railroad property. The CPUC indicates that more than 55 percent of
pedestrian railroad fatalities in California are attributed to suicide,
and according to the American Association of Suicidology, railroads
that have tracked probable suicides on the rail system report that
suicides are responsible for 39 percent of pedestrian fatalities.
Additionally, a March 3, 2005, Chicago Tribune article, ``Suicide is
Top Cause of Train Track Deaths; State Looks for Ways to Prevent
Fatalities,'' indicates that, in 2004, there were 30 probable suicide
deaths and an additional three attempts involving trains in Chicago
alone, and that suicide was the leading cause of rail-related
fatalities in Illinois for 2004, which led Illinois to implement a
systematic tracking program of such incidents on rail property. This
information illustrates that there are a large number of fatalities
occurring on railroad property without any national initiative to
collect data that might be used to address these events.
    Since it appears that suicides contribute significantly to the
total number of fatalities that are occurring on railroad tracks, it is
appropriate to report and collect data about suicides in addition to
the other causes of death in the industry. By requiring that the
information be reported as suicide data, these fatalities will not be
included in the normally reported fatality data. This new data may help
FRA, organizations promoting safety on and around railroad property,
and suicide prevention agencies assess the problem and develop programs
to decrease the incidence of suicides by train.
    FRA notes that the collection of suicide data will also aid the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in its collection and analysis of
commuter railroad accidents, since FRA provides certain commuter
railroad safety data to FTA. FTA relies on FRA to provide to it data on
the types of accidents occurring on commuter rail, their primary
causes, and the consequences, in terms of fatalities (which for FTA
includes suicides under 49 CFR part 659), injuries and property damage.
The data FRA provides to FTA, however, is somewhat incomplete, in that
FRA cannot provide suicide data to FTA. Consequently, FTA, which uses
this information to better inform their assessments of safety plans and
hazard analysis performed by commuter rail grantees applying for FTA
grants, must work with an incomplete data set.
    Comments suggested that the collection of suicide data would create
a duty on the part of the railroad to those individuals attempting to
commit suicide as the railroads would now be aware of potential suicide
hotspots. However, prior to this Final Rule, railroads were exempt from
reporting suicides and attempted suicides. In order to exclude suicides
and attempted suicides, railroads were required to prove cause of death
by obtaining relevant documents to prove that a casualty was an
attempted suicide or suicide. Consequently, railroads should already
have knowledge of where suicides and attempted suicides are taking
place. Therefore, the final rule does not create a new duty for the
railroads, rather it simply requires them to compile the data.
Ultimately, by collecting this information, FRA and other government
agencies will be able to decrease the number of suicides and attempted
suicides occurring on the railroad.
    Amtrak stated in its comments that persons entering railroad
property to commit suicide are considered trespassers and the suicide
is considered a superseding event. As such, Amtrak claims that an event
or exposure arising from the operation of the railroad is not a cause.
Consistent with OSHA, FRA maintains a no fault reporting system. As
such, it does not matter whether the person caused their own injury so
long as the event or exposure arising from the operation of the
railroad is a discernable cause and it meets the general reporting
criteria. And, the collection of this data will help to decrease the
number of suicides and attempted suicides that occur each year.
Moreover, FRA will not be providing this information to DOL.
    Commenters suggested that the collection of suicide data will not
improve safety. As stated above, FRA believes that there are many
benefits to collecting this information. Specifically, FRA will be able
to determine where and how many suicides are occurring on the railroad.
Suicides will be segregated from other fatalities, avoiding an over
count of fatalities associated with railroad operations, and data will
be gathered systematically so that others may use the data to design
interventions.
    In order for FRA to capture suicide data, the final rule requires
railroads to indicate suicide or attempted suicide on Forms FRA F
6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary (Continuation Sheet);''
FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report;'' and FRA F
6180.57, ``Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/Incident Report;'' as
follows:
    (1) Form FRA F 6180.55a--The final rule requires that an ``X,''
representative of ``suicide or attempted suicide,'' be placed in
``Special Cause Code'' block 5r, when applicable. The final rule also
changes the title of block 5m from ``Result'' to ``Tools.'' This change
is a correction to the current form and is

necessary to maintain consistency with types of Circumstance Codes in
Appendix F of the FRA Guide.
    (2) Form FRA F 6180.54--The final rule adds four Miscellaneous
Cause Codes for use in block 38 as follows: (i) Code M309 ``Suicide
(Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident);'' (ii) Code M310 ``Attempted
Suicide (Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident);'' (iii) Code M509
``Suicide (Other Misc.);'' and (iv) Code M510 ``Attempted Suicide
(Other Misc.).'' These codes are added to Appendix C, ``Train Accident
Cause Codes'' to refer to ``Suicide or Attempted Suicide'' for use in
``Primary Cause Code'' block 38. The final rule also requires railroads
to include suicides and attempted suicides in the casualty counts in
blocks 46, 47, and 48, as applicable.
    (3) Form FRA F 6180.57--The final rule adds a code for ``Suicide or
Attempted Suicide'' to block 41 (the final rule also changes, among
other things, the title of block 41 from ``Driver'' to ``Highway
User.''). In addition, the final rule requires railroads to include
suicides and attempted suicides, when appropriate, in the casualty
counts in block numbers 46, 49, and 52. See FRA Guide for additional
information.
    In addition, when appropriate, the final rule requires railroads to
indicate whether a suicide or an attempted suicide was a cause of an
injury or illness or an accident or incident in the applicable
narrative or description section on the following forms: FRA F 6180.98,
``Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record'' and FRA F 6180.97,
``Initial Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Record.'' While employee
suicides or attempted suicides are rare, FRA is still interested in
capturing that information in order to learn more about suicides and
attempted suicides in the work environment.
    Commenters inquired as to whether the NPRM's proposed cause codes
were sufficient to capture the facts surrounding suicides and attempted
suicides. FRA believes that the codes and instructions listed above are
sufficient at this time to identify key information. FRA welcomes the
inclusion of additional information regarding such accidents/incidents
in the applicable form's narrative section (e.g., that the person is
homeless).
    FRA notes that it is also concerned that suicides are being
reported as trespasser fatalities, because some railroads have not
always made a reasonable inquiry in their efforts to determine the
cause of death. In fact, FRA has found that a number of reported
trespasser fatalities are actually suicides. Accordingly, FRA revises
Chapter 6 of the FRA Guide to clarify that, in order to fulfill its
responsibilities to maintain accuracy in reporting, a railroad must try
to obtain verbal or written confirmation of a trespasser's cause of
death by contacting the coroner, public police officer or other public
authority by telephone and, if unsuccessful in obtaining the needed
information by telephone, must follow-up in writing. The railroad must
continue its efforts to obtain this information for a period of six
months following the month in which the fatality occurred. The railroad
must keep a record of its efforts to obtain such confirmation. This
record and any documentation related to the case obtained by the
railroad must be available for review and copying by an FRA
representative under the same criteria as set forth in Sec.  225.35(b).
If a railroad cannot obtain confirmation of the cause of death by the
end of the six month period, the railroad shall report the fatality as
a trespasser fatality.
    FRA also revises Chapter 6 of the FRA Guide to clarify what
documentation is required to prove that an individual committed suicide
or attempted to commit suicide. FRA understands that railroads often
have difficulty obtaining copies of death certificates and/or have to
wait until the death certificate becomes publicly available. As such,
as explained in the FRA Guide, railroads may accept verbal confirmation
of a suicide or attempted suicide from a coroner, public police
officer, or other public authority. When receiving verbal confirmation
of a suicide or attempted suicide, a railroad must create an audit
trail of that confirmation so that FRA can independently verify and
confirm the determination. As part of this audit trail, for example,
the railroad must document the date and time of verbal confirmation in
addition to the name, title, address, and telephone number of the
person who determined the cause of death or injury.
    Commenters stated that this information is too difficult to obtain,
and that public authorities will often not cooperate with the
railroads. Similarly, SEPTA suggested that the law prevents them from
obtaining the written confirmation necessary to prove that a person
committed suicide or attempted to commit suicide. However, railroads
have been able to obtain this information under the requirements in the
2003 Final Rule and, therefore, FRA expects that they will continue to
be able to do so. In addition, FRA hopes that allowing verbal
confirmation will ease the railroad's burden. Finally, when
investigating a trespasser fatality, if a railroad cannot obtain the
required information after making a documented, good faith effort for
six months, then the railroad may discontinue its investigation and
report the casualty as a trespasser fatality.
    Commenters also stated that the follow-up requirements are too
burdensome. SEPTA suggested that railroads should only have to follow-
up for 3 months, rather than 6 months. Moreover, other comments
suggested that only one document request and one follow-up request
should be necessary. However, based on past comments, railroads have
asserted that public authorities require additional time to conclude
that a fatality is a suicide. Therefore, FRA believes that the extended
investigation period is necessary. Once a railroad obtains a
determination, they may terminate their investigation. The FRA Guide
indicates that a railroad must follow-up in writing only if a public
authority cannot be reached by telephone, and then must continue such
efforts for six months or until they have received confirmation. FRA
does not mandate how the continued efforts be conducted, in writing or
by telephone, so long as those efforts are documented. Consequently,
after attempting to reach the public authority once by phone and in
writing, a railroad may select the means by which they continue their
investigation. Again, if a railroad cannot obtain the required
information after making a documented, good faith effort for six
months, then the railroad may discontinue its investigation and report
the casualty as a trespasser fatality. Finally, FRA believes that these
efforts are necessary based on the past apparent over-reporting of
trespasser casualties that were in fact suicides.

Sec.  225.17 Doubtful Cases

    In this section, the final rule amended part 225 by re-designating
the ``Alcohol or Drug Involvement'' provisions, currently contained in
Sec.  225.17(d), to a newly added Sec.  225.18. FRA has observed that
the inclusion of the two unrelated topics in one section has led to
confusion. This revision is intended to reduce possible confusion and
does not substantively change FRA's current accident/incident reporting
requirements.

Sec.  225.18 Alcohol or Drug Involvement

    As stated above, the final rule adds a new section, Sec.  228.18,
re-designating the Alcohol and Drug provisions currently contained in
Sec.  225.17(d) to a new section, Sec.  225.18, for purposes of clarity
only. The final rule also makes the following technical amendments:

changing the word ``title'' to ``chapter,'' to reference the correct
term; inserting ``49 CFR'' in front of Sec.  219.209, for clarity; and
changing the word ``paragraph'' to ``section,'' to accommodate the
proposed re-designation of Sec.  225.17(d) to Sec.  225.18 (a)-(d).
    Commenters suggested that contractors and subcontractors be
included in Sec.  225.18. The final rule does not adopt this suggestion
because it is outside of the scope of the proposed rulemaking.
Specifically, the NPRM did not propose any substantive changes, rather
the sections were simply divided into two sections for purposes of
clarity, and several technical amendments were made.

Sec.  225.19 Primary Groups of Accidents/Incidents

    In this section, the final rule revises paragraph (d) to clarify
the agency's existing reporting requirements for death, injury, and
occupational illness and to further conform those requirements to
OSHA's recordkeeping and reporting regulations.
    As discussed, FRA's accident/incident reporting regulations that
concern railroad occupational casualties are maintained, to the extent
practicable, in general conformity with OSHA's recordkeeping and
reporting regulations in order to enable data comparisons on
occupational casualties between various industries, to allow
integration of railroad industry data into national statistical
databases, and to improve the quality of data available for analysis of
casualties in railroad accidents/incidents. See Section-by-Section
Analysis for Sec.  225.5, ``Definitions'' with respect to ``Discernable
cause.'' Moreover, maintaining such compatibility allows railroads to
only have to report occupational casualties to FRA, rather than to both
OSHA and FRA. See 29 CFR 1904.3.
    With respect to employee injury and illness recording, OSHA's
regulations require that ``each employer * * * must record each
fatality, injury and illness that is work-related; and is a new case;
and meets one or more of the general recording criteria * * * or the
application to specific cases.'' 29 CFR 1904.4(a).
    By rewording paragraph (d) to more closely model OSHA's wording,
the final rule better conforms its reporting requirements to that of
OSHA. The final rule also clarifies that only new cases are reportable
(the current regulation requires that the injury or illness must be a
new case or a significant aggravation of a pre-existing injury or
illness). The final rule, therefore, requires, that, to be reportable,
a significant aggravation of a pre-existing case must be a ``new case''
(i.e., a case in which either the employee has not previously
experienced a reported injury or illness of the same type that affects
the same part of the body, or the employee previously experienced a
reported injury or illness of the same type that affected the same part
of the body but had recovered completely (all signs and symptoms had
disappeared) from the previous injury or illness and an event or
exposure in the work environment caused the signs or symptoms to
reappear).
    The final rule also revises paragraph (d) by amending the general
reporting criteria, specifically paragraph (d)(2), which currently
states, ``injury to any person that results in medical treatment,'' to
include ``significant injury to any person'' and ``loss of
consciousness to any person.'' Failure to include these classes of
injuries as reportable for ``any person,'' rather than just railroad
employees, in the general criteria in the agency's 2003 Final Rule (68
FR 10107, March 3, 2003) has resulted in FRA not capturing data for
non-employees with respect to significant injuries.
    Amtrak expressed concern that extending the reporting criteria to
non-employees would impose a significant burden on the passenger
railroads. As an initial matter, significant injuries are limited to a
small number of injuries (e.g., fractured or cracked bone or punctured
eardrum), which must be diagnosed by a qualified physician, further
narrowing the number of probable cases. In addition, significant
injuries are generally serious, and are the type of injuries the
railroads should already be investigating, and will generally meet the
other general reporting criteria (i.e. someone with a broken bone will
most likely receive medical treatment). As such, these changes should
not substantially increase the investigative duties of the railroad or
the number of cases they are reporting. With respect to loss of
consciousness cases, railroads will not be required to report cases
where the passenger's loss of consciousness is not due to an event or
exposure arising from the operation of the railroad. For these reasons,
FRA does not believe that the additional reporting criteria for non-
employees will significantly increase the number of reportable cases.
    In addition, the final rule amends paragraph (d)(6)(E) (previously
(d)(6)(v)) to remove the word ``independently'' for purposes of
clarity. As explained in the Section-by-Section Analysis, MSD's are
injuries and illnesses under the rule and are subject to the same
recording criteria that apply to other injuries and illnesses.
    Lastly, the final rule amends paragraph (d)(6) to include covered
data cases. The addition of covered data cases to Sec.  225.19(d) is a
technical amendment and intended to correct the inadvertent omission of
the criteria in the current rule text. The addition does not alter
FRA's reporting criteria or its policy on covered data as stated in
Sec.  225.39.

Sec.  225.21 Forms

    In this section, the final rule amends paragraph (j) in relation to
the use of Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record for Illnesses
Claimed to be Work-Related.'' Specifically, the final rule makes the
use of the Form FRA F 6180.107, in place of Form FRA F 6180.98,
``Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record,'' optional, rather
than mandatory, and amends and redesignates the instructions for the
use of the form currently set forth at Sec.  225.21(j) to Sec.
225.25(i), under the section entitled ``Recordkeeping.'' See Section-
by-Section Analysis for Sec.  225.25, ``Recordkeeping,'' for additional
information and a discussion of the relevant comments.
    The final rule also amends this section by adding a paragraph (k)
to address the newly created Form FRA F 6180.150, ``Highway User Injury
Inquiry Form.'' See FRA Guide. Form FRA F 6180.150 shall be used by the
railroads in determining whether a highway user suffered a reportable
injury or illness in addition complying with part 225's accident/
incident requirements. A copy of the Form FRA F 6180.150 shall be sent
to each potentially injured highway user, or their representative,
involved in a highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident along with
a cover letter and a prepaid/preaddressed return envelope. See FRA
Guide, Chapter 10 for complete instructions. A railroad shall not send
a Form FRA F 6180.150 to a highway user, or a highway user's
representative, who has died as a result of the accident/incident. The
railroad shall complete Part I of Form FRA F 6180.150 and send the form
with the completed Part I to the highway user, or their representative.
See FRA Guide for complete instructions. Moreover, the cover letter
shall be drafted in accordance with the instructions contained in the
FRA Guide. See FRA Guide, Chapter 10.

Sec.  225.25 Recordkeeping

    In this section, the final rule eliminates from paragraph (a) the
words ``that arise from the operation of the

railroad,'' in order to maintain conformity with the definition of
``accountable injury or illness.'' See Section-by-Section Analysis for
Sec.  225.5, ``Definitions,'' for additional information. Moreover,
such language is redundant with respect to reportablility, as Sec.
225.19(d) clearly indicates an injury or illness is only reportable if
an event or exposure arising from the operation of a railroad is a
discernable cause of the resulting condition or a discernable cause of
a significant aggravation to a pre-existing injury or illness.
    The final rule also revises the criteria for using Form FRA F
6180.107, ``Alternative Record for Illnesses Claimed to be Work-
Related,'' and sets forth all of the information that must be included
in an alternative railroad-designed record that may be used in lieu of
the form.
    Prior to FRA's most recent amendments to part 225 in 2003, FRA
required that all accountable and reportable injuries and illnesses be
recorded on Form FRA F 6180.98, ``Railroad Employee Injury and/or
Illness Record,'' or an equivalent record containing the same
information. The subset of those cases that qualified for reporting
were then reported to FRA on Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and
Illness Summary (Continuation Sheet).'' If the case was not reported,
the railroad was required to state, on Form FRA F 6180.98, ``Railroad
Employee Injury and/or Illness Record,'' or the equivalent record, the
reason the injury or illness was not reportable. According to the final
rule preamble, 68 FR 10107, 10118, March 3, 2003:

    Although this system has generally worked well, problems have
arisen with respect to accounting of claimed occupational illnesses.
As further explained below, railroads are subject to tort-based
liability for illnesses and injuries that arise as a result of
conditions in the workplace. By their nature, many occupational
illnesses, particularly repetitive stress cases, may arise either
from exposures outside the workplace, inside the workplace, or a
combination of the two. Accordingly, issues of work-relatedness
become very prominent. Railroads evaluate claims of this nature
using medical and ergonomic experts, often relying upon job analysis
studies as well as focusing on the individual claims.
    With respect to accounting and reportability under part 225,
railroad representatives asserted their concern that mere
allegations (e.g., receipt of a complaint in a tort suit naming a
large number of plaintiffs) not give rise to a duty to report. They
added that many such claims are settled for what amounts to nuisance
values, often with no admission of liability on the part of the
railroad, so even the payment of compensation is not clear evidence
that the railroad viewed the claim of work-relatedness as valid.
    Although sympathetic to these concerns, FRA was disappointed in
the quality of data provided in the past related to occupational
illness. Indeed, in recent years the number of such events reported
to FRA has been extremely small. FRA has an obligation to verify,
insofar as possible, whether the railroad's judgments rest on a
reasonable basis, and discharging that responsibility requires that
there be a reasonable audit trail to verify on what basis the
railroad's decisions were made.

    As a result, FRA established, at Sec.  225.25(i)(1), a separate
category of claimed occupational illnesses to be recorded on a new
form, Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record for Illnesses Claimed
to be Work-Related.'' This category is comprised of: Illnesses for
which there is insufficient information to determine whether the
illness is work-related; illnesses for which the railroad has made a
preliminary determination that the illness was not work-related; and
illnesses for which the railroad has made a final determination that
the illness is not work-related.
    For any case later determined to be reportable, under Sec.
225.25(i)(2), the railroad has been required to remove the designation
``illness claimed to be work-related'' and transfer the record to the
reporting officer for retention and reporting in the normal manner. In
the event the railroad determined the case was not reportable, Sec.
225.25(i)(3) requires that the railroad record an explanation in
``narrative'' block 19 of Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record for
Illnesses Claimed to be Work-Related,'' describing the reason(s) the
railroad made that determination, making reference to the ``most
authoritative'' information relied upon.
    FRA believed that this system of accounting for contested illnesses
would focus responsibility for reporting decisions and provide an
appropriate audit trail. In addition, FRA thought that it would result
in a body of information that could be used for research into the
causes of prevalent illnesses, particularly in the case of
musculoskeletal disorders. See 68 FR 10107, 10118, March 3, 2003.
Unfortunately, this has not been the case.
    Rather than use the Form FRA F 6180.107 ``Alternative Record for
Illnesses Claimed to be Work-Related,'' to record only those illnesses
described above, FRA found that railroads were frequently recording all
occupational illnesses on Form FRA F 6180.107 as a matter of practice,
even before evaluating the sufficiency of information provided and/or
work-relatedness. Furthermore, FRA found that railroads were allowing
these records to remain unevaluated for several months or more without
updating or reviewing them for work-relatedness. Moreover, FRA found
that railroads were not creating the Form FRA F 6180.107 record within
seven working days after receiving information or acquiring knowledge
that an employee asserted an occupational illness, as required by the
FRA Guide. Consequently, this system of accounting did not focus
responsibility for reporting decisions, did not provide an appropriate
audit trail, did not result in a body of information that can be used
in the future for research into the causes of prevalent illnesses, and
was not helpful in correcting the under-reporting of occupational
illnesses to FRA.
    In order to correct this problem, the final rule refines the
circumstances and procedures related to the recording of claimed
occupational illnesses on Form FRA F 6180.107. Specifically, the final
rule allows the use of the form to record only those claimed
occupational illnesses for which the railroad carrier has not received,
from the employee or their representative, information sufficient to
determine whether the occupational illness is work-related. The final
rule also includes, among other things, requirements that railroads:
enter each illness claimed to be work-related on the record no later
than seven working days after receiving information or acquiring
knowledge that an employee is claiming they have incurred an
occupational illness; make a good faith effort to obtain information
necessary on occupational illness cases to make a reporting decision by
December 1 of the next calendar year; document the receipt of new or
additional case information in ``narrative'' block 19 of Form FRA F
6180.107 within fifteen calendar days of receipt, compared to the seven
days proposed in the NPRM, and re-evaluate the case in light of the new
information within forty-five calendar days of receipt of the
information, compared to the thirty days proposed in the NPRM; complete
a Form FRA F 6180.98 for any claimed occupational illness case
determined to be accountable or reportable within seven calendar days
of making such determination; retain the record in accordance with the
provisions set forth in Sec.  225.27 and report the illness in
accordance with the regular reporting requirements; and provide
complete narratives on Form FRA F 6180.107 for those cases the railroad
determines are not reportable. The final rule also specifically defines

what data elements an alternative railroad-designed Form FRA F 6180.107
must contain.
    Commenters suggested that there is no evidence of underreporting of
occupational illnesses and, therefore, the narrowing of the use of the
Form FRA F 6180.107 would impose a significant burden on the railroads.
As explained above, FRA has found that the railroads have routinely
used the Form FRA F 6180.107 to record all occupational illnesses and
have failed to review additional evidence for lengthy periods of time,
and that use of the form has resulted in the under-reporting of
occupational illnesses. FRA believes that it is necessary to limit the
use of the form to situations where the cause has not yet been
determined, to avoid abuse of the form, to create an up-to-date audit
trail, to continue to provide additional time to investigate causation
based on the unique nature of occupational illnesses and to ensure that
additional evidence is considered within a reasonable period of time.
    Many of the commenters critiqued the requirement that railroads
update the forms and review additional information within a certain
period of time. Several railroads also requested additional time to
review new evidence and to update the forms. During the hearing on the
NPRM, FRA requested that the railroads provide FRA with a timeframe
that they believe is appropriate to update the forms and review
additional evidence. AAR suggested that the current reporting timeline,
which requires the railroad to update the form by December 1 of the
following year, is appropriate. However, AAR also felt that 365
calendar days would be appropriate. In its comments, AAR failed to
explain why such a lengthy period of time would be necessary. As
explained above, railroads have used the Form FRA F 6180.107 to avoid
reporting occupational illness by failing to reconsider additional
information and to fully investigate the occupational illness. As such,
FRA does not believe railroads need 365 days to simply update a form
and to consider new evidence. Upon review, the final rule lengthens the
amount of time that the railroads have to review new evidence and to
update the Form FRA F 6180.107 from 30 days to 45 days. Moreover, the
Form FRA F 6180.107 is an optional form that the railroads may use for
occupational illnesses where they have not yet determined the cause of
the injury or illness.
    AAR also submitted comments suggesting that the railroads should
not be required to seek out information on claimed occupational
illnesses. Specifically, AAR asserted that there is usually litigation
surrounding these types of injuries and, as such, it is difficult to
fully investigate the illnesses. Moreover, AAR claims that it will be
difficult for FRA to determine whether the railroads made a good faith
effort to determine causation. As an initial matter, the railroads'
concerns about litigation should not prevent them from making
reasonable inquires in addition to updating the Federally required
forms as they receive and review new information. However, FRA
specifically created the Form FRA F 6180.107 as an alternative form to
provide the railroads with additional time to investigate these
illnesses because of the unique nature of occupational illnesses and
the external delays caused by litigation. Railroads should document
their efforts, record new information, and evaluate that new
information as required so that FRA can determine whether they are
making a good faith effort. Again, the additional requirements are
necessary based upon the railroads' past use of the Form FRA F 6180.107
to document all occupational illnesses without making an initial causal
determination, even in cases when work-relatedness was obvious, and
then failing to update the form when they acquired new information
within a reasonable time period.
    The final rule amends the requirement at Sec.  225.25(b)(6) so that
the alternative railroad-designed record for Form FRA F 6180.98,
``Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record,'' requires the input
of the ``Employee identification number'' only (eliminating for privacy
reasons the employee social security number option). The final rule
makes the same amendment to the alternative railroad-designed record
for Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Records for Illnesses Claimed to
be Work-Related.'' The final rule also makes corresponding changes for
Forms FRA F 6180.98 and 6180.107. See FRA Guide.
    The final rule replaces the term ``log entry'' at Sec.  225.25
(b)(28) with ``record'' and ``report'' at Sec.  225.25 (e)(28) with
``record.'' Both of these sections refer to ``records,'' specifically
alternative railroad-designed Form FRA F 6180.98, ``Railroad Employee
Injury and/or Illness Record'' and Form FRA F 6180.97, ``Initial Rail
Equipment Accident/Incident Record,'' respectively. This amendment is
technical, and is not intended to effect any substantive change.
    The final rule also amends the requirements for alternative
railroad-designed records by amending Sec.  225.25(b)(28) and (e)(28),
and the newly created (j)(25), to reflect that the date required is the
initial date the form was signed/completed. FRA finds it necessary to
make this change because certain railroads do not retain the initial
date a record was completed, but only the date of the most recent
update to the record. Consequently, FRA is unable to discern if the
railroad entered each reportable and accountable injury and illness and
each reportable and accountable rail equipment accident/incident on the
appropriate record, as required by Sec.  225.25(a) through (e), no
later than seven working days after receiving information or acquiring
knowledge that an injury or illness or rail equipment accident/incident
has occurred, as required by Sec.  225.25(f). FRA believes that
specifying the date will resolve any confusion regarding the
requirement. The final rule creates a similar requirement for the
alternative railroad-designed Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record
for Illnesses Claimed to be Work-Related,'' and Forms FRA F 6180.98,
6180.97, and 6180.107. See Section-by-Section Analysis for Appendix H,
``Forms.''

Sec.  225.27 Retention of records

    In this section, the final rule adds a five-year record retention
requirement for Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record for Illnesses
Claimed to be Work-Related'' and Form FRA F 6180.150, ``Highway User
Injury Inquiry Form.'' The 2003 Final Rule did not set forth a
retention period for the Form FRA F 6180.107 and the Form FRA F
6180.150 is a newly created form. Five years is the same retention
period as that of Form FRA F 6180.98, ``Railroad Employee Injury and/or
Illness Record,'' and is appropriate for accurate recordkeeping and
auditing purposes. In addition, the final rule makes a technical change
by restructuring the format of paragraph (a) in order to provide
additional clarity.
    The final rule also adds a requirement that, in the event a
railroad opts to submit their monthly Form FRA F 6180.55, ``Railroad
Injury and Illness Summary'' via optical media or electronically via
the Internet, rather than in hard copy, the railroad shall retain the
original completed hard copy for a period of five years after the
calendar year to which it relates. If the railroad opts to submit the
report to FRA via the Internet, the final rule requires the railroad to
also retain a hard copy print out of FRA's electronic notice
acknowledging receipt of the submission for a period of five years
after the calendar year to which the report acknowledged relates. These

requirements are made in light of the new electronic submission options
in Sec.  225.37, ``Optical media transfer and electronic submission,''
of this final rule.
    The final rule also adds system standards for the electronic
retention, by railroads, of accident/incident records. Historically,
railroads have retained these records in hard copy form. Railroads may
maintain these records electronically, so long as the integrity of the
records are maintained. In order to ensure such integrity, the final
rule adds minimum system requirements for the electronic retention of
accident/incident records. These system standards do not become
effective until after October 31, 2011. The final rule establishes this
delayed effective date, with respect to this requirement only, to
provide railroads with sufficient time to bring any electronic
retention systems into compliance.
    A commenter stated that railroads do not receive receipts from FRA
acknowledging receipt of their electronic reports. FRA is reviewing
this issue to ensure that railroads receive such receipts when
electronic reports are properly submitted. A commenter also stated that
the electronic records retention requirements are redundant and
burdensome because railroads will have to retain every minor change,
and will also result in a high cost to the railroads to both report and
store such reports. However, FRA needs to track the development of
these forms for purposes of accurate auditing. In addition, the ability
to electronically submit forms should ease any possible burden.
Moreover, railroads are already required to store many of these
records. And, with respect to the Form FRA F 6180.55, the final rule
only seeks an extra 36 months of records (with one report per month,
for 36 months). This burden is further eased by the fact that the
electronic retention system standards do not go into effect until after
October 31, 2011. In addition, railroads are not required to retain
records electronically.

Sec.  225.33 Internal Control Plan

    In this section, the final rule clarifies the current ambiguity of
element number 11 of the internal control plan to allow railroads to
have multiple named custodians and locations of completed Forms FRA F
6180.107, ``Alternative Records for Illnesses Claimed to be Work-
Related,'' or the alternate railroad-designed forms and supporting
documentation. FRA recognizes that railroads do not necessarily keep
completed Claimed Occupational Illness Records in a centralized
location, and that different individuals may be responsible for keeping
the records. By amending the regulation, railroads will be able to
accurately indicate who the custodians are and where the custodians and
records are located.
    In addition, FRA notes that it published a Notice of Interpretation
in the Federal Register on March 30, 2009, informing interested parties
of its application and enforcement of the harassment or intimidation
provisions contained in 49 CFR part 225, specifically relating to
situations in which a supervisor or other railroad official accompanies
an injured employee into an examination room. See 74 FR 14091. FRA
includes that Interpretation here for interested parties, as follows:

A. General Principle

    Harassment and intimidation occur in violation of Sec.
225.33(a)(1) when a railroad supervisor accompanies an injured
employee into an examination room, unless one or more of the
exceptions listed in section II(B) of this notice exists.

B. Exceptions

    FRA recognizes that there are limited circumstances in which it
is appropriate, and indeed preferable, for a supervisor to accompany
an injured employee into an examination room. Thus, FRA believes
that limited exceptions to the general principle articulated in
section II(A) of this notice are necessary. Consequently, FRA
recognizes the following limited exceptions:
    (1) The injured employee issues a voluntary invitation to the
supervisor to accompany him or her in the examination room. The
injured employee must issue this invitation freely, without
coercion, duress, or intimidation. For example, an injured employee
may seek the attendance of a supervisor where the supervisor is a
friend. This exception does not encompass invitations issued by
third parties, including physicians, unless the invitations are made
pursuant to the request of the injured employee.
    (2) The injured employee is unconscious or otherwise unable to
effectively communicate material information to the physician and
the supervisor's input is needed to provide such material
information to the physician. In these circumstances, the supervisor
is assisting the injured employee in providing information to the
physician so that the injured employee may receive appropriate and
responsive medical treatment.

    A commenter requested that the final rule ``include safety'' in
this section. However, the intended meaning of this comment is unclear.
Regardless, safety is a critical component of Sec.  225.33, along with
all of FRA's regulations.

Sec.  225.37 Optical Media Transfer and Electronic Submission

    The final rule updates the title of this section, to reflect
changes in technology, to read, ``Optical media transfer and electronic
submission.'' In 1994, at the request of many railroads, FRA designed a
method for railroads to submit their monthly accident/incident reports
to FRA using computer technologies. At the time, high speed Internet
access was not available in many locations. Most Internet users used
voice grade phone lines to access the Internet. Transferring high
volumes of data was difficult and often led to data transmission errors
(missing records or errors in characters received in transmission). The
other technology used for sending data was a nine-track magnetic tape
or 3\1/2\ inch ``floppy disk.'' Both the 9-track tape and floppy disk
use a magnetic surface to record data. Due to the probability of errors
in both data transmission and magnetic media, FRA required a Batch
Control Sheet (Form FRA F 6180.99) to verify a complete and accurate
receipt of all data.
    The current state of computer technology has changed significantly.
High-speed Internet access is almost ubiquitous, via cable, DSL, and
satellite. Transmission using phone lines and wireless (using cell
phone technology) has also improved. Optical media (CD-ROM) is very
reliable and the data is ``burned'' into the disk. Optical media has
replaced magnetic media for most data transfer (USB flash drives are
not intended for this type of data exchange). In amending the current
regulation, FRA has taken into account the current computer
technologies by eliminating the requirement for a Batch Control Sheet,
and substituted ``magnetic media'' with ``optical media.'' Further, FRA
allows for document transmission using the .jpg and .pdf formats.
    The final rule also makes two changes related to Form FRA F
6180.55, ``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary.'' FRA believes that
both of these changes will reduce railroad burdens related to
completing and submitting this form. The final rule replaces the oath
and notarization requirement of Form FRA F 6180.55, ``Railroad Injury
and Illness Summary,'' with a requirement that the signature be signed
under penalty of perjury in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1746. Section
20901 of Title 49 of the United States Code requires a railroad to file
an Accident/Incident report ``under oath'' no later than 30 days after
the end of each month. To fulfill this requirement, FRA currently
requires a railroad reporting officer to make a sworn statement, under
oath, before a notary public each month attesting to the accuracy of
that month's submission. The question has arisen as to whether an un-
sworn, un-notarized statement is adequate to fulfill the

section 20901 oath requirement. In 1976, Congress addressed the use of
``unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury,'' in lieu of a sworn
affidavit. Section 1746 of Title 28 of the United States Code, entitled
``Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury,'' provides that
``wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule,
regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is
required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or
proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement,
oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other
than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be
taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such
matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced,
established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate,
verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is
subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated * * *''
and provides examples of the form the declaration, certificate,
verification, or statement must take. Consequently, the oath
requirement of section 20901 can be met via an unsworn, un-notarized
statement, so long as the statement meets the requirements set forth in
28 U.S.C. 1746.
    The final rule also updates the regulatory text to include
provisions allowing railroads to make their monthly reporting
submissions (Form FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident
Report''; Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary
(Continuation Sheet)''; and Form FRA F 6180.57, ``Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Accident/Incident Report'') to FRA via optical media (CD-ROM)
or electronically via the Internet. Batch control forms (Form FRA F
6180.99) are no longer required for submission. Form FRA F 6180.55
``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary'' reports and Form FRA F 6180.81
``Employee Human Factor Attachment'' reports may also be submitted
through these means. However, the Form FRA F 6180.55 must be submitted
as an image of the completed and signed hard copy and must be in a .pdf
or .jpg file format only, and the Form FRA F 6180.81 must also be in a
.pdf or .jpg file format. If a railroad opts to submit their completed
Form FRA F 6180.55 to FRA via optical media or electronically via the
Internet, the railroad must maintain the original completed and signed
Form FRA F 6180.55 for at least five years after the calendar year to
which the report relates, in accordance with Sec.  225.27(c) of this
final rule. FRA will provide to the railroad an electronic notice
acknowledging the agency's receipt of Form FRA F 6180.55 reports which
are filed electronically via the Internet. Railroads must also maintain
a hard copy of this acknowledgment notice for at least five years after
the calendar year to which the report acknowledged relates, in
accordance with Sec.  225.27(c) of this final rule. The final rule also
removes the language in paragraph (e), and replaces it with a statement
requiring that railroads choosing to use the optical media transfer
option, or the electronic submission via Internet option, must use one
of the approved formats specified in the FRA Companion Guide. FRA will
reject submissions that do not adhere to the required formats, which
may result in the issuance of one or more civil penalty assessments
against a railroad for failing to provide timely submissions of
required reports as required by Sec.  225.11. The previous requirements
of paragraph (e) are no longer necessary because they addressed issues
relating to magnetic media.

Sec.  225.41 Suicide Data

    In this section, the final rule adds Sec.  225.41 ``Suicide Data,''
to detail FRA's intended use of suicide data. See Section-by-Section
Analysis for Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents not to be reported''
for additional information.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The discussion in this section with regard to States access
to reports and reports relates only to those records and reports
containing suicide data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, FRA requested comments and suggestions regarding
States' access to records containing ``suicide data.'' FRA is concerned
about the public use and dissemination of this data due to its
sensitive nature, but also wants States to have access to such
information for safety and enforcement purposes. Under the 2003 Final
Rule, States could obtain reports directly from railroads pursuant to
Sec.  225.1. In addition, State agencies participating in investigative
activities under part 212 could obtain records and reports from the
railroads and FRA.
    The final rule does not amend Sec.  225.1 as it relates to State
access; as such, States may still obtain reports directly from a
railroad. All of the reports that the States may access contain no
Personal Identifying Information (PII) and, therefore, FRA is not
concerned about their availability and use. In addition, the final rule
does not amend State access pursuant to part 212, as that access is
subject to an FRA agreement, see Sec.  212.105, and allows States to
assist FRA with its safety mission. State agencies participating in
investigative activities under part 212 will have access to relevant
claims and medical records in addition to Federal records and reports
pursuant to Sec.  225.35(b), which do contain PII. State access to
these documents is limited to their role in investigative activities
and is for the purpose of improving safety; therefore, the final rule
does not limit State access pursuant to part 212. Once a State obtains
copies of documents pursuant to part 212 or Sec.  225.1, their
disclosure and use are governed by the State's privacy laws. Again, FRA
wants to limit the distribution and use of the individual records and
reports due to the sensitive nature of the information, and has limited
the general public's access to the extent reasonably practicable by
limiting its availability online through FRA.
    Commenters stated that States wanted access to these reports to
ensure the accuracy of their own databases and for other safety
purposes. FRA believes that the States should have access to the
``Suicide data'' in addition to the individual reports, pursuant to
part 212 and Sec.  225.1, so that they may take steps to understand and
prevent suicides occurring on the railroad. As stated above, pursuant
to Sec.  225.1, States only have access to certain reports (e.g., Forms
FRA F 6180.54, FRA F 6180.57 and FRA F 6180.55a) and do not have access
to any records (e.g., Forms FRA F 6180.98 and FRA F 6180.97). Forms FRA
F 6180.54, FRA F 6180.57, and FRA F 6180.55a do not contain PII and the
FRA Guide contains instructions requiring railroads to not include any
PII in the narrative section. As such, FRA is not concerned about
allowing the railroads to provide those records to the States pursuant
to Sec.  225.1.
    As discussed above, State agencies participating in investigative
activities under part 212 can obtain records and reports from the
railroads and FRA. In this case, State agencies will have access to
documents containing PII. Once the State agencies' obtain these
documents, their disclosure will be subject to State privacy laws
rather than FOIA requests. While FRA wants to limit the general
public's access to these documents and their dissemination due to their
sensitive nature, FRA believes that States will be able to use this
information to improve safety and that FRA has limited the availability
of this information to the extent reasonably practicable.
    ICC suggested that FRA create a secure Web site so that more
information may be made available. At this time, FRA does not plan on
creating such a Web site. Instead, FRA is making

all of the relevant information available in the aggregate for the
general public.

Appendix A to Part 225--Schedule of Civil Penalties.

    Appendix A to part 225 contains a schedule of civil penalties for
use in connection with this part. The final rule revises the schedule
of civil penalties to reflect revisions made to part 225. Because such
penalty schedules are statements of agency policy, notice and comment
are not required prior to their issuance. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
Although the schedules are statements of agency policy, the NPRM
provided interested parties with an opportunity to comment. However, no
such comments were submitted.

FRA Guide

    Generally, FRA makes the following revisions to the FRA Guide: An
improved table of contents; clarifying instructions on Forms FRA F
6180.57, 6180.54, and 6180.150 that have fields requesting an U.S. DOT
Grade Crossing Identification Number includes and is referencing the
U.S. DOT Grade Crossing Inventory Number; an updated e-mail and U.S.
postal mail address for the monthly accident/incident reporting
submissions; the addition of a subject index; the reorganization of the
chapter contents for ease of use; the inclusion of necessary updates;
the inclusion of new and revised ``Questions and Answers'' and
``Scenarios'' taken from the FRA Safety Data Web page (http://
safetydata.fra.dot.gov/officeofsafety) and from OSHA's Web page (http:/
/www.osha.gov/comp-links.html) to clarify reporting issues; the
inclusion of the prior and the current reporting threshold to reflect
changes made in part 225; the inclusion of Web addresses for access to
the most up-to-date contact information and data contained in the
appendices; and the elimination of redundant language by replacing
verbatim reiterations of part 225 rule text where appropriate (for ease
of reference the FRA Guide includes the full regulatory text of part
225 in a newly created Appendix K).
    FRA also makes a technical amendment throughout the FRA Guide by
changing the term ``Gap'' to ``Passenger Station Platform Gap'' because
it best captures the intended meaning. See FRA Guide.
    More specific changes include:

Chapter 1, ``Overview of Accident/Incident Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements.''

    FRA revises the paragraph titled, ``Telephonic Reports of Certain
Accidents/Incidents,'' in accordance with the amendments set forth in
Sec.  225.9, and includes the telephonic reporting requirements set
forth in 49 CFR parts 229, ``Railroad Locomotive Safety Standards;''
part 233, ``Signal Systems Reporting Requirements;'' part 234, ``Grade
Crossing Signal System Safety;'' and part 219, ``Control of Alcohol and
Drug Use.'' Such incorporation is for informational purposes only, and
places no new reporting requirements on railroads. By including these
requirements in the FRA Guide, FRA hopes to better disseminate its
telephonic reporting requirements, and to improve railroad compliance
by providing a single reference location for determining when accident/
incident telephonic notification is required.
    FRA also revises the section entitled ``Close of Calendar Year'' by
clarifying the requirements for submitting late and amended reports,
revising the time frame in which FRA will accept additional late and
amended accident/incident reports, and changing from optional to
mandatory the filing of amended reports for certain accidents/
incidents.
    FRA publishes final accident/incident counts following the
conclusion of a reporting year. Submission of the December report
concludes the reporting year. However, railroads are still required to
provide to FRA late reports of unreported accidents/incidents and
amended reports that correct or update earlier submissions.
    Previously, the FRA Guide (Chapter 1--Page 12 through 13) specified
three cutoff dates for filing late and amended accident/incident
reports following the completion of the reporting year:
    (1) April 15 of the next calendar year;
    (2) December 1 of the following year: and
    (3) Five years after the end of the calendar year to which the
accident/incident report relates.
    FRA found the reporting scheme to be confusing and outdated with
the advent of improved technology. Moreover, improvements in database
management strategies allow for contemporaneous viewing of reporting
accident/incident statistics and have eliminated the need to impose
artificial deadlines for keeping files open or for FRA to publish
interim reports. As such, FRA removes references to the cutoff date of
April 15th of the next calendar year for accepting late reports and
amendments. Accordingly, FRA will receive and process any and all late
and amended reports for a period of five years following the calendar
year to which an amended or late report relates. This accommodation
does not relieve a railroad of its obligation to promptly file a late
or amended report upon becoming aware of an omission, mistake or
otherwise, in accordance with Sec.  225.13 and the late and amended
reporting guidance set forth in the FRA Guide. FRA will continue to
publish its Annual Report of Railroad Safety Statistics. Because the
accident/incident databases will remain open for updating for a period
of five years, the statistics published in the Annual Report will be
subject to change. The authoritative source for rail safety statistics
will now be the Office of Safety's Web site: http://
safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety.
    To clarify, these revisions do not change the following late and
amended reporting requirements, which are currently set forth in the
FRA Guide:
    (1) Railroads must file amended reports with FRA through December 1
of the year following the year in which the accident/incident was
initially reported.
    (2) Railroads must file late reports with FRA for five years
(following the end of the calendar year to which the accident/incident
relates) for all unreported accident/incidents.
    FRA does, however, revise the reporting requirements with respect
to certain specified accidents/incidents. Previously, the FRA Guide
stated that railroads ``should'' continue to file amended reports after
December 1 of the following year (i.e., for five years after the end of
the calendar year to which they relate) for the changes listed below.
These revisions make such amended reporting mandatory. Accordingly,
railroads shall continue to file amended reports for five years after
the end of the calendar year to which they relate for the following
changes:
    (1) Railroad Injury and Illness Summary (Continuation Sheet) (Form
FRA F 6180.55a): Change from Injury to Fatality (only if the injured
person dies within 180 days from the date of the injury);
    (2) Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/Incident Report (Form FRA
F 6180.57): Change from Injury to Fatality, change in Grade Crossing
ID, change in the Rail Equipment Involved; and
    (3) Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report (Form FRA F 6180.54):
Change from Injury to Fatality, change in Grade Crossing ID, Rail
Equipment Involved, Primary Cause Code, Contributing Cause Code, Type
of Territory, Number of Cars Releasing or Evacuation.
    These revisions further provide that railroads shall continue to
file amended reports for five years after the end of the calendar year
to which they relate for the additional changes listed below:

    (1) Railroad Injury and Illness Summary (Continuation Sheet) (Form
FRA F 6180.55a): A significant change in the number of reportable days
away from work or days restricted; a significant change is at least a
10% variance in the number of actual reportable days away from work or
days restricted compared to the number of days already reported.
    (2) Railroad Equipment Accident/Incident Report (Form FRA F
6180.54): A significant change in the damage costs for reportable rail
equipment accidents/incidents; a significant change is a 10% variance
between the damage amount reported to FRA and the current cost figures.
    In light of these changes, FRA is revising the timeframe imposed
for using the M505 code on the Form FRA F 6180.54. See FRA Guide,
Chapter 7.

Chapter 2, ``Definitions.''

    In the NPRM, FRA added an example to the definition of Worker on
Duty-Employee (Class A) characterizing an employee on his lunch break
as on duty. In response to the example, AAR submitted comments stating
that an employee on an unpaid break should not be considered a Worker
on Duty-Employee (Class A) because they are not performing work at that
time. AAR stated that there was no justification for this change at
this time. FRA removes this example in the final rule to avoid any
confusion. In general, an employee on a break, whether paid or unpaid,
is considered an Employee Not On Duty (Class B). However, if an
employee is performing work-related activities (i.e., lining a switch)
during his or her break then the employee is a Worker on Duty-Employee
(Class A). Thus, an employer should consider an employee's actual
activities during his or her break to determine whether the employee is
on or off duty.
    FRA adds certain definitions for clarification and ease of
reference, and removes definitions that reiterate definitions set forth
in Sec.  225.5. FRA adds a definition for ``Temporary Barricaded
Crossing'' to mean ``a highway-rail grade crossing that is temporarily
closed to highway users by using temporary methods to block highway
traffic such as barrels. A temporary barricaded crossing does not
constitute a `closed' crossing.'' FRA also adds a definition for
``Closed Crossing'' to mean a location where a crossing has been
physically removed or where rail operations, pathway or highway traffic
is not possible (this does not include crossings that are temporarily
closed for repairs to the track structure, crossing surface, or roadway
approaches). Examples of ``closed crossings'' are locations where the
crossing has been permanently barricaded and crossing surface material
removed; where the railroad tracks have been cut or barricaded or
physically removed; where a connecting turnout has been removed; or
where rail operations are not possible because the railroad tracks are
paved over, etc. Crossings along such inactive railroad lines are
closed. FRA adds these definitions to the FRA Guide to eliminate
confusion about the meaning of a ``closed'' versus ``barricaded''
crossing, and to revise the definition of ``closed crossing'' to be
consistent with the definition used in the Grade Crossing Inventory
System (GCIS). The GCIS is a mandatory system used by States,
railroads, and the Federal government to profile crossings and
determine which crossings need improved warning systems for highway
users. FRA and other users regularly compare information from the
Highway-Rail Crossing Accident/Incident Reports (Form FRA F 6180.57) to
the GCIS. Clearly defining ``closed crossing'' and ``temporary
barricaded crossing,'' and making the GCIS and FRA definitions
consistent, will reduce confusion and aid in grade crossing accident/
incident reporting accuracy.
    FRA clarifies in the definition of Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
Accident/Incident that all crossing locations within industry and rail
yards, ports, and dock areas are considered highway-rail crossings
within the meaning of highway-rail grade crossing. This clarifying
amendment does not expand the railroads' reporting requirements or
create an additional burden as the amendment is consistent with the
2003 FRA Guide, FRA's longstanding policy, and industry practices. The
purpose of the amendment is to place the entire definition in one
location for ease of reference.
    FRA adds a definition for ``Passenger Station Platform Gap'' to
mean, ``the horizontal space between the edge of the passenger boarding
platform and the edge of the rail car door threshold plate, and the
vertical difference from the top of the passenger boarding platform and
the top of the rail car threshold.'' This definition, with a minor
variation, was recommended by the RSAC General Passenger Safety Task
Force to the full RSAC on October 25, 2007, along with the Cause Code
Recommendations for platform gap related injuries (see discussion for
Appendix F of the FRA Guide). The full RSAC agreed to the
recommendations on October 25, 2007. The NPRM proposed adding a
definition for ``Gap,'' as opposed to ``Passenger Station Platform
Gap.'' A comment to the NPRM suggested that FRA use the phrase
``Platform Gap,'' rather than ``Gap.'' The final rule uses the term
``Passenger Station Platform Gap'' because it best captures the
intended meaning. A comment to the NPRM also suggested that the
definition itself is too narrow, and not consistent with the common
definition of the term. However, as discussed, the definition in the
final rule is consistent with the RSAC recommendations, and the
definition facilitates the tracking of accidents/incidents that occur
on high level platforms.
    FRA also adds a definition for ``Passenger Station Platform Gap
Incident'' to mean ``an event involving a person who, while involved in
the process of boarding or alighting a passenger train at a rail car
door threshold plate at a high level passenger boarding platform (i.e.,
a platform that is 48'' or more above the top of the rail), has one or
more body parts enter the area between the car body and the edge of the
platform. The following are examples of a Passenger Station Platform
Gap Incident:

--While boarding or alighting a passenger train at a high level
passenger boarding platform, a person misjudges the passenger station
platform gap, resulting in the person's leg entering the passenger
station platform gap.
--While boarding or alighting a passenger train at a high level
passenger boarding platform, a person is struck by a closing door,
resulting in the person's leg entering the passenger station platform
gap.

    The following are not examples of a Passenger Station Platform Gap
Incident:

--While boarding or alighting a passenger train at a high level
passenger boarding platform, a person misjudges the gap and falls into
the vestibule or platform, without a body part entering the gap.
--While walking on a passenger station at a high level passenger
boarding platform, a person slips on the platform, at a location other
than the rail car door threshold, resulting in the person's leg
entering the gap.

    The definition and examples of ``Passenger Station Platform Gap
Incident'' were recommended by the RSAC General Passenger Safety Task
Force to the full RSAC on October 25, 2007, along with Cause Code
Recommendations for platform gap related injuries (see discussion for
Appendix F of the FRA Guide). The full RSAC agreed to these
recommendations on October 25, 2007. The final rule

adopts these recommendations with slight variation.
    FRA also revises the definition of ``Locomotive'' to support
changes necessary to include EMU and DMU cars on FRA Form F 6180.54,
``Rail-Equipment Accident/Incident Report.'' In the current FRA Guide
(May 1, 2003), a cab car is defined as a locomotive. However, there is
no definition for EMU and DMU cars, which created confusion because
these cars provide power to the consist and can, therefore, also be
classified as locomotives.
    FRA adds a definition for ``Vehicle'' to include automobiles,
buses, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, farm vehicles, and all other
modes of surface transportation, motorized and nonmotorized.

Chapter 3, Form FRA F 6180.55, ``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary.''

    FRA revises the instructions for the use of this form consistent
with the changes in this final rule. See Section-by-Section Analysis
for Sec.  225.27, ``Retention of records,'' Sec.  225.37, ``Magnetic
media transfer and submission,'' Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents
not to be reported,'' Sec.  225.41, ``Suicide data,'' and the FRA
Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for additional information.
    The final rule also revises the Form FRA F 6180.55 to clarify that
by signing the form the reporting officer is attesting that all of the
information on the form is true and correct. See FRA Guide, Appendix H,
``Forms'' for additional information.
    In addition, FRA is clarifying that casualties due to suicides and
attempted suicides, for which an event or exposure arising from the
operation of the railroad is a discernable cause and meets the general
reporting criteria, shall also be included in Field 18, Reported
Casualties, on Forms FRA F 6180.55, ``Railroad Injury and Illness
Summary.'' This will allow FRA to verify against the number of forms
submitted with the actual count. The railroad should report the person
by the ``type of person.'' As such, if a trespasser commits suicide,
the railroad shall report it as a trespasser fatality. See FRA Guide,
Chapter 3.

Chapter 4, Form FRA F 6180.98, ``Railroad Employee Injury and/or
Illness Record.''

    FRA revises the instructions for the use of this form consistent
with the changes in this final rule. See Section-by-Section Analysis
for Sec.  225.5, ``Definitions'' definition for Accountable Injury or
Illness; Sec.  225.25, ``Recordkeeping,'' Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/
incidents not to be reported;'' Sec.  225.41, ``Suicide data;'' and the
FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for additional information.
    FRA is clarifying that railroads must create a Form FRA F 6180.98
for employee casualties due to suicides and attempted suicides, that
are accountable or reportable. Moreover, FRA instructs the railroad to
indicate in the narrative section that the casualty resulted from the
person's suicidal act.

Chapter 5, Form FRA F 6180.97, ``Initial Rail Equipment Accident/
Incident Record.''

    FRA revises the instructions for the use of this form consistent
with the changes in this final rule. See Section-by-Section Analysis
for Sec.  225.5, ``Definitions;'' Sec.  225.25, ``Recordkeeping;''
Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents not to be reported;'' Sec.  225.41,
``Suicide data;'' and the FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for
additional information.
    FRA revised the Questions and Answers in Chapter 4 of the FRA Guide
to reflect the changes to the definition of accountable rail equipment
accident/incident. FRA removed the Q2/A2 from the FRA Guide as it dealt
with the disruption of service criteria from the 2003 Final Rule.
    In addition, FRA is clarifying that casualties due to suicides and
attempted suicides, for which an event or exposure arising from the
operation of the railroad is a discernable cause and that meet the
general reporting criteria shall also be included in the Field 30,
Casualties, on Forms FRA F 6180.97. Also, FRA is also including
instructions that when an accountable or reportable rail equipment
accident/incident is caused by a suicide or attempted suicide, the
railroad shall indicate that fact in Field 31, Narrative Description.

Chapter 6, Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness Summary
(Continuation Sheet).''

    FRA revises the instructions for the use of this form consistent
with the changes in this final rule. FRA also adds instructions that,
if an injury is due to a passenger station platform gap incident, the
railroad must use in block 5n (``Cause''), ``Probable Reason for
Injury/Illness Circumstance Codes,'' code number 18--Slipped, fell,
stumbled due to Passenger Station Platform Gap--regardless of whether
other codes may also be applicable. See Section-by-Section Analysis for
Sec.  225.5, ``Definitions;'' Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/Incident not to
be reported;'' Sec.  225.19 ``Primary Groups of Accidents/Incidents''
and the FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for additional information.
    FRA also revised Chapter 6 to make it consistent with the Notice of
Interpretation it published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2009,
informing interested parties of its application and enforcement of the
harassment or intimidation provisions contained in 49 CFR part 225,
specifically relating to situations in which a supervisor or other
railroad official accompanies an injured employee into an examination
room. See 74 FR 14091; see also Section-by-Section Analysis for Sec.
225.33, ``Internal Control Plan.''
    FRA also revises Chapter 6 to instruct railroads that they must
presume that a highway user who is involved in a highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident and is transported from the scene of a
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident to a medical facility via
ambulance or other form of medical conveyance did, more likely than
not, sustain an FRA reportable injury (i.e., an injury meeting the
general reporting criteria set forth at Sec.  225.19(d)(1) through
(d)(6)). Absent evidence to rebut the presumption, the railroad must
report the injury to FRA on Form FRA F 6180.55a, and include the
casualty on Form FRA F 6180.57. If the railroad later discovers that
the highway user did not sustain a reportable injury, the railroad must
notify FRA in accordance with the late reporting instructions set forth
at Sec.  225.13. FRA has found that railroads are under-reporting
highway-rail grade crossing accidents/incidents related to injures to
persons other than railroad employees due to the railroads' limited
access to injured highway users' medical records, especially in light
of privacy protections related to health information provided by the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA),
Public Law 104-191.
    FRA emphasizes, however, that this presumption does not relieve
railroads of their duty to make reasonable inquiry to determine the
nature and severity of highway-rail grade crossing injuries and to
accurately report such injuries. In general, FRA has found that some
railroads often do not make such reasonable inquiry into potentially
reportable injuries of non-employees. Accordingly, the NPRM required a
railroad to fulfill its reasonable inquiry responsibilities in
determining the nature and severity of highway-rail grade crossing
injuries and to accurately report such injuries, by contacting the
injured individual or their representative by phone and, if
unsuccessful in obtaining the needed

information, in writing. Moreover, the NPRM required that a railroad
keep a record of its efforts to make such contact and that this record
and documentation of any information obtained be available for review
and copying by an FRA representative under the same criteria as set
forth in Sec.  225.35(b).
    In light of comments received regarding the burden and
effectiveness of contacting potentially injured highway users, the
final rule revises the language in the NPRM and requires that the
railroad fulfill its inquiry responsibilities by contacting any highway
user potentially injured in a highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident, or the highway user's representative(s), in writing and, if
unsuccessful in obtaining the needed information, by telephone. If a
highway user died as a result of the highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incident, a railroad shall not send this form to any person.
Moreover, the final rule specifies that the written correspondence
should contain the newly created Form FRA F 6180.150, ``Highway User
Injury Inquiry Form,'' a cover letter drafted in accordance with the
instructions contained in the FRA Guide, and a return envelope that is
prepaid and preaddressed. A railroad shall keep a record of its efforts
to contact a highway user, and this record and documentation of any
information obtained shall be available for review and copying by an
FRA representative under the same criteria as set forth in Sec.
225.35(b).
    Form FRA F 6180.150 shall be completed in accordance with the
instructions contained in the FRA Guide in Chapter 10, dealing with
highway-rail grade crossing accidents/incidents. FRA has found that,
when railroads do actually conduct an investigation into injuries to
highway users, they will solicit medical records and other documents
containing PII. This approach has resulted in a lack of response from
individuals who do not want to divulge personal information and are
unsure about the purpose of the request. This has resulted in the
underreporting or inaccurate reporting of highway-rail grade crossing
injuries. While a railroad may request this information, in order to
make a reporting decision, a railroad is not required to obtain that
type of documentation, although it can provide additional insight into
the nature and severity of an injury or illness. As such, Form FRA F
6180.150 is meant to be minimally invasive and requires only that
information which a railroad needs in order to determine whether the
person suffered a reportable injury. This requirement does not prevent
a railroad from conducting additional investigation, but is meant to
ensure that the railroad performs an investigation into the nature and
severity of highway-rail grade crossing injuries, in a less invasive
manner. However, a railroad shall not require a highway user to present
medical documentation or other supportive information in order to
report the casualty.
    A railroad shall complete Part I of Form FRA F 6180.150 with
information regarding the highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident, in accordance with the instructions provided in FRA Guide.
The railroad shall hand deliver or send by first class mail the letter
within a reasonable time period following the date of the highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident. The letter shall also contain a
prepaid, pre-addressed return envelope, and a copy of the Form FRA F
6180.150 with Part I completed, along with the required cover letter.
Highway users are not required to complete Form FRA F 6180.150.
Consequently, FRA acknowledges that there will be situations in which a
highway user cannot be reached even though a railroad contacts the
person in writing and by telephone. Other times, a highway user will
refuse to provide any information even though a railroad clearly
explains the Federal reporting requirements and the reason for
soliciting information. In those cases, a railroad is still responsible
for deciding whether, considering all of the circumstances, the highway
user suffered a reportable injury (or, whether the presumption
discussed above, applies). The railroad must reconsider that
determination if new or additional information is later acquired.
Moreover, if a highway user completes Part II, or provides additional
information during a telephone call, the railroad will be responsible
for determining whether, based on the circumstances, the person
suffered a reportable injury or illness and for using that information
in complying with FRA reporting and recording requirements.
    The final rule adds a draft of Form FRA F 6180.150, ``Highway User
Injury Inquiry Form,'' to Appendix H and a sample cover letter in
Appendix N. See FRA Guide. The instructions added to the final rule for
completing Form FRA F 6180.150 require the railroad to complete Part I
of the form. See FRA Guide, Chapter 10. Form FRA F 6180.150 was
submitted to OMB for approval with the final rule and is still pending
OMB approval; therefore, the railroads cannot use the form until it has
been approved. FRA expects that, prior to the delayed six month
effective date, the form with be approved. Following approval, the
final form will be available at http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/
officeofsafety.
    The cover letter that accompanies Form FRA F 6180.150 shall be
drafted in accordance with the instructions contained in the FRA Guide,
Chapter 10. FRA has included a sample cover letter in the FRA Guide for
use by the railroads. See FRA Guide, Appendix N. Specifically, the
cover letter shall clearly explain the Federal reporting requirements
imposed on the railroads, address only Federal reporting requirements
and not the railroad's claims process, explain that the form is
voluntary, and provide clear instructions on how to complete the form.
The cover letter may ask the highway user to provide additional
information, but the cover letter shall not mandate that the individual
provide certain information in order for a railroad to comply with
Federal reporting requirements. See FRA Guide, Chapter 10 for a
complete list of instructions.
    With regard to the cover letter, the instructions contained in the
final rule require that the letter contain the following:
     An explanation of why the railroad is contacting the
highway user;
     An explanation of part 225's accident/incident reporting
requirements;
     An explanation of how the form and any response will be
used for part 225's accident/incident reporting requirements;
     An explanation that the highway user is not required to
respond and that a response is voluntary;
     An opportunity to correct incorrect information in Part I;
     Identify and provide contact information for a person at
the railroad who can answer questions with regard to the form;
     Provide instructions on how to complete Part II; and,
     An explanation of how any medical records, if requested,
personal identifying information or information will be handled.
    The cover letter and Form FRA F 6180.150 are meant to be tools that
allow the railroad to gather information and comply with part 225's
accident/incident reporting and recording requirements. As such, a
railroad shall not require the highway user to provide any medical or
personal information in order to report a casualty. Moreover, the cover
letter and any communication for the purposes of part 225 shall remain

separate from and not reference the railroad's claims process in order
to avoid confusion.
    As an initial matter, FRA received comments regarding the language
proposed in the NPRM; however, as the language in the final rule simply
elaborates on and provides additional directions on how to conduct an
inquiry into a potentially reportable injury, a majority of the
comments are still relevant.
    Commenters suggested that the requirements proposed in the NPRM
were overly burdensome and would not be effective as individuals
generally do not want to share personal information. As the
requirements contained in the final rule are consistent with those
proposed in the NPRM, the comments are still applicable. FRA is
concerned that these injuries and fatalities are not being reported or
investigated; as such, the changes are meant to ensure that both of
these things occur. Moreover, the presumption of reportablity created
in the final rule is meant to simplify the process. Also, a railroad is
allowed to terminate its investigation after calling and mailing the
individual as required by this final rule. The inquiry requirement does
not impose a timeframe on the follow-up the railroad is required to
perform, except that the railroad must initiate its investigation
within a reasonable time after the date of the highway-rail grade
crossing accident. FRA created the Form FRA F 6180.150 and the sample
cover letter in an effort to open the communication process with
potentially injured highway users to ensure that railroads and FRA are
gathering accurate information. Finally, the final rule requires the
railroads to contact the highway user by mail prior to contacting the
person by phone because FRA believes that this will be a less
intimidating approach.
    In addition, UP stated in its comments that the additional
requirements would force them to intrude on the private lives of the
general public and could increase issues with pending litigation. As an
initial matter, private litigation matters should not prevent the
railroads from reporting information about casualties and investigating
the potential causes of accidents/incidents arising out of the
operation of the railroad. Also, the railroads should already be
investigating these casualties. FRA's creation of the presumption is
meant to alleviate some burden upon the railroad where they follow-up
but cannot eventually obtain the necessary information. While the new
requirement does mandate that a railroad follow-up with injured
persons, a railroad is simply required to send a letter to and possibly
call the highway user in an effort to obtain information in order to
complete a Federal form. As explained above, the Form FRA F 6180.150
and the cover letter, explaining the purpose of the railroad's inquiry,
is meant to encourage the sharing of information and to be less
intimidating.
    Commenters also suggested that this requirement would not improve
safety. FRA uses information about reportable injuries to understand
the severity of accidents and incidents occurring due to the operation
of the railroad. When the railroads fail to report injuries and
illnesses, this prevents FRA from fully understanding the impact and
severity of such accidents and incidents.
    Amtrak submitted comments stating that, due to their large number
of passengers, the burden of these additional requirements will be
extreme. As an initial matter, the duty to investigate highway-rail
grade crossing incidents and trespasser fatalities, which are discussed
below, do not generally apply to passengers (or individuals legally on
railroad property). While railroads are required to conduct a
reasonable inquiry into any potentially reportable injury or illness,
FRA is particularly concerned with, and the additional requirements
apply to, only highway users potentially injured in a highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident and trespasser fatalities. See FRA
Guide.
    Next, FRA is also concerned that suicides are being reported as
trespasser fatalities. Often this occurs because railroads do not
always make reasonable inquiry in their efforts to determine the cause
of death. In fact, FRA has found that a number of reported trespasser
fatalities are actually suicides. Accordingly, FRA revised Chapter 6 to
clarify that, in order to fulfill its responsibilities in determining
the nature of a trespasser fatality and to accurately report such a
fatality, a railroad must try to obtain documentation indicating the
cause of death by contacting the coroner, public police officer, or
other public authority by telephone and, if unsuccessful, in writing.
The railroad must continue its efforts to obtain this documentation for
a period of six months following the month in which the fatality
occurred. The railroad must keep a record of its efforts to obtain such
documentation. This record and any documentation obtained must be
available for review and copying by an FRA representative under the
same criteria as set forth in Sec.  225.35(b).
    Commenters further suggested that there are already sufficient
steps in place requiring the railroads to fully investigate fatalities
and to obtain relevant information. As stated above, FRA has found that
the railroads often report fatalities as trespasser fatalities when
they are in fact suicides. To understand and prevent deaths arising
from the operation of the railroad and suicides occurring on the
railroad, FRA needs to have accurate and complete information. As such,
FRA believes that the additional requirements are necessary. See
Section-by-Section Analysis for Sec.  225.41, ``Suicide data'' for
additional discussion of the comments and requirements.
    Other comments suggested that the six-month follow-up requirement
is too burdensome. FRA has found that it often takes time for public
authorities to complete their investigations and declare a cause of
death. Therefore, FRA believes that the six-month requirement will
provide the railroads with sufficient time to obtain this information.
One railroad suggested that the railroads should only have to follow-up
with one document request within an initial three-month period from the
date of the incident. Again, FRA has found that it often takes more
time to obtain this information and that follow-up by different means
is more effective. In addition, once a railroad has obtained
confirmation of the cause of death, they may terminate their
investigation.
    Several commenters suggested that the railroads do not have the
legal authority to obtain the required documentation. As stated above,
the railroads have historically been able to obtain this information.
If a railroad cannot obtain this information and properly documents its
efforts, then the railroad has fulfilled its obligations under part
225. However, if a railroad cannot confirm cause of death, the railroad
will still be responsible for reporting the casualty as a trespasser
fatality. Finally, FRA believes that allowing the railroads to accept
verbal confirmation of the cause of death, which they must document,
will ease any potential burden. See the Section-by-Section Analysis for
Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents not to be reported.''
    In addition, FRA revises the FRA Guide to clarify who can declare a
casualty as an attempted suicide or suicide. As discussed above, the
final rule revises the definition of ``Suicide data'' to mean ``data
regarding the death of an individual due to the individual's commission
of suicide as determined by a coroner, public police officer or other
public authority; or injury to an individual due to that individual's

attempted commission of suicide as determined by a public police
officer or public authority.'' The FRA Guide explains that a ``public
authority'' is a Federal, State or local government entity, such as a
public health department, that has the legal authority to declare a
fatality a suicide or an injury to a person an attempted suicide.
    Lastly, FRA revises Chapter 6 to instruct railroads that they must
complete the longitude and latitude fields in blocks 5s and 5t on the
Form FRA F 6180.55a for any reportable casualty to a trespasser. This
requirement may be satisfied by either using global positioning system
(GPS) equipment to determine the actual longitude and latitude, or by
using a free online technology to determine an estimated longitude and
latitude. See FRA Guide for additional information.

Chapter 7, Form FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident
Report.''

    FRA revises the instructions for the use of this form consistent
with the changes in this final rule. FRA also adds instructions to
Chapter 7 requiring that, if an accident is caused by a bond wire
attachment issue (see Appendix C ``Train Accident Cause Codes''),
information on the methods and locations of those attachments be
provided in the narrative block 52. See Section-by-Section Analysis for
Sec. Sec.  225.5, 225.15, 225.19 and Revisions to the FRA Guide,
Appendix H.
    FRA also revises Chapter 7 to instruct railroads that they must
complete the longitude and latitude in blocks 50 and 51. This
requirement may be satisfied by either using GPS equipment to determine
the actual longitude and latitude or by using a free online technology
to determine an estimated longitude and latitude. See FRA Guide for
additional information.
    The ICC's comments suggested adding additional fields on the Form
FRA F 6180.54. FRA did not adopt these recommendations at this time, as
the information is captured elsewhere or can be easily obtained at a
later time. ICC suggested a field requesting whether the train was
equipped with a digital or other recording device and whether the
information was retrieved. FRA believes that this field is unnecessary
as the train number provides sufficient information, and this
information can be obtained at a later time. In addition, ICC
recommended requesting whether the grade crossing had a recording
device and whether the information was retrieved. FRA believes that
sufficient information is already being captured on Forms FRA F 6180.54
and FRA F 6180.57, in addition to the U.S. DOT Grade Crossing
Inventory. ICC also suggested including a field asking whether the
train movement was recorded and whether that information was retrieved.
Again, this additional field is not necessary as PTC becomes mandatory.
In addition, ICC wanted a field asking whether the train movement was
recorded by GPS and was the information reported by a wireless device.
Again, FRA believes that this information can easily be obtained at a
later time and does not believe an additional field is necessary. In
addition, this change may be done at a later time.
    The final rule revises the requirements for the Primary Cause Code
with regard to cause code M505 and the railroads' responsibility to
update this code. The final rule eliminates the April 15 deadline as it
no longer serves a purpose with the updated technology and to be
consistent with the changes made in FRA Guide at Chapter 1. See FRA
Guide, Chapter 1. Consequently, the railroad will be required to submit
an amended report pursuant to Sec.  225.13 once it has closed its
investigation and determined the cause of the accident/incident. This
duty is consistent as the railroad's responsibility under the 2003 FRA
Guide, as railroads were previously required to submit an amended
report once it determined the cause of accident/incident.
    The final rule also adds clarifying instructions on Form FRA F
6180.54, which provide that fields requesting a U.S. DOT Grade Crossing
Identification Number are referring to the U.S. DOT Grade Crossing
Inventory Number.

Chapter 10--Form FRA F 6180.57--``Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/
Incident Report.''

    As an initial matter, the final rule revises the title of Chapter
10 to Forms FRA F 6180.57--Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/
Incident Report & FRA F 6180.150--Highway User Injury Inquiry Form.
This change was made in light of the newly created Form FRA F 6180.150
and the instructions which are contained in FRA Guide at Chapter 10.
    The final rule revises the instructions for the use of this form
consistent with the changes in this final rule. See Section-by-Section
Analysis for Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/Incident not to be reported''
and the FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for additional information.
    The final rule revises Chapter 10 to instruct railroads that they
shall presume that a highway user who is involved in a highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident and is transported from the scene of a
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident to a medical facility via
ambulance or other form of medical conveyance, did, more likely than
not, sustain an FRA reportable injury (i.e., an injury meeting the
general reporting criteria set forth at Sec.  225.19(d)(1) through
(d)(6)). Absent evidence to rebut this presumption, the railroad must
report the injury to FRA on Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and
Illness Summary (Continuation Sheet)'' and must include the casualty on
Form FRA F 6180.57. This presumption does relieve the railroad of its
responsibility to an inquiry into the nature and severity of the
highway user's injuries.
    In order to fulfill its responsibilities in determining the nature
and severity of a highway-rail grade crossing injury and to accurately
report such injury, a railroad must try to contact potentially injured
highway users involved in a highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident, or their representatives, in writing and, if unsuccessful,
obtain the needed information, by telephone. There is no requirement to
contact a representative of a highway user who has died as a result of
the accident. The written communication must include a Form FRA F
6180.150, cover letter and prepaid/preaddressed return envelope. Form
FRA F 6180.150 and the cover letter must be completed, drafted and sent
in compliance with the instructions contained in Sec.  225.21 and FRA
Guide at Chapter 10. A highway user is not required to respond to a
railroad's written or verbal requests for additional information with
regard to potential injuries. However, railroads are required to use
any response in complying with part 225's accident/incident reporting
and recording requirements. See FRA Guide, Chapter 6 of this Final Rule
for a complete discussion of the requirements and relevant comments.
    Form FRA F 6180.150 was submitted to OMB for approval with the
final rule and is still pending OMB approval; therefore, the railroads
cannot use the form until it has been approved. FRA expects that prior
to the delayed six-month effective date, the form will be approved.
Following approval, the final form will be available at http://
safetydata.fra.dot.gov/officeofsafety.
    The railroad must keep a record of its efforts to make such contact
including, but not limited to, retaining a copy of the dated Form FRA F
6180.150 that was sent to the highway user and the accompanying cover
letter, documenting the date, time and content of the follow-up call,
and retaining any response from the highway user. This record and
documentation of any information obtained must be available

for review and copying by an FRA representative under the same criteria
as set forth in Sec.  225.35(b). For additional information see
Section-by-Section Analysis for Sec.  225.15 and the FRA Guide,
Subsection F, Form FRA F 6180.55a.
    A comment to the NPRM suggested that block 41 on Form FRA F 6180.57
be expanded from ``Driver'' to ``Highway User.'' As discussed below,
the final rule does make this change. Another comment to the NPRM
suggests that block 44 on Form FRA F 6180.57 be changed from ``Driver''
to ``Highway User'' so as to include non-motorist accidents. The final
rule does not adopt this suggestion because this information is
captured in block 46. In addition, additional instruction is included
in the FRA Guide to clarify that block 44 only concerns motor vehicle
operators.
    The final rule adds instructions pertaining to the narrative
section on Form FRA F 6180.57 stating ``Do not record personal
identifiers, e.g., names, Social Security Numbers, payroll
identification.'' This change is consistent with the instructions for
Forms FRA F 6180.55a and FRA F 6180.54.
    The final rule also adds clarifying instructions on Form FRA F
6180.57 the field requesting an U.S. DOT Grade Crossing Identification
Number means and is referencing to the U.S. DOT Grade Crossing
Inventory Number.

Chapter 13, pertaining to Form FRA F 6180.107, ``Alternative Record for
Illness Claimed to be Work-Related.''

    FRA revised the instructions for the use of the form consistent
with the changes adopted in the final rule. See Section-by-Section
Analysis for Sec.  225.21, ``Forms,'' Sec.  225.25, ``Recordkeeping,''
Sec.  225.27, ``Record Retention,'' Sec.  225.33, ``Internal Control
Plan'' and the FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for additional
information.
    The final rule revises Q1 in the Question and Answer box as the
form no longer has a data element for an employee's social security
number. Rather, employee social security number has been replaced with
a field requesting the employee's identification number. This
clarifying amendment is meant to make the Q1 accurate and consistent
with the changes to the form.

Appendix A, ``Railroad Codes.''

    The FRA Guide updates the railroad codes. In addition, the final
rule adds a web address where there is an up-to-date list of railroad
codes.

Appendix B, ``State Codes.''

    The FRA Guide updates the State codes by adding the abbreviation
for Hawaii. This is a correction of an inadvertent admission and is
consistent with the change to Form FRA F 6180.56.

Appendix C, ``Train Accident Cause Codes.''

    The FRA Guide revises the following Train Accident Cause Codes:
     T224 ``Rail defect originating from bond wire
attachment.'' FRA added Train Accident Cause Code T224 in response to
the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) 2005 recommendation
that FRA provide a train accident cause code for derailments caused by
bond wire attachments. This recommendation arose from the NTSB's
investigation of the derailment of northbound National Railroad
Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) train No. 58 while operating on Canadian
National (CN) track near Flora, Mississippi, on April 6, 2004. The
derailment resulted in one fatality, 35 injuries (that were reportable
to FRA), and damage costs of approximately $7 million. The NTSB
recommended that FRA include in the FRA Guide a train accident cause
code for derailments caused by rail cracks originating from bond wire
attachments, and that information on the methods and locations of those
attachments be provided in the narrative section of the accident/
incident report (NTSB Recommendation Number RAR-05/02);
     S104 ``Radio controlled switch not locked effectively.''
FRA amends Train Accident Cause Code S104 by adding ``(equipment
failure)'' to the code's description. The description of Cause Code
S104 as amended reads, ``Radio controlled switch not locked effectively
(equipment failure).'' FRA incorporated this change in order to clarify
that S104 pertains to equipment failure, not human error.
     H707 ``Radio controlled switch not locked effectively.''
FRA amends Train Accident Cause Code H707 by adding ``(human error)''
to the code's description. The description for Cause Code H707 denotes
``Radio controlled switch not locked effectively (human error).'' FRA
incorporated this change in order to clarify that H707 pertains to
human error, not equipment failure.
     M 309 ``Grade Crossing Suicide''; M310 ``Grade Crossing
Attempted Suicide''; M509 ``Suicide Resulting in Train Accident''; and
M510 ``Attempted Suicide Resulting in Train Accident'' for use in block
38 of Form FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report.''
See Section-by-Section Analysis for Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents
not to be reported'' and the FRA Guide, Appendix H, ``Forms'' for
additional information.

Appendix F, ``Circumstance Codes.''

    FRA adds the following ``Probable Reason for Injury/Illness
Circumstance Codes,'' (Probable Reason Circumstance Code) under the
subtitle ``Remotely controlled locomotive(s) environment'' to the
Remote Control Locomotive Switching Operations Fatality Analysis Codes
(RCL SOFA Codes) to the May 1, 2003, guide as amended:
     R1 Object fouling track, related to using RCL
     R2 Outside caused (e.g., assaulted/attacked), related to
using RCL
     R3 Lack of communication, related to using RCL
     R4 Slack adjustment during switching operation, related to
using RCL
     R5 Insufficient training, related to using RCL
     R6 Failure to provide adequate space between equipment
during switching operation, related to using RCL
     R7 Close or no clearance, related to using RCL
     R8 Act of God, related to using RCL
     U1 Object fouling track, unrelated to using RCL
     U2 Outside caused (e.g., assaulted/attacked), unrelated to
using RCL
     U3 Lack of communication, unrelated to using RCL
     U4 Slack adjustment during switching operation, unrelated
to using RCL
     U5 Insufficient training, unrelated to using RCL
     U6 Failure to provide adequate space between equipment
during switching operations unrelated to using RCL
     U7 Close or no clearance, unrelated to using RCL
     U8 Act of God, unrelated to using RCL
    In the final regulation to 49 CFR part 225, 68 FR 10107, March 3,
2003, new codes and form changes were made to accommodate the recording
events when remote control locomotive operations (RCL) were involved.
    A special task group of railroad safety officers representing labor
and industry and FRA members was created in the RSAC Accident/Incident
Working Group to discuss the coding of RCL. The results of the special
task group would be presented to the entire working group for approval.
The concern of the reporting officers was to prevent any major changes
to the then current forms or databases. In part, this rested on their

information technology offices' internal charges for making major
programming changes. The FRA team was tasked with finding a way to
include RCL involved accidents and incidents on the following three
forms: Form FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report'';
Form FRA F 6180.57, ``Highway-Rail Crossing Accident/Incident Report'';
and Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury/Illness Summary
(Continuation Sheet),'' without changing the database structures.
    FRA found a way to capture RCL-related incidents on both the Form
FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report,'' and Form
FRA F 6180.57, ``Highway-Rail Crossing Accident/Incident Report''
without expanding the database or making a major change on the form or
the respective database. Capturing this information on Form FRA F
6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness (Continuation Sheet),''
remained problematic due to the small number of data fields and limited
amount of data collected for each reportable event. FRA developed a
solution by expanding the number of Probable Causes in the Circumstance
Codes. The method chosen by FRA, and accepted by the RSAC Working
Group, was to take each code for Probable Reason Circumstance Codes and
create two additional codes, one for RCL-related to the event and
another for RCL involved but unrelated to the event. Therefore, the
probable reason of ``Equipment,'' code 04 had two additional codes:
``Equipment, related to using RCL,'' code 24, and ``Equipment,
unrelated to using RCL,'' code 44. This technique, although clumsy,
satisfied railroad safety reporting officers, rail labor officials, and
FRA.
    Codes 21 through 59 in Probable Reason for the ``Remotely
Controlled Locomotive(s) Environment'' was approved by the full RSAC
Working Group for Accident/Incident Reporting. At a later RSAC Working
Group Meeting in New Orleans, LA, a new discussion started about the
Probable Reason Circumstance Codes. This discussion centered on
Switching Operations Fatality Analysis (SOFA). SOFA events were
claiming 40 to 50 percent of all fatalities of railroad workers. The
Working Group decided to include new codes to insure that fatal and
non-fatal SOFA events were culled from other injuries. A small task
group was formed, and worked one evening to develop the eight new
codes. The full Working Group approved these SOFA codes the next day.
However, there was an oversight by the Working Group in the process.
There should have been two additional sets of codes for SOFA RCL events
(related to RCL and unrelated to RCL). This oversight was not
discovered until October 2003, well after the publication and effective
date of the revised regulation.
    All of the parties to the Full Working Group agreed that any
omission in capturing SOFA related injuries was a serious problem. FRA
developed 16 additional codes to correspond to the previous eight
codes. The new codes R1 through R8 and U1 through U8 were promulgated
in December 2003, and were subsequently added to the FRA Guide to
remedy the immediate concern. While the initial publication of these
SOFA codes was not subject to a notice and comment period, FRA invited
comments on the addition of these SOFA codes but did not receive any
comments on this change.
    FRA is also adding new Circumstance Codes to Appendix F of the FRA
Guide for use on Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness
Summary (Continuation Sheet),'' to better identify injuries that occur
in or due to passenger station platform gap. FRA believes that the
collection of this information will allow the agency to assess the
magnitude of these types of injuries, identify locations where
passenger station platform gap related injuries frequently occur, and
ultimately aid FRA in efforts to reduce such injuries.
    The RSAC General Passenger Safety Task Force reported to the full
RSAC on October 25, 2007, its Cause Code Recommendations for passenger
station platform gap related injuries as follows:
    (1) To the ``Physical Act Circumstance Codes'' add codes for:
     Passenger Train-Boarding; and
     Passenger Train-Alighting.

Also revise the ``Physical Act Circumstance Codes'' to clarify that
codes 63 (stepping up) and 64 (stepping over) are to be used for
boarding/alighting at high level platforms.
    (2) To Part III of the ``Location Circumstance Codes'' add codes
for:
     Rail Car Door Threshold Plate to Edge of Passenger Station
Platform Gap;
     Area Between Coupled Cars and Platform;
     Area Along Car body, other than Threshold Plate and
Platform Edge;
     Car in Vestibule; and
     On Platform--Other.

Also change Location Circumstance Code C2--``On Platform'' to ``On
Platform Station.''
    (3) To the ``Event Circumstance Codes'' add a code for:
     Slipped, fell, stumbled due to Passenger Station Platform
Gap.
    (4) To Part I of the ``Location Circumstance Codes'' add a code
for:
     Other than Platform.

Also change the Location Circumstance Code ``P--Passenger Terminal'' to
``P--Passenger Station on Platform''.
    (5) To the ``Tools, Machinery, Appliances, Structures, Surfaces,
(etc.) Circumstance Codes'' add codes for:
     Door, End or Side--Passenger Train; and
     Door, Trap.

The full RSAC agreed to these recommendations on October 25, 2007.
    Subsequently, FRA's Safety Knowledge Management Division's database
experts reviewed the RSAC approved coding scheme in an effort to
prevent redundant codes, develop ease in coding for reporting officers
and clerks not familiar with all the nuances in gap incidents, and to
develop a system to easily cull passenger station platform gap
incidents from the casualty database. Based on this review, FRA is
adding the following new codes to Appendix F--Circumstance Codes as
follows:
    (1) To the ``Physical Act Circumstance Codes'' FRA proposes to add
code:
     80--Stepping across (passenger cars).
    (2) To Part III of the ``Location Circumstance Codes'' FRA proposes
to add codes:
     G1--Rail Car Door Threshold Plate to Edge of Platform--
Gap;
     G2--Area Between Coupled Cars and Platform;
     G3--Area Along Car body, other than Threshold Plate and
Platform Edge; and
     G4--Car in Vestibule.
    (3) To the ``Probable Reason for Injury/Illness Circumstance
Codes'' FRA proposes to add code:
     18--Slipped, fell, stumbled due to Passenger Station
Platform Gap.
    (4) To the ``Tools, Machinery, Appliances, Structures, Surfaces,
(etc.) Circumstance Codes'' FRA proposes to add codes:
     1G--Door, End or Side--Passenger Train; and
     2G--Door, Trap--Passenger Train.

The instructions for coding passenger station platform gap incidents
are included in the FRA Guide.

Appendix G, ``FRA Regional Offices and Headquarters.''

    The FRA Guide updates these entries and includes the web address
where the most current contact information can be obtained.

Appendix H, ``Forms.''

    FRA is revising its forms, as follows:

    (1) Form FRA F 6180.97 and Form FRA F 6180.98. FRA is revising
block 36 on Form FRA F 6180.97 ``Date'' to state ``Date Initially
Signed/Completed''; and block 44 on Form FRA F 6180.98 ``Date'' to
state ``Date Initially Signed/Completed'' to clarify that the block
must contain the initial date the form was completed. FRA finds it
necessary to make such change because certain railroads do not retain
the initial date a record was completed, but only the date of the most
recent update to the record. Consequently, FRA is unable to discern if
the railroad entered each reportable and accountable injury and illness
and each reportable and accountable rail equipment accident/incident on
the appropriate record, as required by Sec.  225.25 (a)-(e), no later
than seven working days after receiving information or acquiring
knowledge that an injury or illness or rail equipment accident/incident
has occurred, as required by Sec.  225.25(f). FRA believes that
specifying the date which is required to be maintained on the record
will resolve any confusion regarding the requirement.
    (2) Form FRA F 6180.97. FRA is renaming block 12, ``Division'' to
``Subdivision'' and requiring railroads to provide train accident
location by providing subdivision data in this block as a means of
improving railroad safety in the area of train accidents. If the
railroad is not so divided, enter the word ``system.'' If subdivision
data is not applicable, the railroad must enter terminal/yard name.
This change also applies to alternative railroad-designed Form FRA
6180.97. This change is consistent with the ``Division'' to
``Subdivision'' change on Form FRA F 6180.54. See paragraph N(6) of
this appendix, ``Form FRA F 6180.54'' for additional information.
    FRA is also clarifying that, in situations of joint operations,
block 26, ``Equipment Damage (in dollars)'', refers to the aggregate
amount of equipment damage incurred for all railroads involved, and
that Block 27, ``Track, Signal, Way & Structure Damage (in dollars)''
refers to the aggregate amount of track, signal, way and structure
damage incurred for all track owners. This revision does not change
existing reporting requirements, and does not represent an additional
reporting burden, because both railroads should already be exchanging
relevant cost data to determine if the accident was FRA reportable.
    (3) Form FRA F 6180.98. FRA is replacing the ``Social Security
Number'' requirement in block 6 with a requirement for ``Employee
Identification Number.'' FRA is making this change in response to
privacy concerns. This chapter will include instructions addressing
FRA's requirement that (by amending the definition for ``Accountable
Injury or Illness'') railroads complete a Form FRA F 6180.98,
``Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record'' for any abnormal
condition or disorder of a railroad employee that causes or requires
the railroad employee to be examined or treated by a qualified health
care professional regardless of whether or not it meets the general
reporting criteria listed in Sec.  225.19(d)(1) through (6), and that
the railroad employee claims that, or the railroad otherwise has
knowledge that, an event or exposure arising from the operation of the
railroad is a discernable cause of the abnormal condition or disorder.
    (4) Form FRA F 6180.55. FRA has eliminated the notary requirement
on Form FRA F 6180.55 block 10, and replaced it with a requirement that
the report be signed under penalty of perjury. The NPRM proposed that
the signature read, as follows:
    (1) If executed within the United States, its territories,
possessions, or commonwealths: ``I declare (or certify, verify, or
state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on (date).
    (Signature).''
    (2) If executed without (i.e., outside of) the United States: ``I
declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under
the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and
correct. Executed on (date).
    (Signature).''

To make clear the signee is attesting to the accuracy of all of the
information on the form, the final rule revised the language, as
follows:
    (1) If executed within the United States, its territories,
possessions, or commonwealths: ``I declare (or certify, verify, or
state) under penalty of perjury that the information on this form is
true and correct. Executed on (date).
    (Signature).''
    (2) If executed without (i.e., outside of) the United States: ``I
declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under
the laws of the United States of America that the information on this
form is true and correct. Executed on (date).
    (Signature).''

FRA is able to replace the oath requirement, mandated by 49 U.S.C.
20901, with a signature under penalty of perjury under 28 U.S.C. 1746.
See Section-by-Section Analysis for Sec.  225.37, ``Magnetic media
transfer and electronic submission,'' for additional information.
    (5) Form FRA F 6180.55a. FRA requires railroads to place an ``X''
representative of ``suicide'' or ``attempted suicide'' in block 5r when
reporting a suicide or attempted suicide. FRA also adds instructions
that, if an injury is due to a passenger station platform gap incident,
the railroad must use in block 5n (``Cause''), ``Probable Reason for
Injury/Illness Circumstance Codes'' code number 18--Slipped, fell,
stumbled due to Passenger Station Platform Gap, regardless of whether
other codes may also be applicable. See Section-by-Section analysis for
Sec.  225.15, ``Accidents/incidents not to be reported,'' for
additional information. FRA also changes the title of block 5m from
``Result'' to ``Tools'' to remain consistent with the wording in
Appendix F.
    In addition, in the NPRM, FRA requested comments and suggestions on
whether FRA should require railroads to complete the longitude and
latitude blocks on Form FRA F 6180.55a, ``Railroad Injury and Illness
Summary (Continuation Sheet)'' (blocks 5s and 5t) for reportable
trespasser casualties, and on Form FRA F 6180.54, ``Rail Equipment
Accident/Incident Report'' (blocks 50 and 51). Currently, completion of
longitude and latitude data on both of these forms is optional.
    Because railroads do not report longitude and latitude to FRA, FRA
cannot currently geo-locate reportable trespasser casualties. In
addition, although FRA can geo-locate reportable accidents/incidents
based on the information available in the Form FRA F 6180.54, it is
time consuming. The final rule provides FRA with the ability to
determine the precise location of accidents and trespasser injuries.
For example, FRA will be able to determine the exact location of
releases of hazardous materials or leakages of diesel fuel. Having the
location information for all train accidents will allow FRA to develop
better inspection planning, identify locations of hazardous materials
contamination affecting the health and/or environment, and provide to
the Transportation Security Administration another tool for security
planning. Traditionally, FRA and the railroad industry have relied on
the railroad milepost system to reference location, and, in many cases,
such location data is accurate for short-term issues. However, the
railroad milepost system is not reliable. Over the long-term, railroads
change mileposts during mergers and reorganizations. Also, mileposts
can be inaccurate when a railroad is able to build a shorter link, or
when a railroad does not remove old mileposts when replacement
mileposts,

which have a different starting location, are installed.
    Several commenters generally supported the collection of this type
of information. One commenter, while not opposed to the collection of
such data, was concerned about the resulting costs and indicated that
the requirement should be phased-in so railroads had time to acquire
the technology to comply with the regulation. This commenter also
indicated that FRA should consider providing funding for GPS equipment,
and that longitude and latitude should only be required for certain
types of incidents. Commenters who were opposed to the mandatory
inclusion of longitude and latitude generally argued that the cost to
obtain GPS technology was too costly, that the technology was
unreliable, that the industry was not ready for such a change, and that
the regulation would not improve data collection or railroad safety.
    After considering the comments received, this final rule requires
the mandatory completion of the longitude and latitude blocks on Form
FRA F 6180.55a (blocks 5s and 5t) for any reportable casualty to a
trespasser, and on Form FRA F 6180.54 (blocks 50 and 51). In order to
defray potential costs, the longitude and latitude coordinates may be
either actual or estimated. Obtaining actual coordinates requires GPS
technology in the field, but obtaining estimated coordinates only
requires internet access. For example, this requirement may be
satisfied by providing either: The actual longitude and latitude, as
determined at the time of the accident/incident, or injury using GPS
technology; or an estimated longitude and latitude, as determined by
using a Web site, such as Google maps or the FRA's free Web site
(http://fragis.frasafety.net/GISFRASafety/default.aspx). Moreover, as
discussed previously, the final rule is effective Wednesday, June 1,
2011. As such, railroads do have a significant period of time to come
into compliance. Regardless, the latitude/longitude requirement has
been an optional field on both forms, and while it will be mandatory on
the Form FRA F 6180.54 for all reportable rail equipment accidents/
incidents, with respect to the FRA Form F 6180.55a, it will only be a
requirement for reportable casualties to trespassers.
    FRA believes that the majority of railroads already have the
capability to determine actual longitude and latitude for such events
on-site. Moreover, within the next six years, about one half of the
general rail system will be equipped with Positive Train Control
(``PTC'').\7\ While such PTC systems will vary widely in complexity and
sophistication, such systems will provide railroads with longitude and
latitude coordinates for specific track locations. For those railroads
that do not currently have the equipment necessary to obtain longitude
and latitude coordinates, the final rule permits the use of estimated
coordinates which can be freely obtained on the internet. For example,
railroads may estimate longitude and latitude via publicly accessible
Web sites at no charge (e.g., http://www.gorissen.info/Pierre/maps/
googleMapLocation.php or http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ PTC refers to technology that is capable of preventing
certain train collisions, derailments, and unauthorized train
movements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A comment to the NPRM stated that this revision may create a duty
for railroads towards trespassers that somehow impacts States' rights.
This revision does not create any such duty, and railroads are already
required to collect information on trespassers--this revision simply
adds a level of detail to increase the value of the information. See
Section-by-Section Analysis Sec.  225.41, ``Suicide data,'' for
additional information. A comment suggested that longitude/latitude
should be collected and stored in decimal degrees. The final rule does
not adopt this suggestion because the FRA Guide provides recording
instructions that are sufficient for FRA's needs. A comment suggested
that additional fields be added for the city name, station name,
railroad division, and milepost to help determine where the incident
occurred. The final rule does not adopt this suggestion because such
information is not necessary as the longitude/latitude will be
captured. A comment suggested that additional fields be added for
weather, visibility, gender, and railroad yard name. The final rule
does not adopt these suggestions because they are outside of the scope
of this rulemaking, and weather and visibility information are
currently captured by the Form FRA F 6180.54. Comments stated that some
GPS equipment would not get reception in all areas, and that GPS is
unreliable because satellite networks can fail. However, FRA believes
that, in general, GPS does get reception in most areas and that
satellites generally do not have failures. Regardless, railroads may
use free online technology to provide estimated longitude/latitude in
the event that there is no GPS reception. A comment stated that GPS
will not provide any additional information that is not otherwise
available, and thus would not improve safety. As stated, FRA does not
currently obtain sufficient information to geo-locate trespassers. In
addition, although FRA can geo-locate reportable accidents/incidents
based on information available in the Form FRA F 6180.54, it is time
consuming, and thus the requirement of longitude/latitude on that form
streamlines the data collection process. Furthermore, longitude/
latitude information enables FRA to obtain specific location
information in order to pinpoint areas of concern.
    (6) Form FRA F 6180.54. FRA is revising block 30 by changing the
name of the block from ``Methods of Operation'' to ``Type of
Territory.'' The block will have five coding blocks. Each of the five
coding blocks printed in block 30 will be labeled for exclusive use in
accordance with codes listed in Appendix J. The coding blocks are
representative of the following information: The first block
(mandatory) will indicate the type of territory (signaled or non-
signaled); the second block (mandatory) will indicate the authority for
movement; and the third, fourth, and fifth blocks (optional) will
indicate additional information through the use of supplemental codes.
    FRA is making this change because in the past few years, with the
advancement of PTC, there has been a growing requirement for FRA to
definitively identify signalized versus ``dark'' territory.
    The revisions should make completing the block less burdensome and
allow for the identification of territory in a manner compatible with
the railroads' internal railroad coding system. These changes are
consistent with suggestions by railroads and the AAR that such coding
be made easier and that the FRA Guide provide clearer instruction. They
also take into consideration railroad concerns about expense associated
with having to revise the form and expressed the desire for FRA to
retain the current form and redesign the coding system but not change
the database structure or the record size. See FRA Guide, Appendix J,
``Type of Territory Codes'' for additional information.
    FRA is renaming block 12, ``Division'' to ``Subdivision'' and
requiring railroads to provide train accident location by subdivision
data (block 12) on Form FRA F 6180.54 as a means of improving railroad
safety in the area of train accidents. If the railroad is not so
divided, enter the word ``system.'' If subdivision data is not
applicable, the railroad must enter terminal/yard name.
    FRA also revises this form to require latitude and longitude. This
revision is

discussed in detail in FRA Guide, Chapter 6, Form FRA F 6180.55a.
    FRA is adding to block 49, ``Special Study Block'' descriptive
references ``a.'' to line one and ``b.'' to line two for ease of
reference. FRA requires railroads to indicate in block ``Special Study
Block'' 49a the type of track an accident/incident occurred on, by
using the codes ``CWR'' for continuous welded rail or ``OTH'' for
other. FRA notes that the special study block was created to allow for
the collection of specific accident information as the need arises. See
61 FR 30940, June 18, 1996. The primary purpose of these revisions to
the rule is to increase the accuracy, completeness, and utility of
FRA's accident database and the clarity of the definitions and
requirements. In light of recent track-related accidents/incidents, FRA