RRPolice0537R

Railroad Police Rule

1. EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAKE THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION NECESSARY. IDENTIFY ANY LEGAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS THAT NECESSITATE THE COLLECTION. ATTACH A COPY OF THE APPROPRIATE SECTION OF EACH STATUTE AND REGULATION MANDATING OR AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION.

This collection of information is a request for an extension of a currently approved submission. FRA has revised the information in this collection – where appropriate and necessary – to reflect the most current data, current rule requirements, and FRA’s experience over the past three years in implementing the requirements of this rule.

Background

49 U.S.C. Section 28101 (formerly Section 1704 of the Crime Control Act of 1990) authorizes railroad employees who are commissioned as railroad police officers by any state to enforce, in accordance with DOT regulations, the laws of any state in which the employers of railroad police officers’ own property for the purpose of protecting railroad property, personnel, passengers, and cargo. Specifically, a railroad police officer may enforce relevant laws for the protection of the following: (1) The railroad’s employees, passengers, or patrons; (2) The railroad’s property or property entrusted to the railroad for transportation purposes; (3) The intrastate, interstate, or foreign movement of cargo in the railroad’s possession or in possession of another railroad or non-rail carrier while on the railroad property; and (4) The railroad movement of personnel, equipment, and materials vital to the national defense.

49 CFR § 207.4 implements the Crime Control Act of 1990 by requiring notice to appropriate state officials – after designation of railroad police officers – of every other state in which the railroad intends to have railroad police officers protecting railroad property, personnel, passengers, and cargo. The authority exercised under this part by an officer for whom the railroad has provided notice in accordance with § 207.4 is the same as that of a railroad police officer commissioned under the laws of that state.

2. INDICATE HOW, BY WHOM, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE THE INFORMATION IS TO BE USED. EXCEPT FOR A NEW COLLECTION, INDICATE THE ACTUAL USE THE AGENCY HAS MADE OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE CURRENT COLLECTION.

The information collected is used by the states. The purpose of the notice provisions of 49 CFR § 207.4 is to provide a mechanism whereby states can determine which railroad police officers have authority to act in their states by virtue of the designation procedures authorized by the Crime Control Act of 1990, as opposed to individuals commissioned by the states themselves. The required notice will fully identify railroad police officers by name, badge number, identification number, rank code, or other identifying information, date of commission, state or states where the officers are commissioned, the date(s) of training, and the names of the designating railroad officials. Also, the required notice must include color photographs of badges, identification cards, and other identifying materials the railroad uses to identify its railroad police officers. These records will provide positive proof of the authority of such railroad police officers to operate in such states in the event this authority is ever questioned. The railroad companies are also required to maintain this information on file at a central location in the event the designation is questioned by state officials.

If these procedures were not in place, there would be no way of determining which railroad police officers were given authority in states other than their original state(s) of commissioning and, hence, no way of providing the effective law enforcement which the Crime Control Act of 1990 envisioned. Without the notice and recordkeeping requirements of the rule, the entire procedure for designating railroad police officers to operate beyond their state(s) of original commissioning would be meaningless.

FRA does not make use of the information because the information is not required to be provided or intended to be provided to the agency. Rather, the information is provided to state authorities as a method of implementing the Crime Control Act of 1990.

3. DESCRIBE WHETHER, AND TO WHAT EXTENT, THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION INVOLVES THE USE OF AUTOMATED, ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL, OR OTHER TECHNOLOGICAL COLLECTION TECHNIQUES OR OTHER FORMS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, E.G. PERMITTING ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF RESPONSES, AND THE BASIS FOR THE DECISION FOR ADOPTING THIS MEANS OF COLLECTION. ALSO DESCRIBE ANY CONSIDERATION OF USING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE BURDEN.

Although the regulation cites notification by paper, FRA strongly supports and highly encourages the use of advanced information technology, wherever possible, to reduce burden. If railroads are so equipped, FRA strongly endorses sending the information required in § 207.4 electronically. Even photographs can now be sent electronically with the proper equipment. Electronic filing is left up to discretion of the railroads. FRA strongly believes in the goal set forth both in the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) to reduce burden on respondents, and is doing its best to meet those goals.

It should be noted that the information collection requirements of this rule and the corresponding burden are already extremely minimal. Since this is the case, electronic filing would not substantially decrease the burden.

4. DESCRIBE EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION. SHOW SPECIFICALLY WHY ANY SIMILAR INFORMATION ALREADY AVAILABLE CANNOT BE USED OR MODIFIED FOR USE FOR THE PURPOSES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 2 ABOVE.

The information collection requirements to our knowledge are not duplicated anywhere.

Similar data are not available from any other source.

5. IF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IMPACTS SMALL BUSINESSES OR OTHER SMALL ENTITIES (ITEM 5 OF OMB FORM 83-I), DESCRIBE ANY METHODS USED TO MINIMIZE BURDEN.

Because the intent of the statute is to authorize railroad police officers to operate in more than one state, the primary impact of the rule is on larger railroads. Nevertheless, it is possible that some smaller railroads will take advantage of the opportunity to use provisions of the Crime Control Act of 1990. There is essentially no way to minimize the requirements for these organizations and retain the integrity of the notice and recordkeeping process. However, as pointed out earlier, the burden of these requirements is already extremely minimal on all railroads.

6. DESCRIBE THE CONSEQUENCE TO FEDERAL PROGRAM OR POLICY ACTIVITIES IF THE COLLECTION IS NOT CONDUCTED OR IS CONDUCTED LESS FREQUENTLY, AS WELL AS ANY TECHNICAL OR LEGAL OBSTACLES TO REDUCING BURDEN.

If this information were not collected, the safety of railroad employees, passengers, property, and cargo might be considerably jeopardized in states where there was no valid method of determining who is and who is not a genuinely commissioned railroad police officer from another state. Consequently, crime in states other than the original commissioning one might rise significantly with more theft, more vandalism, and more assaults from persons impersonating a railroad police officer. Thus, the crime prevention program envisaged by Congress would not be properly implemented without these requirements.

Failure to collect the information would inhibit interstate communication and cooperation between railroad police officers and state law enforcement authorities. Without this interstate cooperation, the property, personnel, passengers, and cargo of the railroads could not be adequately protected to the same extent while travelling across state lines. Railroads might then experience significant financial losses as well as injuries to personnel and passengers. In the case of the transportation of hazardous or nuclear material, theft of these materials could have disastrous consequences to the health and welfare of the general public as well as to the overall security of this country.

Frequency of submission is not an issue for this collection of information since the required notice is to be given only once for each state for which authority is sought.

7. EXPLAIN ANY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD CAUSE AN INFORMATION COLLECTION TO BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER:

- REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO REPORT INFORMATION TO THE AGENCY MORE OFTEN THAN QUARTERLY;

- REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO PREPARE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO A COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IN FEWER THAN 30 DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF IT;

- REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO SUBMIT MORE THAN AN ORIGINAL AND TWO COPIES OF ANY DOCUMENT;

- REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO RETAIN RECORDS, OTHER THAN HEALTH, MEDICAL, GOVERNMENT CONTRACT, GRANT-IN-AID, OR TAX RECORDS FOR MORE THAN THREE YEARS;

- IN CONNECTION WITH A STATISTICAL SURVEY, THAT IS NOT DESIGNED TO PRODUCE VALID AND RELIABLE RESULTS THAT CAN BE GENERALIZED TO THE UNIVERSE OF STUDY;

- REQUIRING THE USE OF A STATISTICAL DATA CLASSIFICATION THAT HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY OMB;

- THAT INCLUDES A PLEDGE OF CONFIDENTIALITY THAT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED IN STATUE OR REGULATION, THAT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY DISCLOSURE AND DATA SECURITY POLICIES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLEDGE, OR WHICH UNNECESSARILY IMPEDES SHARING OF DATA WITH OTHER AGENCIES FOR COMPATIBLE CONFIDENTIAL USE; OR

- REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO SUBMIT PROPRIETARY TRADE SECRET, OR OTHER CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION UNLESS THE AGENCY CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT IT HAS INSTITUTED PROCEDURES TO PROTECT THE INFORMATION'S CONFIDENTIALITY TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW.

Records of notices of commission are to be retained indefinitely or as long as the police officer remains employed. A specific timeframe can not be addressed by virtue of the regulation itself, which is intended to provide continuing evidence of railroad police authority.

With this one exception, all other information collection requirements contained in the rule are in compliance with this section.

8. IF APPLICABLE, PROVIDE A COPY AND IDENTIFY THE DATE AND PAGE NUMBER OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER OF THE AGENCY'S NOTICE, REQUIRED BY 5 CFR 1320.8(d), SOLICITING COMMENTS ON THE INFORMATION COLLECTION PRIOR TO SUBMISSION TO OMB. SUMMARIZE PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THAT NOTICE AND DESCRIBE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE AGENCY IN RESPONSE TO THOSE COMMENTS. SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS COMMENTS RECEIVED ON COST AND HOUR BURDEN.

DESCRIBE EFFORTS TO CONSULT WITH PERSONS OUTSIDE THE AGENCY TO OBTAIN THEIR VIEWS ON THE AVAILABILITY OF DATA, FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION, THE CLARITY OF INSTRUCTIONS AND RECORDKEEPING, DISCLOSURE, OR REPORTING FORMAT (IF ANY), AND ON THE DATA ELEMENTS TO BE RECORDED, DISCLOSED, OR REPORTED.

CONSULTATION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THOSE FROM WHOM INFORMATION IS TO BE OBTAINED OR THOSE WHO MUST COMPILE RECORDS SHOULD OCCUR AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 3 YEARS--EVEN IF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION ACTIVITY IS THE SAME AS IN PRIOR PERIODS. THERE MAY BE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAY PRECLUDE CONSULTATION IN A SPECIFIC SITUATION. THESE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE EXPLAINED.

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FRA published a notice in the Federal Register on April 16, 2009, soliciting comment on this particular information collection. See 74 FR 17762. FRA received no comments in response to this notice.

FRA continues to be in contact with railroad police officers and state officials implementing the statute. The statute and regulation continue to work smoothly, and there have been no complaints with respect to the burden imposed by the collection.

9. EXPLAIN ANY DECISION TO PROVIDE ANY PAYMENT OR GIFT TO RESPONDENTS, OTHER THAN ENUMERATION OF CONTRACTORS OR GRANTEES.

There are no monetary payments provided or gifts made to respondents in connection with this information collection.

10. DESCRIBE ANY ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY PROVIDED TO RESPONDENTS AND THE BASIS FOR THE ASSURANCE IN STATUTE, REGULATION, OR AGENCY POLICY.

Assurances concerning confidentiality were not made, except for those implicit in the Privacy Act. It should be noted, though, that the two parties involved in the requirements – railroads and states – have a strong cooperative interest in utilizing the information only for the purposes for which the information is generated. Moreover, this information is not the kind of information for which privacy concerns typically arise.

11. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL JUSTIFICATION FOR ANY QUESTIONS OF A SENSITIVE NATURE, SUCH AS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR AND ATTITUDES, RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, AND OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE COMMONLY CONSIDERED PRIVATE. THIS JUSTIFICATION SHOULD INCLUDE THE REASONS WHY THE AGENCY CONSIDERS THE QUESTIONS NECESSARY, THE SPECIFIC USES TO BE MADE OF THE INFORMATION, THE EXPLANATION TO BE GIVEN TO PERSONS FROM WHOM THE INFORMATION IS REQUESTED, AND ANY STEPS TO BE TAKEN TO OBTAIN THEIR CONSENT.

There are no questions or information of a sensitive nature or data that would normally be considered private contained in this information collection.

12. PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF THE HOUR BURDEN OF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. THE STATEMENT SHOULD:

- INDICATE THE NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS, FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE, ANNUAL HOUR BURDEN, AND AN EXPLANATION OF HOW THE BURDEN WAS ESTIMATED. UNLESS DIRECTED TO DO SO, AGENCIES SHOULD NOT CONDUCT SPECIAL SURVEYS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION ON WHICH TO BASE HOUR BURDEN ESTIMATES. CONSULTATION WITH A SAMPLE (FEWER THAN 10) OF POTENTIAL RESPONDENTS IS DESIRABLE. IF THE HOUR BURDEN ON RESPONDENTS IS EXPECTED TO VARY WIDELY BECAUSE OF DIFFERENCES IN ACTIVITY, SIZE, OR COMPLEXITY, SHOW THE RANGE OF ESTIMATED HOUR BURDEN, AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THE VARIANCE. GENERALLY, ESTIMATES SHOULD NOT INCLUDE BURDEN HOUR FOR CUSTOMARY AND USUAL BUSINESS PRACTICES

- IF THIS REQUEST FOR APPROVAL COVERS MORE THAN ONE FORM, PROVIDE SEPARATE HOUR BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR EACH FORM AND AGGREGATE THE HOUR BURDENS IN ITEMS 13 OF OMB FORM 83-I.

- PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED COST TO RESPONDENTS FOR THE HOUR BURDENS FOR COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION, IDENTIFYING AND USING APPROPRIATE WAGE RATE CATEGORIES. THE COST OF CONTRACTING OUT OR PAYING OUTSIDE PARTIES FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED HERE. INSTEAD, THIS COST SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN ITEM 14.

Note: Burden estimates have been left unchanged from the previous submission after consulting with the FRA’s security specialist who is responsible for this area of Part 207 compliance.

Section 207.4 - Notice to State officials

(a) After the designated railroad police officer is commissioned by a state or states, the railroad shall send, by certified mail, written notice to appropriate officials of every other state in which the railroad police officer shall protect the railroad’s property, personnel, passengers, and cargo. The notice of commission shall contain the following information: (1) The name of the railroad police officer; (2) The badge number, identification number, rank, code, or other identifying information assigned to the railroad police officer; (3) The date of commission; (4) The state or states where the railroad police officer is commissioned; (5) The date the railroad police officer received training or retraining regarding the laws of such state or states; (6) The name of the railroad official who designated the employee as a railroad police officer; and (7) Color photographs of the types of badges, identification cards, and other identifying materials the railroad uses to identify its railroad police officers. The authority set forth in § 207.5 shall be effective upon receipt by such state(s) of written notice conforming to the requirements of this section.

FRA estimates that approximately 35 railroads will be affected by this requirement. It is estimated that approximately one (1) new police officer will be commissioned per railroad annually. Furthermore, it is estimated that it will take each railroad approximately five (5) hours to prepare each notice or report with the required information, and send it by certified mail to appropriate officials of the relevant state(s). Total annual burden for this requirement is 175 hours.

Respondent Universe: 728 railroads

Burden time per response: 5 hours

Frequency of Response: On occasion

Annual number of Responses: 35 notices/reports

Annual Burden: 175 hours

Calculation: 35 notices/reports x 5 hrs. = 175 hours

(b) The railroad shall keep copies of all such notices at a central location.

FRA estimates that approximately 35 railroads will keep records or copies of notices as required under this section. It is estimated that each railroad will keep one record and that it will take approximately 10 minutes to prepare each record. Total annual burden for this requirement is six (6) hours.

Respondent Universe: 728 railroads

Burden time per response: 10 minutes

Frequency of Response: On occasion

Annual number of Responses: 35 records

Annual Burden: 6 hours

Calculation: 35 records x 10 min. = 6 hours

Total annual burden for this entire requirement is 181 hours (175 + 6).

Section 207.5(a) - Authority in States where officer not commissioned

A railroad police officer who is designated by a railroad and commissioned under the laws of any state is authorized to enforce the laws of any state(as specified in paragraph (b) of this section) of any state in which the railroad owns property and to which the railroad has provided notice in accordance with § 207.4.

The burden for this requirement is included under § 207.4(a) above.

Total annual burden for this entire collection of information is 181 hours.

13. PROVIDE AN ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL ANNUAL COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS OR RECORDKEEPERS RESULTING FROM THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. (DO NOT INCLUDE THE COSTS OF ANY HOUR BURDEN SHOWN IN ITEMS 12 AND 14).

- THE COST ESTIMATES SHOULD BE SPLIT INTO TWO COMPONENTS: (A) A TOTAL CAPITAL AND START-UP COST COMPONENT (ANNUALIZED OVER IT EXPECTED USEFUL LIFE); AND (B) A TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AND PURCHASE OF SERVICES COMPONENT. THE ESTIMATES SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH GENERATING, MAINTAINING, AND DISCLOSING OR PROVIDING THE INFORMATION. INCLUDE DESCRIPTIONS OF METHODS USED TO ESTIMATE MAJOR COSTS FACTORS INCLUDING SYSTEM AND TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION, EXPECTED USEFUL LIFE OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT, THE DISCOUNT RATE(S), AND THE TIME PERIOD OVER WHICH COSTS WILL BE INCURRED. CAPITAL AND START-UP COSTS INCLUDE, AMONG OTHER ITEMS, PREPARATIONS FOR COLLECTING INFORMATION SUCH AS PURCHASING COMPUTERS AND SOFTWARE; MONITORING, SAMPLING, DRILLING AND TESTING EQUIPMENT; AND RECORD STORAGE FACILITIES.

- IF COST ESTIMATES ARE EXPECTED TO VARY WIDELY, AGENCIES SHOULD PRESENT RANGES OF COST BURDENS AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THE VARIANCE. THE COST OF PURCHASING OR CONTRACTING OUT INFORMATION COLLECTION SERVICES SHOULD BE A PART OF THIS COST BURDEN ESTIMATE. IN DEVELOPING COST BURDEN ESTIMATES, AGENCIES MAY CONSULT WITH A SAMPLE OF RESPONDENTS (FEWER THAN 10), UTILIZE THE 60-DAY PRE-OMB SUBMISSION PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS AND USE EXISTING ECONOMIC OR REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RULEMAKING CONTAINING THE INFORMATION COLLECTION, AS APPROPRIATE.

- GENERALLY, ESTIMATES SHOULD NOT INCLUDE PURCHASES OF EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES, OR PORTIONS THEREOF, MADE (1) PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1995, (2) TO ACHIEVE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE INFORMATION COLLECTION, (3) FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO PROVIDE INFORMATION OR KEEP RECORDS FOR THE GOVERNMENT, OR (4) AS PART OF CUSTOMARY AND USUAL BUSINESS OR PRIVATE PRACTICES.

Cost to Respondents: (Note: Costs are estimated high since not all railroads impacted own property in 16 states)

Postage: $952.00 (35 envelopes x 16 states x $1.70)

Photos: $4,900 (35 Railroads x 1 new police officer x 5 photos x 16 states x $1.75)

TOTAL $5,852.00

35 = number of railroads

35 = number of envelopes with required information

16 = average number of states that receive required information

5 = number of photos per police officer

1 = number of new police officers per year

$1.75 = Estimated cost per photo

$1.70 = Estimated cost of postage per envelope

14. PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. ALSO, PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE METHOD USED TO ESTIMATE COSTS, WHICH SHOULD INCLUDE QUANTIFICATION OF HOURS, OPERATIONAL EXPENSES SUCH AS EQUIPMENT, OVERHEAD, PRINTING, AND SUPPORT STAFF, AND ANY OTHER EXPENSE THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INCURRED WITHOUT THIS COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. AGENCIES ALSO MAY AGGREGATE COST ESTIMATES FROM ITEMS 12, 13, AND 14 IN A SINGLE TABLE.

There is no cost to the Federal Government since the rule imposes notice and recordkeeping requirements solely upon railroads and states. No information is provided to FRA.

15. EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR ANY PROGRAM CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REPORTED IN ITEMS 13 OR 14 OF THE OMB FORM 83-I.

There are no program changes, and there have no changes in burden estimates. Consequently, there is no change in total burden from the previous submission. The total burden for this collection of information remains 181 hours.

Furthermore, there has been no change in cost to respondents from the previous submission.

16. FOR COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION WHOSE RESULTS WILL BE PUBLISHED, OUTLINE PLANS FOR TABULATION, AND PUBLICATION. ADDRESS ANY COMPLEX ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES THAT WILL BE USED. PROVIDE THE TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT, INCLUDING BEGINNING AND ENDING DATES OF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION, COMPLETION OF REPORT, PUBLICATION DATES, AND OTHER ACTIONS.

There are no plans for publication of this submission. The information will be used exclusively for purposes of determining proper police authority.

17. IF SEEKING APPROVAL TO NOT DISPLAY THE EXPIRATION DATE FOR OMB APPROVAL OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION, EXPLAIN THE REASONS THAT DISPLAY WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE.

Once OMB approval is received, FRA will publish the approval number for these information collection requirements in the Federal Register.

18. EXPLAIN EACH EXCEPTION TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 19, "CERTIFICATION FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSIONS," OF OMB FORM 83-I.

No exceptions are taken at this time.

Meeting Department of Transportation (DOT) Strategic Goals

This information collection supports the main DOT strategic goal, namely transportation safety. Without proper identification of railroad police officers, interstate communication and cooperation between railroad police officers and state law enforcement authorities would be inhibited. Without this interstate cooperation, the passengers, personnel, property, and cargo of the railroads would not be protected to the same extent while traveling across state lines. Consequently, rail transportation would be more susceptible to a variety of crimes, including higher rates of robbery, assault, and vandalism. The will of Congress – as expressed in the Crime Control Act of 1990 – would then be thwarted. Higher crime rates might easily translate into additional injuries to crews and possibly injuries to passengers, and most certainly would result in financial losses for the railroads.

In summary, in an age of terrorism, this collection of information enhances railroad safety by providing an additional layer of protection in the form of railroad police officers who can watch over passengers, personnel, property, and cargo. It furthers DOT’s goal of promoting the public health and safety by working toward the elimination of transportation-related deaths, injuries, and property damage.

In this information collection, as in all its information collection activities, FRA seeks to do its utmost to fulfill DOT Strategic Goals and to be an integral part of One DOT.