SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Comments Received in Response to the NPRM

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2025), FRA is reviewing its regulatory requirements in 49 CFR parts 200 through 299 and repealing requirements that are outdated and redundant.

The requirements related to the use of locomotive horns by FRA-regulated entities are established in 49 CFR part 222, “Use of Locomotive Horns at Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings.” On July 1, 2025, FRA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) seeking to amend 49 CFR 222.21(d) to provide regulatory relief from the required horn sounding pattern of two long blasts, one short blast, and one long blast for locomotive engineers operating trains, locomotive consists, or individual locomotives that have stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing. 90 FR 28641 (July 1, 2025).

Currently, paragraph (d) of § 222.21 permits locomotive engineers operating trains, locomotive consists, or individual locomotives that have stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing to approach the nearby crossing and sound the locomotive horn for less than the 15-second minimum horn sounding duration required by paragraph (b)(2) of that section. However, engineers operating this equipment that have stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing are not permitted to vary the horn sounding pattern of two long blasts, one short blast, and one long blast, unless the engineer is at a location where public highway-rail grade crossings are spaced closely together.^[1] Therefore, in the NPRM, FRA proposed to allow engineers operating trains, locomotive consists, or individual locomotives that have stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing to vary the required locomotive horn sounding pattern (to include providing one single blast of the locomotive horn) as they enter the nearby public highway-rail grade crossing.

FRA received 12 comments in response to the NPRM.^[2] Nine comments were submitted anonymously ^[3] and ( printed page 55765) eight of these anonymous comments supported the flexibility provided by the NPRM. One anonymous comment opposed the NPRM, expressing concern with the adequacy of the warning provided by a single blast of the locomotive horn. FRA also received a comment from an individual, self-described as a person who has been living near a gated crossing for more than 30 years, in full support of the changes proposed in the NPRM.^[4]

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) submitted comments in support of the flexibility proposed in the NPRM. Although BLET recommended that FRA retain the locomotive horn sounding pattern required by § 222.21(a) as the default rule for use in most situations, BLET also commented that its locomotive engineer members “would welcome the allowance to use discretion to use one single horn blast when they enter onto a crossing at grade, after being stopped in close proximity.” ^[5]

The Transportation Division of the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (SMART-TD) submitted comments opposing the NPRM. SMART-TD noted that the horn sounding pattern required by § 222.21(a) provides motorists, pedestrians, and communities with a predictable and recognizable warning that a train is approaching. The comment asserted that the proposed flexibility would introduce ambiguity and reduce the clarity of the warning provided at grade crossings. Further, SMART-TD challenged FRA's assertion that the NPRM would reduce burdens on railroads and surrounding communities, contending that the existing horn sounding pattern requirement carries no meaningful cost to railroads and that the changes proposed in the NPRM would weaken FRA's safety regulations and result in social and economic costs from increased collisions, injuries, fatalities, and subsequent litigation.^[6]

In response, FRA notes that § 222.21 currently allows locomotive engineers to sound the locomotive horn for less than 15 seconds in two very different scenarios. Locomotive engineers are permitted to sound the locomotive horn for less than 15 seconds when initiating movement after having been stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing.^[7] Locomotive engineers are also permitted to sound the locomotive horn for less than 15 seconds when traveling at speeds in excess of 60 miles per hour (mph) on approach to a public highway-rail grade crossing.^[8] Moreover, a commuter railroad obtained regulatory relief similar to the proposal through an FRA waiver permitting its train crews to vary the locomotive horn sounding pattern required by § 222.21(a) when initiating train movement after having stopped at certain specified passenger stations located in close proximity to public highway-rail grade crossings.^[9] This waiver has been in effect since 2009 without negatively impacting public safety or the safety of railroad operations.

FRA disagrees with SMART-TD's assertion that the horn sounding pattern required by § 222.21(a) carries no meaningful cost to railroads. Without the regulatory flexibility proposed, each entity seeking to vary the required locomotive horn sounding pattern by train crews would be required to prepare and submit a waiver petition for regulatory relief.

SMART-TD also noted concern that the proposed language may create liability for locomotive engineers, who might be scapegoated in the event of a grade crossing collision. In response, FRA is amending § 222.21(d) to clarify that FRA is authorizing locomotive engineers to exercise their discretion when determining whether to vary the locomotive horn sounding pattern if the engineer can determine that the nearby public highway-rail grade crossing is not obstructed and, in the locomotive engineer's sole judgment, at least one of the conditions set forth in § 222.21(d)(1) and (2) has been met.

II. Section-by-Section Analysis

Please refer to the discussion in the NPRM, as FRA is generally adopting the rule text as proposed in the NPRM. 90 FR 28641 (July 1, 2025). However, as noted above, in this final rule, FRA is adding the phrase, “in the locomotive engineer's sole judgment” to § 222.21(d) to clarify that FRA is authorizing locomotive engineers to exercise their discretion when determining whether to vary the locomotive horn sounding pattern when entering a nearby public highway-rail grade crossing, after having stopped in close proximity to the crossing.

FRA is also replacing the reference to “conflicting highway movements” in § 222.21(d)(2) with “conflicting motorist or pedestrian traffic” to clarify that FRA expects locomotive engineers to look for motorists and pedestrians who may be approaching the nearby public highway-rail grade crossing. Thus, prior to exercising the discretion authorized by § 222.21(d), locomotive engineers must determine that either the crossing gates at the nearby unobstructed public highway-rail grade crossing are fully lowered (in compliance with the condition set forth in § 222.21(d)(1)) or there is no conflicting motorist or pedestrian traffic approaching the nearby unobstructed public highway-rail grade crossing (in compliance with the condition set forth in § 222.21(d)(2)).

III. Regulatory Impact and Notices

A. Executive Order 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.^[10] 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 and concluded that it reduces the burden on railroads and communities by providing greater flexibility in rules concerning train horns near public highway-rail grade crossings. In addition, this final rule eliminates the need for railroads seeking to vary the mandatory locomotive horn sounding pattern to prepare and submit a waiver petition for regulatory relief to FRA.

B. Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)

E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, requires that for “each new [E.O. 14192 regulatory ( printed page 55766) action] issued, at least ten prior regulations be identified for elimination.” ^[11] Implementation guidance for E.O. 14192 issued by OMB (Memorandum M-25-20, March 26, 2025) defines two different types of E.O. 14192 actions: an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action, and an E.O. 14192 regulatory action.^[12]

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 is expected to have total costs less than zero, and therefore it is considered an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action. This final rule will provide additional flexibility for the use of train horns near public highway-rail grade crossings, and waivers will no longer be necessary for those railroads that otherwise would petition FRA for relief from such rules.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. ), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,³ requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory action on small business 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)).

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. This final rule will allow for regulatory relief in certain situations from the pattern of horn soundings in FRA train horn regulation. By extending this regulatory relief, many regulated entities, including small entities, will experience benefits. Some small entities will experience cost savings from no longer having to submit waivers. Although some small entities may be impacted by this final rule, FRA does not anticipate that those impacts will 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 contains no new information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., therefore, an information collection submission to OMB is not required. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements already contained in part 222 became effective when it was approved by OMB on January 19, 2026. The OMB Control Number is 2130-0560, and OMB approval expires on January 31, 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, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any “significant energy action.” ^[13] 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.

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.

The Final Rule

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends part 222 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

91 FR 55764