baseline rate)/baseline rate
5. Determined the effectiveness rate of the ASM for each crossing by
multiplying the violation rate reduction by .78.
6. Using the effectiveness rates for each crossing treated by an
ASM, determine the Quiet Zone Risk Index. If and when the Quiet Zone
Risk Index for the proposed quiet zone has been reduced to either the
risk level which would exist if locomotive horns sounded at all
crossings in quiet zone or to a risk level below the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold, the public authority may apply to FRA for
approval of the quiet zone. Upon receiving written approval of the quiet
zone application from FRA, the public authority may then proceed with
notifications and implementation of the quiet zone.
7. Violation rates must be monitored for the next two calendar
quarters and every second quarter thereafter. If after five years from
the implementation of the quiet zone, the violation rate for any quarter
has never
[[Page 281]]
exceeded the violation rate that was used to determine the effectiveness
rate that was approved by FRA, violation rates may be monitored for one
quarter per year.
8. In the event that the violation rate is ever greater than the
violation rate used to determine the effectiveness rate that was
approved by FRA, the public authority may continue the quiet zone for
another quarter. If, in the second quarter the violation rate is still
greater than the rate used to determine the effectiveness rate that was
approved by FRA, a new effectiveness rate must be calculated and the
Quiet Zone Risk Index re-calculated using the new effectiveness rate. If
the new Quiet Zone Risk Index indicates that the ASM no longer fully
compensates for the lack of a train horn, or that the risk level is
equal to, or exceeds the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, the
procedures for dealing with unacceptable effectiveness after
establishment of a quiet zone should be followed.
Appendix C to Part 222--Guide to Establishing Quiet Zones
Introduction
This Guide to Establishing Quiet Zones (Guide) is divided into four
sections in order to address the variety of methods and conditions that
affect the establishment of quiet zones under this rule.
Section I of the Guide provides an overview of the different ways in
which a quiet zone may be established under this rule. This includes a
brief discussion on the safety thresholds that must be attained in order
for train horns to be silenced and the relative merits of each. It also
includes the two general methods that may be used to reduce risk in the
proposed quiet zone, and the different impacts that the methods have on
the quiet zone implementation process.
Section II of the Guide provides information on establishing New
Quiet Zones. A New Quiet Zone is one at which train horns are currently
being sounded at crossings. The Public Authority Designation and Public
Authority Application to FRA methods will be discussed in depth.
Section III of the Guide provides information on establishing Pre-
Rule Quiet Zones. A Pre-Rule Quiet Zone is one where train horns were
not routinely sounded as of October 9, 1996 and December 18, 2003. The
differences between New and Pre-Rule Quiet Zones will be explained.
Public Authority Designation and Public Authority Application to FRA
methods also apply to Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
Section IV of the Guide deals with the required notifications that
must be provided by public authorities when establishing both New and
continuing Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
Section V of the Guide provides examples of quiet zone
implementation.
Section I--Overview
In order for a quiet zone to be qualified under this rule, it must
be shown that the lack of the train horn does not present a significant
risk with respect to loss of life or serious personal injury, or that
the significant risk has been compensated for by other means. The rule
provides four basic ways in which a quiet zone may be established.
Creation of both New Quiet Zones and Pre-Rule Quiet Zones are based on
the same general guidelines; however, there are a number of differences
that will be noted in the discussion on Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
A. Qualifying Conditions
One of the following four conditions or scenarios must be met in
order to show that the lack of the train horn does not present a
significant risk, or that the significant risk has been compensated for
by other means:
1. One or more SSMs as identified in Appendix A are installed at
each public crossing in the quiet zone; or
2. The Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less than, the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold without implementation of
additional safety measures at any crossings in the quiet zone; or
3. Additional safety measures are implemented at selected crossings
resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to a level equal
to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold; or
4. Additional safety measures are taken at selected crossings
resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to at least the
level of risk that would exist if train horns were sounded at every
public crossing in the quiet zone.
It is important to consider the implications of each approach before
deciding which one to use. If a quiet zone is qualified based on
reference to the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (i.e. the Quiet
Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold--see the second and third scenarios above), then an
annual review will be done by FRA to determine if the Quiet Zone Risk
Index remains equal to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold. Since the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and the Quiet
Zone Risk Index may change from year to year, there is no guarantee that
the quiet zone will remain qualified. The circumstances that cause the
disqualification may not be subject to the control of the public
authority. For example, an overall national improvement in safety at
gated crossings may cause the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold to
fall. This may cause the Quiet Zone Risk Index to become greater than
the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold. If the quiet zone is no
longer qualified, then the public authority will have
[[Page 282]]
to take additional measures, and may incur additional costs that might
not have been budgeted, to once again lower the Quiet Zone Risk Index to
at least the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold in order to retain
the quiet zone. Therefore, while the initial cost to implement a quiet
zone under the second or third scenario may be lower than the other
options, these scenarios also carry a degree of uncertainty about the
quiet zone's continued existence.
The use of the first or fourth scenarios reduces the risk level to
at least the level that would exist if train horns were sounding in the
quiet zone. These methods may have higher initial costs because more
safety measures may be necessary in order to achieve the needed risk
reduction. Despite the possibility of greater initial costs, there are
several benefits to these methods. The installation of SSMs at every
crossing will provide the greatest safety benefit of any of the methods
that may be used to initiate a quiet zone. With both of these methods
(first and fourth scenarios), the public authority will never need to be
concerned about the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, annual
reviews of the Quiet Zone Risk Index, or failing to be qualified because
the Quiet Zone Risk Index is higher than the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold. Public authorities are strongly encouraged to carefully
consider both the pros and cons of all of the methods and to choose the
method that will best meet the needs of its citizens by providing a
safer and quieter community.
For the purposes of this Guide, the term ``Risk Index with Horns''
is used to represent the level of risk that would exist if train horns
were sounded at every public crossing in the proposed quiet zone. If a
public authority decides that it would like to fully compensate for the
lack of a train horn and not install SSMs at each public crossing in the
quiet zone, it must reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index to a level that is
equal to, or less than, the Risk Index with Horns. The Risk Index with
Horns is similar to the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold in that
both are targets that must be reached in order to establish a quiet zone
under the rule. Quiet zones that are established by reducing the Quiet
Zone Risk Index to at least the level of the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold will be reviewed annually by FRA to determine if it still
qualifies under the rule to retain the quiet zone. Quiet zones that are
established by reducing the Quiet Zone Risk Index to at least the level
of the Risk Index with Horns will not be subject to annual reviews.
The use of FRA's web-based Quiet Zone Calculator is recommended to
aid in the decision making process (http://www.fra.dot.gov/
Content3.asp?P=1337). The Quiet Zone Calculator will allow the public
authority to consider a variety of options in determining which SSMs
make the most sense. It will also perform the necessary calculations
used to determine the existing risk level and whether enough risk has
been mitigated in order to create a quiet zone under this rule.
B. Risk Reduction Methods
FRA has established two general methods to reduce risk in order to
have a quiet zone qualify under this rule. The method chosen impacts the
manner in which the quiet zone is implemented.
1. Public Authority Designation (SSMs)--The Public Authority
Designation method (Sec. 222.39(a)) involves the use of SSMs (see
appendix A) at some or all crossings within the quiet zone. The use of
only SSMs to reduce risk will allow a public authority to designate a
quiet zone without approval from FRA. If the public authority installs
SSM's at every crossing within the quiet zone, it need not demonstrate
that they will reduce the risk sufficiently in order to qualify under
the rule since FRA has already assessed the ability of the SSMs to
reduce risk. However, if only SSMs are installed within the quiet zone,
but not at every crossing, the public authority must calculate that
sufficient risk reduction will be accomplished by the SSMs. Once the
improvements are made, the public authority must make the required
notifications, and the quiet zone may be implemented. FRA does not need
to approve the plan as it has already assessed the ability of the SSMs
to reduce risk.
2. Public Authority Application to FRA (ASMs)--The Public Authority
Application to FRA method (Sec. 222.39(b)) involves the use of ASMs
(see appendix B). ASMs include both modified SSMs that do not fully
comply with the provisions found in Appendix A (e.g. shorter than
required traffic channelization devices), and non-engineering ASMs such
as programmed law enforcement. If the use of ASMs (or a combination of
ASMs, SSMs, and modified SSMs) is elected to reduce risk, then the
public authority must apply to FRA for approval of the quiet zone. The
application must contain sufficient data and analysis to confirm that
the proposed ASMs do indeed provide the necessary risk reduction. FRA
will review the application and will issue a formal approval if it
determines that risk is reduced to a level that is necessary in order to
comply with the rule. Once FRA approval has been received and the safety
measures fully implemented, the public authority would then proceed to
make the necessary notifications, and the quiet zone may be implemented.
The use of non-engineering ASMs will require continued monitoring and
analysis throughout the existence of the quiet zone to ensure that risk
continues to be reduced.
3. Calculating Risk Reduction--The following should be noted when
calculating risk
[[Page 283]]
reductions in association with the establishment of a quiet zone. This
information pertains to both New Quiet Zones and Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
and to the Public Authority Designation and Public Authority Application
to FRA methods.
Crossing closures: If any public crossing within the quiet zone is
proposed to be closed, include that crossing when calculating the Risk
Index with Horns. Do not include the crossing to be closed when
calculating the Quiet Zone Risk Index since the crossing will no longer
exist. This will reflect the fact that the risk associated with the
crossing has been eliminated entirely. However, be sure to increase the
traffic counts at other crossings within the quiet zone and recalculate
the risk indices for those crossings that will handle the traffic
diverted from the closed crossing.
Example: A proposed New Quiet Zone contains four crossings: A, B, C
and D streets. A, B and D streets are equipped with flashing lights and
gates. C Street is a passive crossbuck crossing with a traffic count of
400 vehicles per day. It is decided that C Street will be closed as part
of the project. Compute the risk indices for all four streets. The
calculation for C Street will utilize flashing lights and gates as the
warning device. Calculate the Crossing Corridor Risk Index by averaging
the risk indices for all four of the crossings. This value will also be
the Risk Index with Horns since train horns are currently being sounded.
To calculate the Quiet Zone Risk Index, first re-calculate the risk
indices for B and D streets by increasing the traffic count for each
crossing by 200. (Assume for this example that the public authority
decided that the traffic from C Street would be equally divided between
B and D streets.) Increase the risk indices for A, B and D streets by
66.8 percent and average the results. This is the initial Quiet Zone
Risk Index and accounts for the risk reduction caused by closing C
Street.
Grade Separation: Grade separated crossings that were in existence
before the creation of a quiet zone are not included in any of the
calculations. However, any public crossings within the quiet zone that
are proposed to be treated by grade separation should be treated in the
same manner as crossing closures as explained above. Highway traffic
that may be diverted from other crossings within the quiet zone to the
new grade separated crossing should be considered when computing the
Quiet Zone Risk Index.
Example: A proposed New Quiet Zone contains four crossings: A, B, C
and D streets. All streets are equipped with flashing lights and gates.
C Street is a busy crossing with a traffic count of 25,000 vehicles per
day. It is decided that C Street will be grade separated as part of the
project. Compute the risk indices for all four streets. Calculate the
Crossing Corridor Risk Index, which will also be the Risk Index with
Horns, by averaging the risk indices for all four of the crossings. To
calculate the Quiet Zone Risk Index, first re-calculate the risk indices
for B and D streets by decreasing the traffic count for each crossing by
1,200. (The public authority decided that 2,400 motorists will decide to
use the grade separation at C Street in order to avoid possible delays
caused by passing trains.) Increase the risk indices for A, B and D
streets by 66.8 percent and average the results. This is the initial
Quiet Zone Risk Index and accounts for the risk reduction caused by the
grade separation at C Street.
Wayside Horns: Crossings with wayside horn installations will be
treated as a one for one substitute for the train horn and are not to be
included when calculating the Crossing Corridor Risk Index, the Risk
Index with Horns or the Quiet Zone Risk Index.
Example: A proposed New Quiet Zone contains four crossings: A, B, C
and D streets. All streets are equipped with flashing lights and gates.
It is decided that C Street will have a wayside horn installed. Compute
the risk indices for A, B and D streets. Since C Street is being treated
with a wayside horn, it is not included in the calculation of risk.
Calculate the Crossing Corridor Risk Index by averaging the risk indices
for A, B and D streets. This value is also the Risk Index with Horns.
Increase the risk indices for A, B and D streets by 66.8 percent and
average the results. This is the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index for the
proposed quiet zone.
Section II--New Quiet Zones
FRA has established several approaches that may be taken in order to
establish a New Quiet Zone under this rule. Please see the preceding
discussions on ``Qualifying Conditions'' and ``Risk Reduction Methods''
to assist in the decision-making process on which approach to take. This
following discussion provides the steps necessary to establish New Quiet
Zones and includes both the Public Authority Designation and Public
Authority Application to FRA methods. It must be remembered that in a
New Quiet Zone all public crossings must be equipped with flashing
lights and gates.
A. Requirements for Both Public Authority Designation and Public
Authority Application
The following steps are necessary when establishing a New Quiet
Zone. This information pertains to both the Public Authority Designation
and Public Authority Application to FRA methods.
1. Determine all public and private at-grade crossings that will be
included within the quiet zone. Also determine any existing grade-
separated crossings that fall within
[[Page 284]]
the quiet zone. Each crossing must be identified by the US DOT Crossing
Inventory number and street or highway name. If a crossing does not have
a US DOT crossing number, then contact FRA's Office of Safety (202-493-
6299) for assistance.
2. Ensure that the quiet zone will be at least one-half mile in
length. (Sec. 222.35(a)(1))
3. A complete and accurate Grade Crossing Inventory Form must be on
file with FRA for all crossings (public and private) within the quiet
zone. These must be dated within six months prior to the designation of
the quiet zone. An inspection of each crossing in the proposed quiet
should be performed and the Grade Crossing Inventory Forms updated to
reflect the current conditions at each crossing.
4. Every public crossing within the quiet zone must be equipped with
active warning devices comprising both flashing lights and gates. The
warning devices must be equipped with power out indicators. Constant
warning time circuitry is also required unless existing conditions would
prevent the proper operation of the constant warning time circuitry. The
plans for the quiet zone may be made assuming that flashing lights and
gates are at all public crossings; however the quiet zone may not be
implemented until all public crossings are actually equipped with the
flashing lights and gates. (Sec. 222.35(b)(1))
5. Private crossings must have cross-bucks and ``STOP'' signs on
both approaches to the crossing. Private crossings with public access,
industrial or commercial use must have a diagnostic team review and be
treated according to the team's recommendations. (Sec. Sec. 222.25(b)
and (c))
6. Each highway approach to every public and private crossing must
have an advanced warning sign (in accordance with the MUTCD) that
advises motorists that train horns are not sounded at the crossing.
(Sec. 222.35(c)(1) and 222.25(c)(2))
B. New Quiet Zones--Public Authority Designation
Once again it should be remembered that all public crossings must be
equipped with automatic warning devices consisting of flashing lights
and gates in accordance with Sec. 222.35(b). In addition, one of the
following conditions must be met in order for a public authority to
designate a new quiet zone without FRA approval:
One or more SSMs as identified in Appendix A are
installed at each public crossing in the quiet zone (Sec.
222.39(a)(1)); or
The Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less
than, the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold without SSMs installed
at any crossings in the quiet zone (Sec. 222.39(a)(2)(i)); or
SSMS's are installed at selected crossings
resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to a level equal
to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (Sec.
222.39(a)(2)(ii)); or
SSMS's are installed at selected crossings
resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to a level of risk
that would exist if the horn were sounded at every crossing in the quiet
zone (i.e. the Risk Index with Horns) (Sec. 222.39(a)(3)).
Steps necessary to establish a New Quiet Zone using the Public
Authority Application to FRA method:
1. If one or more SSMs as identified in appendix A are installed at
each public crossing in the quiet zone, the requirements for a public
authority designation quiet zone have been met. It is not necessary for
the same SSM to be used at each crossing. Once the necessary
improvements have been installed, notifications may take place and the
quiet zone implemented in accordance with the rule. If SSMs are not
installed at each crossing, proceed on to Step 2 and use the risk
reduction method.
2. To begin, calculate the risk index for each public crossing
within the quiet zone (See appendix D. FRA's web-based Quiet Zone
Calculator may be used to do this calculation). If flashing lights and
gates have to be installed at any public crossings, calculate the risk
indices for such crossings as if lights and gates were installed. (Note:
Flashing lights and gates must be installed prior to initiation of the
quiet zone.) If the Inventory record does not reflect the actual
conditions at the crossing, be sure to use the conditions that currently
exist when calculating the risk index. Note: Private crossings are not
included when computing the risk for the proposed quiet zone.
3. The Crossing Corridor Risk Index is then calculated by averaging
the risk index for each public crossing within the proposed quiet zone.
Since train horns are routinely being sounded for crossings in the
proposed quiet zone, this value is also the Risk Index with Horns.
4. In order to calculate the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index, first
adjust the risk index at each public crossing to account for the
increased risk due to the absence of the train horn. The absence of the
horn is reflected by an increased risk index of 66.8 percent at gated
crossings. The initial Quiet Zone Risk Index is then calculated by
averaging the increased risk index for each public crossing within the
proposed quiet zone. At this point the Quiet Zone Risk Index will equal
the Risk Index with Horns multiplied by 1.668.
5. Compare the Quiet Zone Risk Index to the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less than,
the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, then the public authority may
decide to designate a quiet zone and proceed with the notification
process. With this approach, FRA will annually recalculate the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and
[[Page 285]]
the Quiet Zone Risk Index. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index for the quiet
zone is above the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will notify
the Public Authority so that appropriate measures can be taken. (See
Sec. 222.51(a).)
6. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index is greater than the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold, then select an appropriate SSM for a
crossing. Reduce the inflated risk index calculated in Step 4 for that
crossing by the effectiveness rate of the chosen SSM. (See appendix A
for the effectiveness rates for the various SSMs.) Recalculate the Quiet
Zone Risk Index by averaging the revised inflated risk index with the
inflated risk indices for the other public crossings. If this new Quiet
Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold, the quiet zone would qualify for public authority
designation. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index is still higher than the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, treat another public crossing
with an appropriate SSM and repeat the process until the Quiet Zone Risk
Index is equal to, or less than, the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold. Once this is obtained the quiet zone has qualified for the
public authority designation method, and notification may take place
once all the necessary improvements have been installed. With this
approach, FRA will annually recalculate the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold and the Quiet Zone Risk Index. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index
for the quiet zone is above the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold,
FRA will notify the public authority so that appropriate measures can be
taken. (See Sec. 222.51(a).)
7. If the public authority wishes to reduce the risk of the quiet
zone to the level of risk that would exist if the horn were sounded at
every crossing within the quiet zone, the public authority should
calculate the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index as in Step 4. The objective
is to now reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index to the level of the Risk
Index with Horns by adding SSMs at the crossings. The difference between
the Quiet Zone Risk Index and the Risk Index with Horns is the amount of
risk that will have to be reduced in order to fully compensate for lack
of the train horn. The use of the Quiet Zone Calculator will aid in
determining which SSMs may be used to reduce the risk sufficiently.
Follow the procedure stated in Step 6, except that the Quiet Zone Risk
Index must be equal to, or less than, the Risk Index with Horns instead
of the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold. Once this risk level is
attained, the quiet zone has qualified for the public authority
designation method, and notification may take place once all the
necessary improvements have been installed. One important distinction
with this option is that the public authority will never need to be
concerned with the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Quiet
Zone Risk Index. The rule's intent is to make the quiet zone as safe as
if the train horns were sounding. If this is accomplished, the public
authority may designate the crossings as a quiet zone and need not be
concerned with possible fluctuations in the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold or annual risk reviews.
C. New Quiet Zones--Public Authority Application to FRA
A public authority must apply to FRA for approval of a quiet zone
under two conditions. First, if any of the SSMs selected for the quiet
zone do not fully conform to the design standards set forth in appendix
A. These are referred to as modified SSMs in appendix B. Second, when
programmed law enforcement, public education and awareness programs, or
photo enforcement is used to reduce risk in the quiet zone, these are
referred to as non-engineering ASMs in appendix B. It should be
remembered that non-engineering ASMs will require periodic monitoring as
long as the quiet zone is in existence. Please see appendix B for
detailed explanations of ASMs and the periodic monitoring of non-
engineering ASMs.
The public authority is strongly encouraged to submit the
application to FRA for review and comment before the appendix B
treatments are initiated. This will enable FRA to provide comments on
the proposed modified SSMs or non-engineering ASMs to help guide the
application process. If non-engineering ASMs are proposed, the public
authority also may wish to confirm with FRA that the methodology it
plans to use to determine the effectiveness rates of the proposed ASMs
is appropriate. A quiet zone that utilizes a combination of SSMs from
appendix A and ASMs from appendix B must make a Public Authority
Application to FRA. A complete and thoroughly documented application
will help to expedite the approval process.
The following discussion is meant to provide guidance on the steps
necessary to establish a new quiet zone using the Public Authority
Application to FRA method. Once again it should be remembered that all
public crossings must be equipped with automatic warning devices
consisting of flashing lights and gates in accordance with Sec.
222.35(b).
1. Gather the information previously mentioned in the section on
``Requirements for both Public Authority Designation and Public
Authority Application.''
2. Calculate the risk index for each public crossing as directed in
Step 2--Public Authority Designation.
3. Calculate the Crossing Corridor Risk Index, which is also the
Risk Index with Horns, as directed in Step 3--Public Authority
Designation.
[[Page 286]]
4. Calculate the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index as directed in Step
4--Public Authority Designation.
5. Begin to reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index through the use of ASMs
and SSMs. Follow the procedure provided in Step 6--Public Authority
Designation until the Quiet Zone Risk Index has been reduced to equal
to, or less than, either the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or
the Risk Index with Horns. (Remember that the public authority may
choose which level of risk reduction is the most appropriate for its
community.) Effectiveness rates for ASMs should be provided as follows:
a. Modified SSMs--Estimates of effectiveness for modified SSMs may
be proposed based upon adjustments from the effectiveness rates provided
in appendix A or from actual field data derived from the crossing sites.
The application should provide an estimated effectiveness rate and the
rationale for the estimate.
b. Non-engineering ASMs--Effectiveness rates are to be calculated in
accordance with the provisions of appendix B, paragraph 2(b).
6. Once it has been determined through analysis that the Quiet Zone
Risk Index has been reduced to equal to, or less than, either the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns, the
public authority may make application to FRA for a quiet zone under
Sec. 222.39(b). FRA will review the application to determine the
appropriateness of the proposed effectiveness rates, and whether or not
the proposed application demonstrates that the quiet zone meets the
requirements of the rule. When submitting the application to FRA for
approval, the application must contain the following (Sec.
222.39(b)(1)):
Sufficient detail concerning the present safety
measures at the public crossings within the proposed quiet zone. This
includes current and accurate crossing inventory forms.
Detailed information on the SSMS's or ASM's that
are proposed to be implemented and at which public crossings within the
proposed quiet zone.
Membership and recommendations of the diagnostic
team (if any) that reviewed the proposed quiet zone.
A commitment to implement the proposed safety
measures.
Demonstrate through data and analysis that the
proposed measures will reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index to equal, to or
less than, either the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk
Index with Horns.
A copy of the application must be provided to the
parties listed under Required Notifications.
7. Upon receiving written approval from FRA of the quiet zone
application, the public authority may then proceed with notifications
and implementation of the quiet zone. If the quiet zone is qualified by
reducing the Quiet Zone Risk Index to at the least the level of the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will annually recalculate the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and the Quiet Zone Risk Index. If
the Quiet Zone Risk Index for the quiet zone is above the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will notify the public authority so that
appropriate measures can be taken. (See Sec. 222.51(a)).
Note: The provisions stated above for crossing closures, grade
separations and wayside horns apply for Public Authority Application to
FRA as well.
Section III--Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
Pre-Rule Quiet Zones are treated slightly differently from New Quiet
Zones in the rule. This is a reflection of the statutory requirement to
``take into account the interest of communities that have in effect
restrictions on the sounding of a locomotive horn at highway-rail grade
crossings * * *'' It also recognizes the historical experience of train
horns not being sounded at Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.
Overview
Pre-Rule Quiet Zones that do not meet the requirements for automatic
approval (see discussion that follows) must meet the same requirements
as New Quiet Zones as provided in Sec. 222.39. In other words, risk
must be reduced through the use of SSMs or ASMs so that the Quiet Zone
Risk Index for the quiet zone has been reduced to either the risk level
which would exist if locomotive horns sounded at all crossings in the
quiet zone (i.e. the Risk Index with Horns) or to a risk level equal to,
or less than, the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold. Pre-Rule Quiet
Zones must meet these requirements by December 18, 2008 (Sec.
222.41(b)(2)). There are four differences in the requirements between
Pre-Rule Quiet Zones and New Quiet Zones that must be noted.
First, since train horns have not been routinely sounded in the Pre-
Rule Quiet Zone, it is not necessary to increase the risk indices of the
public crossings to reflect the additional risk caused by the lack of a
train horn. Since the train horn has already been silenced, the added
risk caused by the lack of a horn is reflected in the actual collision
history at the crossings. Collision history is an important part in the
calculation of the severity risk indices. In other words, the Quiet Zone
Risk Index is calculated by averaging the existing risk index for each
public crossing without the need to increase the risk index by 66.8
percent. For Pre-Rule Quiet Zones, the Crossing Corridor Risk Index and
the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index have the same value.
Second, since train horns have been silenced at the crossings, it
will be necessary
[[Page 287]]
to mathematically determine what the risk level would have been at the
crossings if train horns had been routinely sounded. These revised risk
levels then will be used to calculate the Risk Index with Horns. This
calculation is necessary to determine how much risk must be eliminated
in order to compensate for the lack of the train horn. This will allow
the public authority to have the choice to reduce the risk to at least
the level of the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or to fully
compensate for the lack of the train horn.
To calculate the Risk Index with Horns, the first step is to divide
the existing severity risk index for each crossing by the appropriate
value as shown in Table 1. This process eliminates the risk that was
caused by the absence of train horns. The table takes into account that
the train horn has been found to produce different levels of
effectiveness in preventing collisions depending on the type of warning
device at the crossing. (Note: FRA's web based Quiet Zone Calculator
will perform this computation automatically for pre-rule quiet zones.)
The Risk Index with Horns is the average of the revised risk indices.
The difference between the calculated Risk Index with Horns and the
Quiet Zone Risk Index is the amount of risk that would have to be
reduced in order to fully compensate for the lack of train horns.
Table 1.--Risk Index Divisor Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flashing Lights and
Passive lights gates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. except Chicago............................................. 1.749 1.309 1.668
Chicago Region.................................................. N/A N/A 1.173
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The Chicago Region includes the Illinois counties of: Cook,
DuPage, Lake, Kane, McHenry and Will. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones in the
Chicago Region are able to use a lower adjustment factor at crossings
equipped with gates due to data that indicate that the collision rate
for Pre-Rule Quiet Zone crossings that were equipped with flashing
lights and gates in the Chicago Region had an increased collision rate
of 17.3 percent when compared to similar gated crossings in the Nation
where horns were sounded. Gated crossings in Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
outside of the Chicago Region had an increased collision rate of 66.8
percent when compared to similar crossings in the Nation where horns
were sounded. Passive and flashing lights crossings in the Chicago
Region use the ``U.S. except Chicago'' values in Table 1.
The third difference is that credit is given for the risk reduction
that is brought about through the upgrading of the warning devices at
public crossings (Sec. 222.35(b)(2)). For New Quiet Zones, all
crossings must be equipped with automatic warning devices consisting of
flashing lights and gates. Crossings without gates must have gates
installed. The severity risk index for that crossing is then calculated
to establish the risk index that is used in the Risk Index with Horns.
The Risk Index with Horns is then increased by 66.8 percent to adjust
for the lack of the train horn. The adjusted figure is the initial Quiet
Zone Risk Index. There is no credit received for the risk reduction that
is attributable to warning device upgrades.
For Pre-Rule Quiet Zones, the Risk Index with Horns is calculated
from the initial risk indices which use the warning devices that are
currently installed. If a public authority elects to upgrade an existing
warning device as part of its quiet zone plan, the accident prediction
value for that crossing will be re-calculated based on the upgraded
warning device. (Once again, FRA's web-based Quiet Zone Calculator can
do the actual computation.) The new accident prediction value is then
used in the severity risk index formula to determine the risk index for
the crossing. This adjusted risk index is then used to compute the new
Quiet Zone Risk Index. This computation allows the risk reduction
attributed to the warning device upgrades to be used in establishing a
quiet zone.
The fourth difference is that pre-rule quiet zones have different
minimum requirements under Sec. 222.35. A pre-rule quiet zone may be
less than one-half mile in length if that was its length as of October
9, 1996. A pre-rule quiet zone does not have to have automatic warning
devices consisting of flashing lights and gates at every public crossing
(Sec. 222.32(b)(2)). The existing crossing safety warning systems in
place as of December 18, 2003, may be retained but cannot be downgraded.
It also is not necessary for the automatic warning devices to be
equipped with constant warning time devices or power out indicators;
however, when the warning devices are upgraded, constant warning time
and power out indicators will be required if reasonably practical (Sec.
222.35(b)(2)). Advance warning signs that notify the motorist that train
horns are not sounded and STOP signs and crossbucks at private crossings
do not have to be installed until December 18, 2006, which allows three
years to install the required signage.
[[Page 288]]
A. Requirements for Both Public Authority Designation and Public
Authority Application--Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
These following is necessary when establishing a Pre-Rule Quiet
Zone. This information pertains to Automatic Approval, the Public
Authority Designation and Public Authority Application to FRA methods.
1. Determine all public and private at-grade crossings that will be
included within the quiet zone. Also determine any existing grade
separated crossings that fall within the quiet zone. Each crossing must
be identified by the U.S. DOT Crossing Inventory number and street name.
If a crossing does not have a U.S. DOT crossing number then contact FRA
for assistance.
2. Document the length of the quiet zone. It is not necessary that
the quiet zone be at least one-half mile in length. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
may be shorter than one-half mile. However, the addition of a new
crossing to a quiet zone nullifies its pre-rule status, and the
resulting New Quiet Zone must be at least one-half mile. The deletion of
a crossing from a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone (except through closure or grade
separation) must result in a quiet zone that is a least one half mile in
length.
3. A complete and accurate Grade Crossing Inventory Form must be on
file with FRA for all crossings (public and private) within the quiet
zone. These must be dated within six months prior to the designation of
the quiet zone. An inspection of each crossing in the proposed quiet
should be performed and the Grade Crossing Inventory Forms updated to
reflect the current conditions at each crossing.
4. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones must retain, and may upgrade, the existing
grade crossing safety warning systems. Unlike New Quiet Zones, it is not
necessary that every public crossing within a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone be
equipped with active warning devices comprising both flashing lights and
gates. Existing warning devices need not be equipped with power out
indicators and constant warning time circuitry. If warning devices are
upgraded to flashing lights, or flashing lights and gates, the upgraded
equipment must include, as is required for New Quiet Zones, power out
indicators and constant warning time devices (if reasonably practical).
5. By December 18, 2006, private crossings must have cross-bucks and
``STOP'' signs on both approaches to the crossing. Private crossings
with public access, industrial or commercial use must have a diagnostic
team review and be treated according to the team's recommendations
unless the quiet zone qualifies for automatic approval. A diagnostic
team review of private crossings is not necessary for Pre-Rule Quiet
Zones that qualify for Automatic Approval.
6. By December 18, 2006, each highway approach to every public and
private crossing must have an advanced warning sign (in accordance with
the MUTCD) that advises motorists that train horns are not sounded at
the crossing.
B. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--Automatic Approval
In order for a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone to be automatically approved as a
quiet zone under this rule (Sec. 222.41(a)), one of the following
conditions must be met:
One or more SSMs as identified in appendix A are
installed at each public crossing in the quiet zone; or
The Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal, to or less,
than the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold; or
The Quiet Zone Risk Index is above the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold but less than twice the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold and there have been no relevant collisions at
any public grade crossing within the quiet zone for the preceding five
years.
Additionally, it must be in compliance with the minimum requirements
for quiet zones (Sec. 222.35) and the notification requirements in
Sec. 222.43.
The following discussion is meant to provide guidance on the steps
necessary to determine if a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone qualifies for automatic
approval.
1. All of the items listed in Requirements for both Public Authority
Designation and Public Authority Application--Pre-Rule Quiet Zones
previously mentioned are to be accomplished. Remember that a Pre-Rule
Quiet Zone may be less than one-half mile in length if that was its
length as of October 9, 1996. Also, a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone does not have
to have automatic warning devices consisting of flashing lights and
gates at every public crossing.
2. If one or more SSMs as identified in Appendix A are installed at
each public crossing in the quiet zone, the quiet zone qualifies and
notification should take place. If the Pre-Rule Quiet Zone does not
qualify by this step, proceed on to the next step.
3. Calculate the risk index for each public crossing within the
quiet zone (See appendix D). Be sure that the risk index is calculated
using the formula appropriate for the type of warning device that is
actually installed at the crossing. Unlike New Quiet Zones, it is not
necessary to calculate the risk index using flashing lights and gates as
the warning device. (FRA's web-based Quiet Zone Calculator may be used
to simplify the calculation process). If the Inventory record does not
reflect the actual conditions at the crossing, be sure to use the
conditions that currently exist when calculating the risk index.
4. The Quiet Zone Risk Index is then calculated by averaging the
risk index for each
[[Page 289]]
public crossing within the proposed quiet zone. (Note: The initial Quiet
Zone Risk Index and the Crossing Corridor Risk Index are the same for
Pre-Rule Quiet Zones.)
5. Compare the Quiet Zone Risk Index to the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal to, or less than,
the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, then the quiet zone qualifies
for automatic approval, and the public authority may proceed with the
notification process. With this approach, FRA will annually recalculate
the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and the Quiet Zone Risk. If
the Quiet Zone Risk Index for the quiet zone is above the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will notify the public authority so that
appropriate measures can be taken (See Sec. 222.51(b)(2)). If the pre-
rule quiet zone does not qualify by this step, proceed on to the next
step.
6. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index is above the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold but less than twice the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold and there have been no relevant collisions at any public grade
crossing within the quiet zone for the preceding five years, then the
quiet zone qualifies for automatic approval, and the public authority
may proceed with the notification process. Note: A relevant collision
means a collision at a highway-rail grade crossing between a train and a
motor vehicle, excluding the following: a collision resulting from an
activation failure of an active grade crossing warning system; a
collision in which there is no driver in the motor vehicle; or a
collision where the highway vehicle struck the side of the train beyond
the fourth locomotive unit or rail car. With this approach, FRA will
annually recalculate the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and the
Quiet Zone Risk. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index for the quiet zone is
above two times the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, or a relevant
collision has occurred during the preceding year, FRA will notify the
public authority so that appropriate measures can be taken (See Sec.
222.51(b)(3)).
If the Pre-Rule Quiet Zone does not qualify for automatic approval,
continuation of the quiet zone beyond the interim three year period will
require implementation of SSMs or ASMs so that the Quiet Zone Risk Index
for the quiet zone has been reduced to a risk level equal to, or below,
either the risk level which would exist if locomotive horns sounded at
all crossings in the quiet zone (i.e. the Risk Index with Horns) or the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold. This is the same methodology used
to create New Quiet Zones with the exception of the four differences
previously noted. A review of the previous discussion on the two methods
used to establish quiet zones may prove helpful in determining which
would be the most beneficial to use for a particular Pre-Rule Quiet
Zone.
C. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--Public Authority Designation
The following discussion is meant to provide guidance on the steps
necessary to establish a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone using the Public Authority
Designation method.
1. All of the items listed in ``Requirements for both Public
Authority Designation and Public Authority Application--Pre-Rule Quiet
Zones'' previously mentioned are to be accomplished. Remember that a
Pre-Rule Quiet Zone may be less than one-half mile in length if that was
its length as of October 9, 1996. Also, a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone does not
have to have automatic warning devices consisting of flashing lights and
gates at every public crossing.
2. Calculate the risk index for each public crossing within the
quiet zone as in Step 3--Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--Automatic Approval.
3. The Crossing Corridor Risk Index is then calculated by averaging
the risk index for each public crossing within the proposed quiet zone.
Since train horns are not being sounded for crossings, this value is
actually the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index.
4. Calculate Risk Index with Horns by the following:
a. For each public crossing, divide the risk index that was
calculated in Step 2 by the appropriate value in Table 1. This produces
the risk index that would have existed had the train horn been sounded.
b. Average these reduced risk indices together. The resulting
average is the Risk Index with Horns.
5. Begin to reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index through the use of SSMs
or by upgrading existing warning devices. Follow the procedure provided
in Step 6--Public Authority Designation until the Quiet Zone Risk Index
has been reduced to a level equal to, or less than, either the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns. A
public authority may elect to upgrade an existing warning device as part
of its Pre-Rule Quiet Zone plan. When upgrading a warning device, the
accident prediction value for that crossing must be re-calculated for
the new warning device. Determine the new risk index for the upgraded
crossing by using the new accident prediction value in the severity risk
index formula. This new risk index is then used to compute the new Quiet
Zone Risk Index. (Remember that FRA's web-based Quiet zone Calculator
will be able to do the actual computations.) Once the Quiet Zone Risk
Index has been reduced to equal to, or less than, either the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns, the quiet zone
has qualified for the Public Authority Designation method, and
notification may take place once all the necessary improvements have
been installed. If quiet zone is established by reducing the Quiet Zone
Risk Index to equal to, or less
[[Page 290]]
than, the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will annually
recalculate the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and the Quiet Zone
Risk Index. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index for the quiet zone is above the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, FRA will notify the public
authority so that appropriate measures can be taken (See Sec.
222.51(a)).
Note: The provisions stated above for crossing closures, grade
separations, and wayside horns apply for Public Authority Designation.
D. Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--Public Authority Application to FRA
The following discussion is meant to provide guidance in the steps
necessary to establish a Pre-Rule Quiet zone using the Public Authority
Application to FRA method.
1. All of the items listed in ``Requirements for both Public
Authority Designation and Public Authority Application--Pre-Rule Quiet
Zones'' previously mentioned are to be accomplished. Remember that a
Pre-Rule Quiet Zone may be less than one-half mile in length if that was
its length as of October 9, 1996. Also, a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone does not
have to have automatic warning devices consisting of flashing lights and
gates at every public crossing.
2. Calculate the risk index for each public crossing within the
quiet zone (See Appendix D. FRA's web-based Quiet Zone Calculator may be
used to simplify the calculation process). If the Inventory record does
not reflect the actual conditions at the crossing, be sure to use the
conditions that currently exist when calculating the risk index.
3. The Crossing Corridor Risk Index is then calculated by averaging
the risk index for each public crossing within the proposed quiet zone.
Since train horns are not being sounded for crossings, this value is
actually the initial Quiet Zone Risk Index.
4. Calculate Risk Index with Horns by the following:
a. For each public crossing, divide its risk index that was
calculated in Step 2 by the appropriate value in Table 1. This produces
the risk index that would have existed had the train horn been sounded.
b. Average these reduced risk indices together. The resulting
average is the Risk Index with Horns.
5. Begin to reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index through the use of ASMs
and/or SSMs. Follow the procedure the provided in Step 6--Public
Authority Designation until the Quiet Zone Risk Index has been reduced
to a level equal to, or less than, either the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns. A public authority may
elect to upgrade an existing warning device as part of its Pre-Rule
Quiet Zone plan. When upgrading a warning device, the accident
prediction value for that crossing must be re-calculated for the new
warning device. Determine the new risk index for the upgraded crossing
by using the new accident prediction value in the severity risk index
formula. (Remember that FRA's web-based quiet zone risk calculator will
be able to do the actual computations.) This new risk index is then used
to compute the new Quiet Zone Risk Index. Effectiveness rates for ASMs
should be provided as follows:
a. Modified SSMs--Estimates of effectiveness for modified SSMs may
be proposed based upon adjustments from the benchmark levels provided in
Appendix A or from actual field data derived from the crossing sites.
The application should provide an estimated effectiveness rate and the
rationale for the estimate.
b. Non-engineering ASMs--Effectiveness rates are to be calculated in
accordance with the provisions of appendix B, paragraph 2(b).
6. Once it has been determined through analysis that the Quiet Zone
Risk Index has been reduced to a level equal to, or less than, either
the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns,
the public authority may make application to FRA for a quiet zone under
Sec. 222.39(b). FRA will review the application to determine the
appropriateness of the proposed effectiveness rates, and whether or not
the proposed application demonstrates that the quiet zone meets the
requirements of the rule. When submitting the application to FRA for
approval, it should be remembered that the application must contain the
following (Sec. 222.39(b)(1)):
a. Sufficient detail concerning the present safety measures at the
public crossings within the proposed quiet zone. This includes current
and accurate crossing inventory forms.
b. Detailed information on the SSMS's, ASM's, or upgraded warning
devices that are proposed to be implemented and at which public
crossings within the proposed quiet zone.
c. Membership and recommendations of the diagnostic team (if any)
that reviewed the proposed quiet zone.
d. A commitment to implement the proposed safety measures.
e. Demonstrate through data and analysis that the proposed measures
will reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index to, or below, either the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold or the Risk Index with Horns.
f. A copy of the application must be provided to the parties listed
under Required Notifications.
7. Upon receiving written approval from FRA of the quiet zone
application, the public authority may then proceed with notifications
and implementation of the quiet zone. If the quiet zone is established
by reducing the Quiet Zone Risk Index to a level equal to, or less than,
the Nationwide Significant
[[Page 291]]
Risk Threshold, FRA will annually recalculate the Nationwide Significant
Risk Threshold and the Quiet Zone Risk. If the Quiet Zone Risk Index for
the quiet zone is above the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, FRA
will notify the public authority so that appropriate measures can be
taken (See Sec. 222.51(a)).
Note: The provisions stated above for crossing closures, grade
separations, and wayside horns apply for Public Authority Application to
FRA as well.
Section IV--Required Notifications
A. The public authority responsible for the creation of a New Quiet
Zone or the continuation of a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone, is required to
provide notification to parties that will be affected by the quiet zone.
The notification process is to ensure that interested parties are made
aware in a timely manner of the establishment or continuation of quiet
zones. Specific information is to be provided so that the crossings in
the quiet zone can be identified. The method used to qualify or continue
the quiet zone is to be given. The notification process also includes
additional information that must be provided to FRA. Once the rule
becomes effective, railroads will be obligated to sound train horns when
approaching all public crossings unless notified in accordance with the
rule that a New Quiet Zone has been established or that a Pre-Rule Quiet
Zone is being continued.
The time frames for the notification process is as follows:
New Quiet Zones--Notification of the
establishment of a New Quiet Zone under Sec. 222.39 must be mailed at
least 21 days before the routine sounding of train horns for public
crossings is to cease (Sec. 222.43(a)(2)(i)). The routine use of train
horns at public crossings will not cease unless the proper notification
has been given.
Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--Notification of the
continuation of a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone under Sec. 222.41 must be served
no later than December 18, 2004 (Sec. 222.43(a)(2)(ii)). Failure to
provide the required notice will result in the commencement of the
sounding of train horns at public crossings on this date.
B. Parties To Be Notified
The public authority that is implementing a New Quiet Zone or is
continuing a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone must provide notification of the quiet
zone by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following (see
Sec. 222.43(a)(1)):
All railroads operating over the crossings within
the quiet zone.
The highway or traffic control authority, or law
enforcement authority having control over vehicular traffic at crossings
within the quiet zone.
The State agency responsible for highway and road
safety.
All landowners owning a private crossing within
the quiet zone.
The Associate Administrator.
C. Required Information
The quiet zone implementation notification should contain the
following information (Sec. 222.43(a)(3)):
1. A list all grade crossings within the quiet zone by both the U.S.
DOT crossing number and the street or highway name. This includes
public, private and grade separated crossings.
2. The specific date upon which routine use of the train horn will
cease at crossings within the quiet zone. The date for New Quiet Zones
shall be no earlier than 21 days after mailing of written notification.
3. The notice should state which section contained in the rule is
used as the basis for establishment or continuation of the quiet zone.
4. Reference to Sec. 222.39(a)(1), (2), or (3) shall include a copy
of the FRA web page containing the quiet zone data upon which the public
authority relies.
5. Reference to Sec. 222.39(b) shall include a copy of FRA's
notification of approval.
6. Reference to Sec. 222.41 shall include a statement as to how the
quiet zone is in compliance with that section. If appropriate, it shall
include a copy of the FRA web page containing the quiet zone data upon
which the public authority relies.
7. A certificate of service showing to whom and by what means the
notice was provided.
D. In addition to the above required information, the notification
to the Associate Administrator also must include the following (Sec.
222.43(b)):
1. An accurate and complete Grade Crossing Inventory Form for each
public and private highway-rail grade crossing within the quiet zone,
dated within six months prior to designation or approval by FRA of the
quiet zone. Copies of the inventory forms may be obtain on FRA Web site
(www.fra.dot.gov).
2. An accurate, complete and current Grade Crossing Inventory Form
reflecting SSMs or ASMs in place upon establishment of the quiet zone.
SSMs or ASMs that cannot be fully described on the Inventory form must
be fully described in writing.
3. The name and title of the person responsible for monitoring
compliance with the requirements of this part, and the manner in which
that person can be contacted.
4. A list of all parties that received notification of the
establishment or continuation of the quiet zone together with copies of
the certificates of service showing to whom and by what means the notice
was provided.
5. A statement signed by the CEO of each public authority
establishing or continuing a
[[Page 292]]
quiet zone that certifies that responsible officials of the public
authority have reviewed documentation provided by FRA sufficient to make
an informed decision regarding the advisability of establishing the
quiet zone.
Section V--Examples of Quiet Zone Implementations
Example 1--New Quiet Zone
A public authority wishes to create a New Quiet Zone over four
public crossings. All of the crossings are equipped with flashing lights
and gates, and the length of the quiet zone is 0.75 mile. There are no
private crossings within the proposed zone.
The tables that follow show the street name in the first column, and
the existing risk index for each crossing with the horn sounding
(``Crossing Risk Index w/Horns'') in the second. The third column,
``Crossing Risk Index w/o Horns'', is the risk index for each crossing
after it has been inflated by 66.8% to account for the lack of train
horns. The fourth column, ``SSM Eff'', is the effectiveness of the SSM
at the crossing. A zero indicates that no SSM has been applied. The last
column, ``Crossing Risk Index w/o Horns Plus SSM'', is the inflated risk
index for the crossing after being reduced by the implementation of the
SSM. At the bottom of the table are two values. The first is the Risk
Index with Horns (``RIWH'') which represents the average initial amount
of risk in the proposed quiet zone with the train horn sounding. The
second is the Quiet Zone Risk Index (``QZRI'') and is the average risk
in the proposed quiet zone taking into consideration the increased risk
caused by the lack of train horns and reductions in risk attributable to
the installation of SSMs. For this example it is assumed that the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold is 15,424. In order for the
proposed quiet zone to qualify under the rule, the Quiet Zone Risk Index
must be reduced to at least either the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold (15,424) or to the Risk Index with Horns.
Table 1 shows the existing conditions in the proposed quiet zone.
SSMs have not yet been installed. The Risk Index with Horns for the
proposed quiet zone is 11,250. The Quiet Zone Risk Index without any
SSMs is 18,765.
Table 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk
Crossing risk Crossing risk index w/o
Street index w/horns index w/o SSM EFF horns, plus
horns SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................................... 12000 20016 0 20016
B............................................... 10000 16680 0 16680
C............................................... 8000 13344 0 13344
D............................................... 15000 25020 0 25020
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
11250 .............. .............. 18765
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public authority decides to install traffic channelization
devices at D Street. Reducing the risk at the crossing that has the
highest severity risk index will provide the greatest reduction in risk.
The effectiveness of traffic channelization devices is 0.75. Table 2
shows the changes in the proposed quiet zone corridor that would occur
when traffic channelization devices are installed at D Street. The Quiet
Zone Risk Index has been reduced to 14,073.75. This reduction in risk
would qualify the quiet zone as the risk has been reduced lower than the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold which is 15,424.
Table 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street Crossing risk index w/o SSM EFF index w/o
index w/ horns horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................................... 12000 20016 0 20016
B............................................... 10000 16680 0 16680
C............................................... 8000 13344 0 13344
D............................................... 15000 25020 0.75 6255
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
11250 .............. .............. 14073.75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public authority realizes that authorizing the quiet zone by
lowering the risk to below the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold
will result in an annual re-calculation of the Quiet Zone Risk Index and
comparison to the Nationwide Significant
[[Page 293]]
Risk Threshold. As the Quiet Zone Risk Index is close to the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold (14,074 to 15,424), there is a reasonable
chance that the Quiet Zone Risk Index may some day exceed the Nationwide
Significant Risk Threshold. This would result in the quiet zone no
longer being qualified and additional steps would have to be taken to
keep the quiet zone. Therefore, the public authority decides to reduce
the risk further by the use of traffic channelization devices at A
Street. Table 3 shows the results of this change. The Quiet Zone Risk
Index is now 10,320.75 which is less than the Risk Index with Horns of
11,250. The quiet zone now qualifies by fully compensating for the loss
of train horns and will not have to undergo annual reviews of the Quiet
Zone Risk Index.
Table 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street Crossing risk index w/o SSM EFF index w/o
index w/horns horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................................... 12000 20016 0.75 5004
B............................................... 10000 16680 0 16680
C............................................... 8000 13344 0 13344
D............................................... 15000 25020 0.75 6255
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
11250 .............. .............. 10320.75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example 2--Pre-Rule Quiet Zone
A public authority wishes to qualify a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone which did
not meet the requirements for Automatic Approval because the Quiet Zone
Risk Index is greater than twice the Nationwide Significant Risk
Threshold. There are four public crossings in the Pre-Rule Quiet Zone.
Three of the crossings are equipped with flashing lights and gates, and
the fourth (Z Street) is passively signed with a STOP sign. The length
of the quiet zone is 0.6 mile, and there are no private crossings within
the proposed zone.
The tables that follow are very similar to the tables in Example 1.
The street name is shown in the first column, and the existing risk
index for each crossing (``Crossing Risk Index w/o Horns'') in the
second. This is a change from the first example because the risk is
calculated without train horns sounding because of the existing ban on
whistles. The third column, ``Crossing Risk Index w/ Horns'', is the
risk index for each crossing after it has been adjusted to reflect what
the risk would have been had train horns been sounding. This is
mathematically done by dividing the existing risk index for the three
gated crossing by 1.668. The risk at the passive crossing at Z Street is
divided by 1.749. (See the above discussion in ``Pre-Rule Quiet Zones--
Establishment Overview'' for more information.) The fourth column, ``SSM
EFF'', is the effectiveness of the SSM at the crossing. A zero indicates
that no SSM has been applied. The last column, ``Crossing Risk Index w/o
Horns Plus SSM'', is the risk index without horns for the crossing after
being reduced for the implementation of the SSM. At the bottom of the
table are two values. The first is the Risk Index with Horns (RIWH)
which represents the average initial amount of risk in the proposed
quiet zone with the train horn sounding. The second is the Quiet Zone
Risk Index (``QZRI'') and is the average risk in the proposed quiet zone
taking into consideration the increased risk caused by the lack of train
horns and reductions in risk attributable to the installation of SSMs.
Once again it is assumed that the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold
is 15,424. The Quiet Zone Risk Index must be reduced to either the
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (15,424) or to the Risk Index with
Horns in order to qualify under the rule.
Table 4 shows the existing conditions in the proposed quiet zone.
SSMs have not yet been installed. The Risk Index with Horns for the
proposed quiet zone is 18,705.83. The Quiet Zone Risk Index without any
SSMs is 31,375. Since the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold is less
than the calculated Risk Index with Horns, the public authority's goal
will be to reduce the risk to at least value of the Risk Index with
Horns. This will qualify the Pre-Rule Quiet Zone under the rule.
Table 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street index w/o Crossing risk SSM EFF index w/o
horns index w/horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W............................................... 35000 20983.21 0 35000
X............................................... 42000 25179.86 0 42000
[[Page 294]]
Y............................................... 33500 20083.93 0 33500
Z............................................... 15000 8576.33 0 15000
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
18705.83 .............. .............. 31375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Z Street crossing is scheduled to have flashing lights and gates
installed as part of the state's highway-rail grade crossing safety
improvement plan (section 130). While this upgrade is not directly a
part of the plan to authorize a quiet zone, the public authority may
take credit for the risk reduction achieved by the improvement from a
passive STOP sign crossing to a crossing equipped with flashing lights
and gates. Unlike New Quiet Zones, upgrades to warning devices in Pre-
Rule Quiet Zones do contribute to the risk reduction necessary to
qualify under the rule. Table 5 shows the quiet zone corridor after
including the warning device upgrade at Z Street. Note that the Risk
Index with Horns and the Crossing Risk Index With Horns for Z Street do
not change. The Quiet Zone Risk Index has been reduced to 29,500.
Table 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street index w/o Crossing risk SSM EFF index w/o
horns index w/horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W............................................... 35000 20983.21 0 35000
X............................................... 42000 25179.86 0 42000
Y............................................... 33500 20083.93 0 33500
Z............................................... 7500 8576.33 0 7500
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
18705.83 .............. .............. 29500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public authority elects to install four-quadrant gates without
vehicle presence detection at X Street. As shown in Table 6, this
reduces the Quiet Zone Risk Index to 20,890. This risk reduction is not
sufficient to quality as quiet zone under the rule.
Table 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street index w/o Crossing risk SSM EFF index w/o
horns index w/horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W............................................... 35000 20983.21 0 35000
X............................................... 42000 25179.86 0.82 7560
Y............................................... 33500 20083.93 0 33500
Z............................................... 7500 8576.33 0 7500
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
18705.83 .............. .............. 20890
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public authority next decides to use traffic channelization
devices at W Street. Table 7 shows that the Quiet Zone Risk Index is now
reduced to 14,327.5. This risk reduction fully compensates for the loss
of the train horn as it is less than the Risk Index with Horns. The
quiet zone is qualified under the rule.
Table 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossing risk Crossing risk
Street index w/o Crossing risk SSM EFF index w/o
horns index w/horns horns plus SSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W............................................... 35000 20983.21 0.75 8750
X............................................... 42000 25179.86 0.82 7560
[[Page 295]]
Y............................................... 33500 20083.93 0 33500
Z............................................... 7500 8576.33 0 7500
RIWH .............. .............. QZRI
18705.83 .............. .............. 14327.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[69 FR 70664, Dec. 18, 2004; 69 FR 1930, Jan. 13, 2004]
Appendix D to Part 222--Determining Risk Levels
Introduction
The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold, the Crossing Corridor
Risk Index, and the Quiet Zone Risk Index are all measures of collision
risk at public highway-rail grade crossings that are weighted by the
severity of the associated casualties. Each crossing can be assigned a
risk index.
The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold represents the average
severity weighted collision risk for all public highway-rail grade
crossings equipped with lights and gates nationwide where train horns
are routinely sounded. FRA developed this index to serve as a threshold
of permissible risk for quiet zones established under this rule.
The Crossing Corridor Risk Index represents the average severity
weighted collision risk for all public highway-rail grade crossings
along a defined rail corridor.
The Quiet Zone Risk Index represents the average severity weighted
collision risk for all public highway-rail grade crossings that are part
of a quiet zone.
The Prediction Formulas
The Prediction Formulas were developed by DOT as a guide for
allocating scarce traffic safety budgets at the State level. They allow
users to rank candidate crossings for safety improvements by collision
probability. There are three formulas, one for each warning device
category: (1) automatic gates with flashing lights, (2) flashing lights
with no gates, and (3) passive warning devices.
The prediction formulas can be used to derive the following for each
crossing:
1. PC which is the predicted collisions.
2. P(FC[bond]C) which is the probability of a fatal collision given
that a collision occurs.
3. P(CC[bond]C) which is the probability of a casualty collision
given that a collision occurs.
The following factors are the determinants of the number of
predicted collisions per year:
Average annual daily traffic;
Total number of trains per day;
Number of highway lanes;
Number of main tracks;
Maximum timetable train speed;
Whether the highway is paved or not;
Number of through trains per day during daylight
hours.
The resulting basic prediction is improved in two ways. It is
enriched by the particular crossing's collision history for the previous
five years and it is calibrated by resetting normalizing constants. The
normalizing constants are reset so that the sum of the predicted
accidents in each warning device group (passive, flashing lights, gates)
for the top twenty percent most hazardous crossings exactly equals the
number of accidents which occurred in a recent period for the top twenty
percent of that group. This adjustment factor allows the formulas to
stay current with collision trends. The calibration also corrects for
errors such as data entry errors. The final output is the predicted
number of collisions (PC).
The severity formulas answer the question, ``What is the chance that
a fatality (or casualty) will happen, given that a collision has
occurred?'' The fatality formula calculates the probability of a fatal
collision given that a collision occurs (i.e. the probability of a
collision in which a fatality occurs) P(FC[bond]C). Similarly, the
casualty formula calculates the probability of a casualty collision
given that a collision occurs P(CC[bond]C). As casualties consist of
both fatalities and injuries, the probability of a non-fatal injury
collision is found by subtracting the probability of a fatal collision
from the probability of a casualty collision. To convert the probability
of a fatal or casualty collision to the number of expected fatal or
casualty collisions, that probability is multiplied by the number of
predicted collisions (PC).
For the prediction and severity index formulas, please see the
following DOT publications: Summary of the DOT Rail-Highway Crossings
Resource Allocation Procedure--Revised, June 1987, and the Rail-Highway
Crossing Resource Allocation Procedure: User's Guide, Third Edition,
August 1987. Both documents are in the docket for this rulemaking and
also available through the National Technical Information Service
located in Springfield, Virginia 22161.
[[Page 296]]
Risk Index
The risk index is basically the predicted cost to society of the
casualties that are expected to result from the predicted collisions at
a crossing. It incorporates three outputs of the DOT prediction
formulas. The two components of a risk index are:
1. Predicted Cost of Fatalities = PC x P(FC[bond]C) x (Average Number of
Fatalities Observed In Fatal Collisions) x $3 million
2. Predicted Cost of Injuries = PC x (P(CC[bond]C) - P(FC[bond]C)) x
(Average Number of Injuries in Collisions Involving Injuries)
x $1,167,000
PC, P(CC[bond]C), and P(FC[bond]C) are direct outputs of the DOT
prediction formulas.
The average number of fatalities observed in fatal collisions and
the average number of injuries in collisions involving injuries were
calculated by FRA as follows.
The highway-rail incident files from 1997 through 2001 were matched
against a data file containing the list of whistle ban crossings in
existence from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 2001 to identify two
types of collisions involving trains and motor vehicles (1) those that
occurred at crossings where a whistle ban was in place during the
period, and (2) those that occurred at crossings equipped with automatic
gates where a whistle ban was not in place. Certain records were
excluded. These were incidents where the driver was not in the motor
vehicle, or the motor vehicle struck the train beyond the 4th locomotive
or rail car that entered the crossing. FRA believes that sounding the
train horn would not be very effective at preventing such incidents.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The data used to make these exclusions is contained in blocks
18--Position of Car Unit in Train; 19--Circumstance: Rail Equipment
Struck/Struck By Highway User; 28--Number of Locomotive Units; and 29--
Number of Cars of the current FRA Form 6180-57 Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Accident/Incident Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collisions in the group containing the gated crossings nationwide
where horns are routinely sounded were then identified as either fatal,
injury only, or no casualty. Collisions were identified as fatal if one
or more deaths occurred, regardless of whether or not injuries were also
sustained. Collisions were identified as injury only when injuries, but
no fatalities resulted.
The collisions (incidents) selected were summarized by year from
1997 through 2001 (see table below). The fatality rate for each year was
calculated by dividing the number of fatalities (``Deaths'') by the
number of fatal incidents (``Number''). The injury rates were calculated
by dividing the number of injuries in injury only incidents
(``Injured'') by the number of injury only incidents (``Number'').
The following table lists the results. Note that the number of
injuries in the sixth column includes only those injuries resulting from
injury only incidents, it excludes any non-fatal injuries sustained in
fatal incidents. Non-fatal injuries sustained in fatal incidents are not
included in this table. The first line in the table presents information
in summary form for the five-year period.
Motor Vehicle Incidents at Non WB Gated Crossings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fatal incidents Injury incidents
Total -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
incidents Number Deaths Rate Number Injured Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................... 2,028 255 311 1.2196 552 739 1.3388
--------------------------------------------------------------
2001......................................................... 457 70 78 1.1143 119 156 1.3109
2000......................................................... 430 48 56 1.1667 109 157 1.4404
1999......................................................... 395 43 59 1.3721 109 144 1.3211
1998......................................................... 353 46 57 1.2391 105 131 1.2476
1997......................................................... 393 48 61 1.2708 110 151 1.3727
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fatality rate and the injury rate for the five-year period
appear in bold in the first line.
Per guidance from DOT, $3 million is the value placed on preventing
a fatality. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) developed by the
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine categorizes
injuries into six levels of severity. Each AIS level is assigned a value
of injury avoidance as a fraction of the value of avoiding a fatality.
FRA rates collisions that occur at train speeds in excess of 25 mph as
an AIS level 5 ($2,287,500) and injuries that result from collisions
involving trains traveling under 25 mph as an AIS level 2 ($46,500).
About half of grade crossing collisions occur at speeds greater than 25
mph. Therefore, FRA estimates that the value of preventing the average
injury resulting from a grade crossing collision is $1,167,000 (the
average of an AIS-5 injury and an AIS-2 injury.)
[[Page 297]]
Notice that the quantity [PC*P(FC[bond]C)] represents the expected
number of fatal collisions. Similarly, {PC*[P(CC[bond]C)-
P(FC[bond]C)]{time} represents the expected number of injury
collisions. These are then multiplied by their respective average number
of fatalities and injuries (from the table above) to develop the number
of expected casualties. The final parts of the expressions attach the
dollar values for these casualties.
The Risk Index for a Crossing is the integer sum of the Predicted
Cost of Fatalities and the Predicted Cost of Injuries.
Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold
The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold is simply an average of
the risk indexes for all of the gated crossings nationwide where train
horns are routinely sounded. FRA identified 33,879 gated non-whistle ban
crossings for input to the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold.
The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold rounds to 15,424. This
value is recalculated annually.
Crossing Corridor Risk Index
The Crossing Corridor Risk Index is the average of the risk indexes
of all the crossings in a defined rail corridor. Communities seeking to
establish `Quiet Zones' should initially calculate this average for
potential corridors.
Quiet Zone Risk Index
The Quiet Zone Risk Index is the average of the risk indexes of all
the public crossings in a Quiet Zone. It takes into consideration the
absence of the horn sound and any safety measures that may have been
installed.
Appendix E to Part 222--Requirements for Wayside Horns
Minimum requirements for wayside horn use at highway-rail grade
crossings:
1. Highway-rail crossing must be equipped with constant warning time
device, if reasonably practical, and power-out indicator;
2. Horn system must be equipped with an indicator or other system to
notify the locomotive engineer as to whether the wayside horn is
operating as intended in sufficient time to enable the locomotive
engineer to sound the locomotive horn for at least 15 seconds prior to
arrival at the crossing in the event the wayside horn is not operating
as intended;
3. The railroad must adopt an operating rule, bulletin or special
instruction requiring that the train horn be sounded if the wayside horn
indicator is not visible approaching the crossing, or if this, or an
equivalent system, does not indicate that the system is operating as
intended;
4. Horn system must provide a minimum of 96 and a maximum of 110
dB(A) when measured 100 feet from the horn in the direction it is
installed;
5. Horn system must sound at a minimum of 15 seconds prior to the
train's arrival at the crossing and while the lead locomotive is
traveling across the crossing. It is permissible for the horn system to
begin to sound simultaneously with activation of the flashing lights or
descent of the crossing arm; and
6. Horn shall be directed toward approaching traffic.
Appendix F to Part 222--Diagnostic Team Considerations
For purposes of this part, a diagnostic team is a group of
knowledgeable representatives of parties of interest in a highway-rail
grade crossing, organized by the public authority responsible for that
crossing, who, using crossing safety management principles, evaluate
conditions at a grade crossing to make determinations or recommendations
for the public authority concerning safety needs at that crossing.
Crossings proposed for inclusion in a quiet zone should be reviewed in
the field by such a diagnostic team composed of railroad personnel,
public safety or law enforcement, engineering personnel from the public
agency with responsibility for the roadway that crosses the railroad,
and other concerned parties.
This diagnostic team, using crossing safety management principles,
should evaluate conditions at a grade crossing to make determinations
and recommendations concerning safety needs at that crossing. The
diagnostic team can evaluate a crossing from many perspectives and can
make recommendations as to what safety measures authorized by this part
might be utilized to compensate for the silencing of the train horns
within the proposed quiet zone.
All Crossings Within a Proposed Quiet Zone
The diagnostic team should obtain and review the following
information about each crossing within the proposed quiet zone:
1. Current highway traffic volumes and percent of trucks;
2. Posted speed limits on all highway approaches;
3. Maximum allowable train speeds, both passenger and freight;
4. Accident history for each crossing under consideration;
5. School bus or transit bus use at the crossing; and
6. Presence of U.S. DOT grade crossing inventory numbers clearly
posted at each of the crossings in question.
The diagnostic team should obtain all inventory information for each
crossing, and
[[Page 298]]
should check while in the field to see that inventory information is up-
to-date and accurate. Outdated inventory information should be updated
as part of the quiet zone development process.
When in the field, the diagnostic team should take note of the
physical characteristics of each crossing, including the following
items:
Can any of the crossings within the proposed
quiet zone be closed, or consolidated with another adjacent crossing?
Crossing elimination should always be the preferred alternative, and it
should be explored for crossings within the proposed quiet zone.
What is the number of lanes on each highway
approach? Note the pavement condition on each approach, as well as the
condition of the crossing itself.
Is the grade crossing surface smooth, well graded
and free draining?
Does the alignment of the railroad tracks at the
crossing create any problems for road users on the crossing? Are the
tracks in superelevation (are they banked on a curve?) and does this
create a conflict with the vertical alignment of the crossing roadway?
Note the distance to the nearest intersection or
traffic signal on each approach (if within 500 feet or so of the
crossing, or if the signal or intersection is determined to have a
potential impact on highway traffic at the crossing because of queuing
or other special problems).
If there is a roadway that runs parallel to the
railroad tracks, and it is within 100 feet of the railroad tracks when
it crosses an intersecting road that crosses the tracks, the appropriate
advance warning signs should be posted as shown in the MUTCD.
Is the posted highway speed (on each approach to
the crossing) appropriate for the alignment of the roadway, and the
configuration of the crossing?
Does the vertical alignment of the crossing
create the potential for a ``hump crossing'' where long, low-clearance
vehicles might get stuck on the crossing?
What are the grade crossing warning devices in
place at each crossing? Flashing lights and gates are required for each
public crossing in a New Quiet Zone. Are all required warning devices,
signals, pavement markings and advance signing in place, visible and in
good condition for both day and night time visibility?
What kind of train detection is in place at each
crossing? Are these systems old or outmoded; are they in need of
replacement, upgrading, or refurbishment?
Are there sidings or other tracks adjacent to the
crossing that are often used to store railroad cars, locomotives, or
other equipment that could obscure the vision of road users as they
approach the crossings in the quiet zone? Clear visibility may help to
reduce violation of automatic devices.
Are motorists currently violating the warning
devices at any of the crossings at an excessive rate?
Do accident statistics for the corridor indicate
any potential problems at any of the crossings?
If school buses or transit buses use crossings
within the proposed quiet zone corridor, can they be rerouted to a use
single crossing within or outside of the quiet zone?
Private Crossings Within a Proposed Quiet Zone
In addition to the items discussed above, a diagnostic team should
examine the following for any private crossings within a proposed quiet
zone:
How often is the private crossing used?
What kind of signing or pavement markings are in
place at the private crossing?
What types of vehicles use the private crossing?
School buses
Large trucks
Hazmat carriers
Farm equipment
What is the volume, speed and type of train
traffic over the crossing?
Do passenger trains use the crossing?
Do approaching trains sound the horn at private
crossings?
State or local law forbids or requires it?
Railroad safety rule requires it?
Are there any nearby crossings where train horns
sound that might also provide some warning at the private crossing where
no horns sound?
What are the approach (corner) sight distances?
What is the clearing sight distance for all
approaches?
What are the private roadway approach grades?
What are the private roadway pavement surfaces?
Appendix G to Part 222--Schedule of Civil Penalties \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willful
Section Violation violation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B--Use of Locomotive Horns
Sec. 222.21 Use of locomotive horn:
(a) Failure to sound horn at grade $5,000 $7,500
crossing...........................
Failure to sound horn in proper 1,000 3,000
pattern........................
(b) Failure to sound horn at least 5,000 7,500
15 and no more than 20 seconds
before crossing....................
Sounding horn more than \1/4\ 1,000 4,000
mile in advance of crossing....
[[Page 299]]
Sec. 222.33 Failure to sound horn when 5,000 7,500
conditions of Sec. 222.33 are not met
Sec. 222.45 Sounding locomotive horn 1,500 5,000
at a grade crossing within a quiet zone
Sec. 222.49 (b) Failure to provide 2,500 5,000
Grade Crossing Inventory Form
information............................
Sec. 222.59 (c) Routine sounding 5,000 7,500
locomotive horn at a grade crossing
equipped with wayside horn.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 $27,000 for any violation where circumstances warrant. See 49
CFR part 209, appendix A.
[68 FR 70664, Dec. 18, 2003, as amended at 69 FR 30594, May 28, 2004]