An adverse comment changed the text of the final rule — two rail unions on opposite sides of the horn at crossings
The Federal Railroad Administration issued a final rule allowing a single horn blast where a train had stopped close to a grade crossing. Of twelve comments received, two rail unions took opposing positions, and the rule text was amended in response to the opposition.
Document overview (primary data)
- Document typeRule
- AgencyDepartment of Transportation
- Citation91 FR 55764
Key points
- The Federal Railroad Administration issued a final rule allowing a single horn blast where a train had stopped close to a grade crossing.
- Relief on the 15-second minimum duration already existed; varying the sounding pattern generally did not.
- Twelve comments were received; an engineers union supported the change while another rail union opposed it as reducing the clarity of the warning.
- The agency cited a similar waiver in effect since 2009 without negative safety impact, and the burden of filing waiver petitions.
- In response to a concern that engineers might be blamed for collisions, the rule text was amended to clarify their discretion.
1What changes
A train approaching a crossing sounds its horn in a fixed order: two long blasts, one short, one long. This rule adds one exception. Where a train has stopped very close to a crossing and then moves into it, a single blast will suffice.
Relief already existed on duration, because a train stopped just short of a crossing has no room to sound for fifteen seconds. This extends that relief to the pattern.
2Twelve comments, two unions
| Source of comment | Position | Principal reason |
|---|---|---|
| Nine anonymous comments | Eight in support, one opposed | The opposition concerned the adequacy of warning from a single blast |
| A resident near a crossing | Support | Living near a gated crossing for more than 30 years |
| Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen | Support | Keep the prescribed pattern as default, but welcome discretion after stopping |
| Transportation Division of the rail and transportation workers association | Opposed | The prescribed pattern gives a predictable and recognizable warning |
Two organizations representing rail workers took opposite positions. Those who sound the horn welcomed the discretion; the other argued that the value of the warning lies precisely in its being a fixed pattern. At the root is a difference over whom the warning at a crossing is for.
3The agency reasoning
Responding to the opposition, the agency pointed to existing practice. The current rule already permits sounding for less than fifteen seconds in two situations: when starting movement after having stopped close to a crossing, and when approaching at speeds above 60 miles per hour.
Moreover, a commuter railroad obtained a waiver permitting its crews to vary the pattern after stopping at specified passenger stations close to crossings, and that waiver has been in effect since 2009 without negatively impacting public safety or the safety of railroad operations.
Against the assertion that the prescribed pattern carries no meaningful cost to railroads, the agency responded that without this flexibility, each entity seeking to vary the pattern would have to prepare and submit a waiver petition.
4The comment that changed the text
Here is the notable part. The opposing union raised a concern that engineers might be blamed in the event of a crossing collision. In response, the agency amended the section to clarify that it is authorizing engineers to exercise their discretion in deciding whether to vary the pattern. A comment period produced an actual change in the rule.
This site also covers the mechanism of publishing a definition of a significant adverse comment alongside a rule, so the role comments play within the system can be read across both.
Why it matters
A comment period can be more than a formality and actually alter rule text. Where organizations representing the same occupation take opposing positions, the design question of whom a rule protects comes to the surface.
FAQ
Why only where the train had stopped?
Do comment periods change rules?
Sources (primary)
Source: Federal Register (federal documents, public domain). Links go to the official site.