Rule2026-08254
Repealing Certain Bridge Load Capacity Evaluation Requirements
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 28, 2026
Effective
May 28, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentFederal Railroad Administration
Abstract
This rule eliminates the Federal requirement that defines the process a track owner must follow when scheduling the evaluation of bridges with no load capacity determination. The requirement was intended as a transitional measure to phase in compliance after the bridge safety regulations became effective and is no longer necessary because the regulations have been in effect for almost 15 years and the transitional period for compliance has ended.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 81 (Tuesday, April 28, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 81 (Tuesday, April 28, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22745-22747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08254]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 237
[Docket No. FRA-2025-0129; Notice No. 2]
RIN 2130-AD28
Repealing Certain Bridge Load Capacity Evaluation Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule eliminates the Federal requirement that defines the
process a track owner must follow when scheduling the evaluation of
bridges with no load capacity determination. The requirement was
intended as a transitional measure to phase in compliance after the
bridge safety regulations became effective and is no longer necessary
because the regulations have been in effect for almost 15 years and the
transitional period for compliance has ended.
DATES: This rule is effective May 28, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yu-Jiang Zhang, Staff Director, FRA
Track & Structures Division, FRA, telephone: (202) 570-1508, email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#99c0ecf3f0f8f7feb7c3f1f8f7fed9fdf6edb7fef6ef"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1049657a79717e773e4a78717e7750747f643e777f66">[email protected]</span></a>; or Aaron Moore, Senior Attorney, FRA, telephone:
(202) 853-4784, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#acedcddec3c282e1c3c3dec9ecc8c3d882cbc3da"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="450424372a2b6b082a2a372005212a316b222a33">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Consistent with Executive Order (E.O.) 14192, Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation (90 FR 9065, Feb. 6, 2025), and E.O. 14219,
Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's
``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative (90 FR
10583, Feb. 25, 2025), FRA is reviewing its regulatory requirements in
parts 200 through 299 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
and repealing requirements that are outdated and redundant.
On July 1, 2025, FRA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that proposed the elimination of the Federal requirement in 49
CFR part 237, Bridge Safety Standards, that defines the process a track
owner must follow when scheduling the evaluation of bridges with no
load capacity determination.\1\ This requirement was intended as a
transitional measure to phase in compliance after the bridge safety
regulations became effective. The restrictions on the track owner's
discretion to determine the process for evaluation of bridge load
capacity are no longer necessary because the regulations have been in
effect for almost 15 years and the transitional period for compliance
has ended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 90 FR 28669 (July 1, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA received three comments in response to the NPRM. A private
citizen expressed concern about the degradation of American
infrastructure, including failing bridges, and opposes this rule
because the citizen asserted it may lead to bridge failure. The
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division of the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters (BMWED) and Transportation
Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) both submitted comments in support of
this proposal. Though they recognized differences in operational and
structural characteristics of railroad bridges and public highway
bridges, BMWED and TTD encouraged the increased alignment of part 237
with bridge inspection and evaluation practices employed by the Federal
Highway Administration, citing the incorporation of standardized
inspection intervals, load rating protocols, and common protocols as
potential areas for alignment. In addition, BMWED and TTD recommended a
structured review of part 237 involving industry, labor, and government
representatives through the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC).
The commenters and FRA have the same goal, which is to support rail
bridge infrastructure and to make sure that it can safely handle the
weight of trains operating over bridges. This rule does not impact
FRA's regulatory oversight over bridge load capacity requirements, but
rather it removes an obsolete provision from the CFR. Specifically, the
requirement to be repealed in 49 CFR 237.71 requires an initial
determination of load capacity that must be completed within five years
of the required date for adoption of the track owner's bridge
management program (BMP). See section 237.71(e).
In this final rule, FRA is revising section 237.71 as proposed. As
acknowledged by BMWED and TTD, this requirement was intended as a
transitional measure to phase in compliance after the bridge safety
regulations became effective and more than five years had elapsed from
the required BMP adoption dates in section 237.31. All other bridge
load capacity requirements in this section remain unchanged, including
the requirement that each track owner must determine the load capacity
of each of its railroad bridges as documented in the track owner's BMP
using appropriate engineering methods and standards. In addition, FRA
welcomes BMWED's and TTD's ideas about bridge load capacity regulation
for other transportation modes and also agrees that RSAC may be the
appropriate forum for the agency's various stakeholders to exchange
information relating to the safety of rail operations.
II. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 237.71 Determination of Bridge Load Capacities
This final rule removes the requirement in paragraph (e) that
defines the process a track owner must follow when scheduling the
evaluation of bridges with no load capacity determination. The existing
requirement imposes a restriction on a track owner's ability to
establish a BMP and evaluate bridge load capacity as the track owner
sees fit. The existing regulation requires an initial determination of
load capacity to be completed within five years of the required date
for adoption of a BMP under section 237.31. Under the existing
regulation, a period of more than five years has elapsed from the
required adoption dates in section 237.31. This requirement was
intended as a transitional measure to phase in compliance after the
bridge safety regulations became effective. Removing this regulatory
text removes an obsolete provision from the CFR, improving readability
of this CFR part.
III. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
FRA has considered the impact of this final rule under E.O. 12866
(58 FR
[[Page 22746]]
51735, Oct. 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and Review, and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
determined that this final rule is not a significant regulatory action
under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
FRA analyzed the potential costs and benefits of this final rule.
This final rule removes obsolete requirements, and therefore it imposes
no additional burdens on regulated entities. Moreover, implementing
this rule will provide benefits, improving readability of this CFR
part.
B. Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, requires
that for ``each new [E.O. 14192 regulatory action] issued, at least ten
prior regulations be identified for elimination.'' \2\ Implementation
guidance for E.O. 14192 issued by OMB (Memorandum M-25-20, Mar. 26,
2025) defines two different types of E.O. 14192 actions: an E.O. 14192
deregulatory action, and an E.O. 14192 regulatory action.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Executive Office of the President, Executive Order 14192 of
January 31, 2025, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, 90 FR
9065-9067 (Feb. 6, 2025).
\3\ Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget, Guidance Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192,
Titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' Memorandum M-
25-20 (Mar. 26, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An E.O. 14192 deregulatory action is defined as ``an action that
has been finalized and has total costs less than zero.'' FRA determined
that issuing this final rule is expected to have total costs less than
zero, and therefore this final rule is considered an E.O. 14192
deregulatory action.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,\4\
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory
action on small entities and to minimize any significant economic
impact. Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the impact of
all regulations on small entities and mandates that agencies strive to
lessen any adverse effects on these businesses. The term small entities
encompasses small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000 (5
U.S.C. 601(6)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, however, if the
head of an Agency or an appropriate designee certifies that the rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This final rule would not preclude small entities from
continuing practices that comply with part 237 as amended; it merely
removes obsolete provisions from the CFR and improves readability.
Consequently, FRA certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule offers regulatory flexibilities, and it contains no
new information collection requirements, in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and therefore,
an information collection submission to OMB is not required. OMB
approved the existing recordkeeping and reporting requirements
contained in part 237 on April 1, 2026. The OMB control number is 2130-
0586, and OMB approval expires on April 30, 2029.
E. Environmental Assessment
FRA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 42 U.S.C.
4336 and DOT NEPA Order 5610.1D, FRA has determined that this rule is
categorically excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15). This
rulemaking is not anticipated to result in any environmental impacts,
and there are no unusual or extraordinary circumstances present in
connection with this rulemaking.
F. Federalism Implications
This final rule will not have a substantial effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Thus, in accordance with E.O. 13132, Federalism
(64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), preparation of a Federalism Assessment is
not warranted.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This final rule will not result in the expenditure, in the
aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more, adjusted for inflation, in any one
year by State, local, or Indian Tribal governments, or the private
sector. Thus, consistent with section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1532), FRA is not required
to prepare a written statement detailing the effect of such an
expenditure.
H. Energy Impact
E.O. 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of
Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' \5\ FRA has
evaluated this final rule in accordance with E.O. 13211 and determined
that this final rule is not a ``significant energy action'' within the
meaning of E.O. 13211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
FRA has evaluated this final rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, Nov. 6, 2000). The final
rule will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian
tribal governments, and will not preempt tribal laws. Therefore, the
funding and consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 do not apply, and a
tribal summary impact statement is not required.
J. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary
obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S.
standards. This final rule is purely domestic in nature and is not
expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business
overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 237
Bridges, Penalties, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Final Rule
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends part 237 of
chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
[[Page 22747]]
PART 237--BRIDGE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for part 237 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102-20114; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; and 49
CFR 1.89.
0
2. Amend Sec. 237.71 by removing paragraph (e) and redesignating
paragraphs (f) through (h) as paragraphs (e) through (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 237.71 Determination of bridge load capacities.
* * * * *
(e) Where a bridge inspection reveals that, in the determination of
the railroad bridge engineer, the condition of a bridge or a bridge
component might adversely affect the ability of the bridge to carry the
traffic being operated, a new capacity shall be determined.
(f) Bridge load capacity may be expressed in terms of numerical
values related to a standard system of bridge loads, but shall in any
case be stated in terms of weight and length of individual or combined
cars and locomotives, for the use of transportation personnel.
(g) Bridge load capacity may be expressed in terms of both normal
and maximum load conditions. Operation of equipment that produces
forces greater than the normal capacity shall be subject to any
restrictions or conditions that may be prescribed by a railroad bridge
engineer.
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.89.
David A. Fink,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-08254 Filed 4-27-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 28, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.