Rule2026-08255
Allowing for the Electronic Posting of Reportable Injuries and Occupational Illnesses
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 allows railroads to satisfy the requirement to post a listing of all injuries and occupational illnesses at an establishment electronically. This rule also removes the requirement that these postings be signed by the preparer of the listing.
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 22740-22745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08255]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 225
[Docket No. FRA-2025-0122; Notice No. 2]
RIN 2130-AD57
Allowing for the Electronic Posting of Reportable Injuries and
Occupational Illnesses
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule allows railroads to satisfy the requirement to post
a listing of all injuries and occupational illnesses at an
establishment electronically. This rule also removes the requirement
that these postings be signed by the preparer of the listing.
DATES: This rule is effective May 28, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Wissman, Railroad Safety
Specialist, Part 225, FRA, telephone: 610-314-5729, email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#acc1c5cfc4cdc9c082dbc5dfdfc1cdc2ecc8c3d882cbc3da"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e38e8a808b82868fcd948a90908e828da3878c97cd848c95">[email protected]</span></a>; or Michael C. Spinnicchia, Attorney Adviser,
FRA, telephone: 202-713-7671, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6cbcfc5cec7c3ca88d5d6cfc8c8cfc5c5cecfc7e6c2c9d288c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d4b9bdb7bcb5b1b8faa7a4bdbababdb7b7bcbdb594b0bba0fab3bba2">[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
49 CFR parts 200 through 299 and updating requirements that are
outdated.
On July 1, 2025, FRA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that proposed allowing railroads to satisfy the requirement to
post a listing of all injuries and occupational illnesses at an
establishment through electronic means. The NPRM also proposed removing
some requirements of what must be included in these listings.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 90 FR 28648 (July 1, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA received four comments. The Association of American Railroads
(AAR) and the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association
(ASLRRA) (collectively, ``the associations'') submitted a joint comment
in support of the NPRM. AAR and ASLRRA contended that allowing
railroads to post their injuries and occupational illnesses
electronically uses technological innovation to advance safety and
efficiency while reducing costs for railroads. The Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), the International Association
of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers--Transportation
Division (SMART-TD), and the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
(TTD) (collectively, ``the labor organizations'') each submitted a
comment opposing the NPRM. The labor organizations asserted that
allowing electronic posting in lieu of paper posting will have an
adverse safety impact as it will reduce the number of important
conversations that occur due to the physical posting of workplace
injuries and illnesses. The labor organizations also questioned whether
it is a burden for railroads to post this information physically.
After considering comments, FRA is proceeding to revise part 225 to
allow railroads to post the information required under 49 CFR 225.25(h)
electronically in lieu of paper posting and to remove the requirement
that these postings be signed by the preparer. However, in
consideration of BLET's comment, explained in more detail below, FRA
has decided to retain the requirement that these postings include the
annual average number of railroad employees reporting to an
establishment.
For more information, please review the Discussion of Comments and
FRA's Responses and the Section-by-Section Analysis, below.
II. Discussion of Comments and FRA's Responses
A. Comment Supporting the NPRM
In their joint comment, AAR and ASLRRA stated that allowing the
electronic posting of injuries and
[[Page 22741]]
occupational illnesses is preferable for various reasons.\2\ First,
electronic posting allows railroads to provide the same information
that is currently provided through paper posting except in a portable
format that is searchable and can be accessed at any time by employees.
This use of technology gives railroads greater flexibility while also
promoting safety and efficiency through technology, as some railroads
have developed a single portal that employees can use to access injury
and occupational illness data, along with other types of safety-related
information, such as rule books, manuals, and guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FRA-2025-0122-0005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The associations also support the reduction of costs that would
result from electronic posting. Specifically, the associations noted
that the rule would lower costs associated with purchasing and
maintaining printers and supplying the printers with paper and ink. In
addition, the associations mentioned that several railroads have
submitted waivers requesting permission to use electronic posting in
lieu of paper posting. This amendment to part 225 would eliminate the
need for railroads to submit such waiver petitions approximately every
five years, which would eliminate costs for both the railroads and for
FRA in processing waiver petitions.
Lastly, the associations pointed to the success of the current
waivers that have been in place for several years. For example, BNSF
Railway Company noted its employees ran at least 655 reports in 2024,
and the railroad has not received any negative feedback or complaints
about its paperless injury log process. This suggests that employees
are actively engaged in accessing this information electronically.
FRA's Response
The joint comment from the associations largely corroborates FRA's
rationale for proposing this change. By allowing railroads to post
injury and illness data electronically, FRA is permitting technological
advances that allow railroads to operate more efficiently without
having an adverse impact on safety. As the associations noted,
electronic posting of injury and illness data is beneficial to railroad
safety as it provides railroad employees with greater access to this
data. This rule also eliminates the unnecessary costs associated with
the antiquated requirement that this data be physically posted at work
establishments.
B. Comments Opposing the NPRM
BLET, SMART-TD, and TTD all submitted comments opposing this NPRM.
TTD also endorsed the comments submitted by BLET and SMART-TD. These
comments contained various arguments in opposition to the NPRM.
1. Employee Access to Injury and Illness Data
One of the labor organizations' primary concerns is that allowing
railroads to post injury and illness data electronically may make this
information less accessible to railroad employees. BLET stated it can
be time-consuming for employees to navigate railroads' complex computer
systems.\3\ Further, BLET asserted that this problem is exacerbated by
Precision Scheduled Railroading, as employees are often under pressure
from their managers to start their assigned duties immediately, and
thus, they may not have time to view this information electronically.
BLET also suggested that this proposed change would not improve safety
and could lead to railroads concealing important information from their
employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ FRA-2025-0122-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMART-TD's comment similarly asserted that the proposed rule would
have a negative safety impact that degraded safety culture because it
could lead to railroad employees not having reliable access to
information about the hazards where they work.\4\ This may inhibit the
ability of employees to learn from past accidents and prevent future
accidents. SMART-TD also alleged that supervisors and employees have
unequal access to the data, contending that supervisors have higher
system access and greater familiarity with company technology than
employees. SMART-TD encouraged FRA to consult with employee
representatives on ways to make this safety information more readily
available and to ensure it is being discussed in job briefings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ FRA-2025-0122-0004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TTD argued that requiring physical posting of injury and illness
data provides necessary transparency to workers of their railroad's
safety culture.\5\ Because employees may work in different places
within a yard or facility, the physical posting allows them to be
informed of safety issues affecting various crafts, locations, or
shifts. TTD also noted that employees may work multiple shifts without
having the time or ability to access this injury data electronically,
which means they could be unaware of existing safety concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FRA-2025-0122-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA's Response
Though FRA agrees that employee access to injury and illness data
is important to railroad safety, FRA disagrees with the contention that
allowing electronic posting to fulfill the requirement in 49 CFR
225.25(h) would limit employees' access to this information. TTD noted
that railroad employees may work in different places within a yard or
facility that inhibit their ability to view the posting electronically
for multiple shifts. However, employees could also work multiple shifts
without passing the physical posting. Thus, FRA fails to see how
electronic posting would be harmful to safety. To the contrary,
electronic posting provides employees with greater access to this
information, as they can access injury and illness data at any time.
Therefore, even if an employee does not have time to view the railroad
portal during their workday, they will still have access to this
information. Further, since the electronic dissemination of information
is faster than physically posting such information, railroads will be
better equipped to ensure the injury and illness data they are posting
is accurate and up to date. This should enhance railroad safety, as it
will allow employees to obtain reliable information more efficiently.
FRA is also unpersuaded by the labor organizations' contention that
railroad computer systems are too complex and time-consuming for
employees to navigate. Computers have been omnipresent in society for
decades, and most railroad employees should have the requisite computer
skills to access this injury and illness data upon receiving the
instructions or training that the railroad is required to provide under
section 225.25(h)(4)(i) of this final rule. For those employees who
lack the requisite skills to find this information on their own,
section 225.25(h)(4)(iii) requires supervisors to show an employee
these postings upon request, thus ensuring employee access to this
information. Therefore, even if supervisors have ``higher system
access'' and ``greater familiarity with company technology,'' as SMART-
TD alleges, this final rule requires railroads to ensure that all
employees have access to this data.
BLET expressed concerns that adopting this final rule could lead to
railroads concealing important information from their employees, but it
did not provide a rationale for this concern. This final rule simply
allows
[[Page 22742]]
railroads to disseminate information in a manner that is more
consistent with 21st century technological advances. Any efforts by a
railroad to conceal information that it is required to post would be in
violation of part 225.
Finally, in response to SMART-TD's comment that FRA should work
with employee representatives on ways to make this safety information
more available to railroad employees, FRA welcomes these interactions
and is always interested in learning how to make the U.S. rail system
safer. FRA believes that this final rule promotes rail safety by making
injury and illness data more easily accessible to employees, who can
review this data anywhere, at any time, as opposed to being able to
view this information only at a single location within a work
establishment.
2. Injury and Illness Data Promoting Important Safety Conversations
Among Employees
All three labor organization comments referenced how physical
postings encourage conversations among employees that promote a safer
work environment. SMART-TD described these physical postings as a
``critical learning tool'' that leads to the sharing of best practices
and safety hazards. Both BLET and SMART-TD argued that checking for
injury and illness data electronically would not facilitate these
spontaneous conversations that promote a strong safety culture and
peer-to-peer accountability.
FRA's Response
FRA supports in-person conversations regarding accidents at a work
establishment and agrees that such conversations are beneficial to
worker safety. However, the suggestion that physical postings promote
more conversations than electronic postings is not supported. None of
the comments provided any data or evidence in support of this argument.
FRA notes that these conversations cannot occur without employee
knowledge and awareness of these accidents. Therefore, accessibility to
this information is vital to ensuring these conversations take place.
FRA contends that permitting railroads to post this data electronically
will increase access to this information by allowing employees to
access it from various locations at any time. Electronic posting also
allows employees to review employee injury data at other
establishments, which provides greater awareness of on-the-job safety
hazards, and can prompt additional conversations.
3. Cost Savings for Railroads
The labor organizations questioned whether the proposed rule would
reduce costs for railroads. BLET asserted that posting injury data in a
physical location is not a burden for railroads. SMART-TD referred to
the physical posting requirement as a ``simple act of placing a sheet
of paper on a crew room wall'' and that any ``miniscule cost savings''
would be outweighed by losses to worker safety. TTD noted that other
Federal agencies require employers to post physical notices regarding
employee rights and employer responsibilities. For example, as TTD
explained, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)
requires private employers engaged in commerce to post a physical copy
of a job safety poster in their establishments. OSHA also requires many
employers to post its Form 300A in a visible location, so employees are
aware of injuries and illnesses that have occurred in the workplace.
TTD suggested the posting of this information is important, especially
for dangerous occupations such as railroading.
FRA's Response
As AAR and ASLRRA noted in their joint comment, this rule will
reduce costs with respect to printing while also eliminating the need
for railroads to request a waiver. These waiver petitions require time
and effort on the part of the railroad submitting the petition, as well
as FRA in its review of these petitions. Thus, FRA finds that this
final rule will result in some cost savings.
With respect to TTD's contention that other Federal agencies still
require some employers to post certain information regarding employee
rights and employer responsibilities physically, FRA is not bound by
other agencies' requirements. Also, the examples of physical posting
TTD cited have material differences from the posting requirements in 49
CFR 225.25(h). Most notably, unlike the posting requirement in section
225.25(h), these examples do not require monthly updates on the part of
the employer. The OSHA Form 300A is an annual form, so any burden
associated with posting this form in a physical location only occurs
once a year,\6\ and posting the OSHA job safety poster is a one-time
burden.\7\ Therefore, maintaining the physical posting requirement in
section 225.25(h) would be considerably more burdensome than the
examples TTD provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 29 CFR 1904.32.
\7\ 29 CFR 1903.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. FRA's Reliance on Its Waiver Experience
SMART-TD raised concerns with FRA's statement in the NPRM that the
agency was unaware of any issues caused from granting waivers allowing
certain Class I railroads to use electronic posting in lieu of paper
posting. SMART-TD asserted that railroads are not going to volunteer
information to their regulator about how waivers led to workplace
injuries or fatalities. The comment also cited specific examples in
support, such as CSX Transportation Inc. (CSX) not complying with its
waiver conditions; requirements that SMART-TD described as ``very
basic'' to meet. SMART-TD also mentioned that since the Union Pacific
Railroad Company (UP) received a waiver allowing it to post injury and
illness data electronically, it was found to have tampered with FRA's
safety culture assessment and contends that UP unjustly punished an
employee who reported an injury. In addition, UP is currently seeking a
``high-stakes merger'' which will allegedly further disincentivize the
railroad from reporting to FRA any safety issues that have arisen from
this waiver voluntarily.
FRA's Response
Regardless of whether railroads are likely to report safety issues
that result from these waivers voluntarily, railroad employees, or the
labor organizations that represent them, are not prevented from
reporting any such issues. However, SMART-TD's comment provides no
examples of situations where a waiver allowing electronic posting has
resulted in a workplace injury or has been otherwise harmful to safety.
Regarding SMART-TD's comment about the CSX waiver, the non-compliance
was identified at only certain CSX establishments and CSX corrected the
issue upon notification of the non-compliance.
FRA acknowledges that railroads may not report problems with
electronic posting or their own non-compliance with the regulation
(just as railroads may not report problems with physical postings or
their own non-compliance with the existing regulation). The agency will
continue to perform inspections of railroads' electronic posting
systems, and if they do not meet the requirements of this final rule,
FRA will take appropriate action. Based on the available evidence, FRA
finds that there have been no reported instances where waivers allowing
railroads to post injury and illness data electronically, in lieu of
paper posting, reduced railroad
[[Page 22743]]
safety. If new information comes to light which suggests that allowing
railroads to meet the requirements in section 225.25(h) through
electronic posting reduces railroad safety, FRA may reconsider this
issue.
5. Requirement That Postings Include the Average Annual Number of
Employees Reporting to the Establishment
BLET disagreed with FRA's proposal in the NPRM to remove the
requirement that railroads include the annual average number of
railroad employees reporting to the establishment in the posting
requirement under section 225.25(h). Specifically, BLET noted that this
data is helpful in allowing employees to determine the frequency of
accidents at their establishment and to compare this data with accident
data at other establishments. For example, if 100 employees work at a
particular location where there had been multiple injuries in the past
30 days, whereas another location with a similar number of employees
had only had one injury during the same time period, that would give
workers a better understanding of the safety conditions at their work
establishment.
FRA's Response
FRA found BLET's argument compelling for why it should keep the
requirement that the annual average number of railroad employees at an
establishment be included in these postings. As BLET asserted in its
comment, this information provides railroad employees with important
context for the safety conditions where they work, including the
ability to compare injury statistics at locations with similar numbers
of employees. FRA did not receive any comments in support of removing
this requirement. Therefore, FRA has determined to keep this
requirement in the final rule.
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 225.25 Recordkeeping
Except as otherwise noted below, FRA has adopted the rule text as
proposed, and readers may refer to the NPRM's Section-by-Section
Analysis for discussion of FRA's rationale for the revisions. FRA will
revise the FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports in
accordance with the changes to part 225 finalized in this rulemaking.
In the NPRM, FRA proposed eliminating the requirement that the
postings required by paragraph (h) of this section include the annual
average number of railroad employees reporting to the establishment.
However, because FRA has decided to keep this requirement, FRA inserted
the language as paragraph (h)(3)(ii). Proposed paragraphs (h)(3)(ii)
through (xiii) in the NPRM have been renumbered in this final rule as
paragraphs (h)(3)(iii) through (xiv), respectively.
IV. 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 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.
Railroads will avoid costs associated with physically printing,
posting, and signing documents, including the time and expense required
to do so. Employees will benefit from more convenient access to safety
information. Those railroads currently submitting waiver petitions to
post information electronically will avoid the costs of submitting
waiver petitions, including the time and expense required to do so. The
government will avoid the costs of processing and reviewing waiver
requests, including the time and expense required to do so.
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.'' \8\ 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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Executive Office of the President, Executive Order 14192 of
January 31, 2025, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, 90 FR
9065-9067 (Feb. 6, 2025).
\9\ Executive Office of the President, OMB, 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.'' This final
rule will have total costs less than zero, and therefore it will be
considered an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action upon issuance of this
final rule.
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,\10\
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory
action on small businesses and other 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 comprises small businesses and 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)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No regulatory flexibility analysis is 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. The regulatory relief provided by this rule will result
in cost savings for many regulated entities, including small entities.
However, the impact to small entities is not expected to be
significant. 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 does not
impose any new information collection requirements or modify any
existing information collection requirements. Therefore, an information
collection submission to OMB is not required under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The existing recordkeeping
and reporting requirements already contained in part 225 were approved
by OMB on December 5, 2023, and the information collection requirements
thereby became effective when they were approved by OMB. The OMB
approval number is OMB No. 2130-0500, and OMB approval expires on
December 31, 2026.
E. Environmental Assessment
FRA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In
[[Page 22744]]
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.'' \11\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 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 225
Investigations, Penalties, Railroad safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
The Final Rule
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends part 225 of
chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 225--RAILROAD ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS: REPORTS CLASSIFICATION AND
INVESTIGATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 225 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 103, 322(a), 20103, 20107, 20901-20902,
21301, 21302, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; and 49 CFR 1.89.
0
2. Revise Sec. 225.25(h) to read as follows:
Sec. 225.25 Recordkeeping.
* * * * *
(h) Except as provided in paragraph (h)(2) of this section, a
listing of all injuries and occupational illnesses reported to FRA as
having occurred at an establishment shall be posted in a conspicuous
location at that establishment, within 30 days after the expiration of
the month during which the injuries and illnesses occurred, if the
establishment has been in continual operation for a minimum of 90
calendar days. If the establishment has not been in continual operation
for a minimum of 90 calendar days, the listing of all injuries and
occupational illnesses reported to FRA as having occurred at the
establishment shall be posted, within 30 days after the expiration of
the month during which the injuries and illnesses occurred, in a
conspicuous location at the next higher organizational level
establishment, such as one of the following: an operating division
headquarters; a major classification yard or terminal headquarters; a
major equipment maintenance or repair installation, e.g., a locomotive
or rail car repair or construction facility; a railroad signal and
maintenance-of-way division headquarters; or a central location where
track or signal maintenance employees are assigned as a headquarters or
receive work assignments. These examples include facilities that are
generally major facilities of a permanent nature where the railroad
generally posts or disseminates company informational notices and
policies, e.g., the policy statement in the internal control plan
required by Sec. 225.33 concerning harassment and intimidation. At a
minimum, ``establishment'' posting is required and shall include
locations where a railroad reasonably expects its employees to report
during a 12-month period and to have the opportunity to observe the
posted list containing any reportable injuries or illnesses they have
suffered during the applicable period.
(1) This listing shall be posted and shall remain continuously
displayed for the next 12 consecutive months. Incidents reported for
employees at that establishment shall be displayed in date sequence.
(2) Railroads do not have to post information on an occupational
injury or illness that is a privacy concern case.
(3) The listing shall contain all of the following information:
(i) Name and address of the establishment.
(ii) Annual average number of railroad employees reporting to the
establishment.
(iii) Calendar year of the cases being displayed.
(iv) Incident number used to report case.
(v) Date of the injury or illness.
(vi) Location of incident.
(vii) Regular job title of employee injured or ill.
(viii) Description of the injury or condition.
(ix) Number of days employee was absent from work at time of
posting.
(x) Number of days of work restriction for employee at time of
posting.
(xi) If the employee died, include the date of death.
(xii) The preparer's name, title, and telephone number (including
the area code).
(xiii) The date the record was completed.
(xiv) When there are no reportable injuries or occupational
illnesses associated with an establishment for a month, the listing
shall reference this fact.
[[Page 22745]]
(4) A railroad may maintain the posting required under this
paragraph (h) in electronic format if:
(i) Employees are provided instructions or training on how properly
to access the electronic posting;
(ii) There is a device at the facility which employees may use to
access the posting or employees are issued a device that can access the
posting; and
(iii) Supervisors at the establishment can show the posting to
employees or an FRA representative upon request.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.89.
David A. Fink,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-08255 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.