49 C.F.R. § 210.3

Applicability

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the provisions of this part apply to the total sound emitted by moving rail cars and locomotives (including the sound produced by refrigeration and air conditioning units that are an integral element of such equipment), active retarders, switcher locomotives, car coupling operations, and load cell test stands, operated by a railroad as defined in 45 U.S.C. 22, under the conditions described in this part and in 40 CFR part 201.

(b) The provisions of this part do not apply to—

(1) Steam locomotives;

(2) Street, suburban, or interurban electric railways unless operated as a part of the general railroad system of transportation;

(3) Sound emitted by warning devices, such as horns, whistles, or bells when operated for the purpose of safety;

(4) Special purpose equipment that may be located on or operated from rail cars;

(5) As prescribed in 40 CFR 201.10, the provisions of 40 CFR 201.11 (a) and (b) and (c) do not apply to gas turbine powered locomotives or any locomotive type that cannot be connected by any standard method to a load cell; or

(6) Inert retarders.

[48 FR 56758, Dec. 23, 1983, as amended at 54 FR 33228, Aug. 14, 1989]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1993–2020 · leading case: Tufariello v. Long Island Rail Road, 364 F. Supp. 2d 252 (E.D.N.Y 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tufariello v. Long Island Rail Road, 364 F. Supp. 2d 252 (E.D.N.Y 2005). · cites it 2× “The FRA had also promulgated regulations concerning the appropriate levels of railroad noise emissions, 49 C.”

S. Pac. Transp. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of the State of Oregon, & Its Members, 9 F.3d 807 (9th Cir. 1993). “4 49 C.F.R. § 210.3 (b)(3) (1992). We therefore hold that the NCA does not preempt Oregon’s law and regulations regarding train whistle sounding.”

Burlington N. R.R. v. City of Connell, 811 F. Supp. 1459 (E.D. Wash. 1993). “49 C.F.R. § 210.3 (b)(3). See Norfolk Southern Ry.”

Civil City of South Bend, Ind. v. Conrail, 880 F. Supp. 595 (N.D. Ind. 1995). “§ 4916 (c); see 49 C.F.R. § 210.3 (b)(3) (1993); 40 C.F.R.”

The Belt Ry. Co. of Chicago v. Weglarz Hotel III, L.L.C. (N.D. Ill. 2020). “49 C.F.R. § 210.3 (b)(6). Relying on these provisions, Weglarz argues essentially as follows: even assuming the ICCTA would preempt the PCB’s enforcement of state noise regulations, the ICCTA’s regulatory regime overlaps with the NCA’s regulatory regime.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.