[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24891-24895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-11450]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 209

[Docket No. FRA 1999-6086]
RIN 2130-AB15


Final Policy Statement Concerning Small Entities Subject to the 
Railroad Safety Laws

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; final statement of agency policy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On August 11, 1997, in compliance with the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), FRA issued an 
Interim Policy Statement Concerning Small Entities Subject to the 
Railroad Safety Laws. This document discusses comments received in 
response to the Interim Policy Statement and adopts the Interim Policy 
Statement as the Final Policy Statement Concerning Small Entities 
Subject to the Railroad Safety Laws, with minor edits required to 
update the language. The Final Policy Statement contains FRA's 
communication and enforcement policy statements concerning small 
entities subject to the railroad safety laws. FRA has in place programs 
that devote special attention to the unique concerns and operations of 
small entities in the administration of the national railroad safety 
compliance and enforcement program.

DATES: This policy statement is effective May 9, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) Principal Program Person: Jeffrey 
Horn, Office of Safety Planning and Evaluation, Federal Railroad 
Administration, 1120 Vermont Ave. NW., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 
20590 (tel: (202) 493-6283) (2) Principal Attorney: Melissa Porter, 
Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont 
Ave., NW., Mail Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590 (tel: (202) 493-6034) (3) 
Enforcement Issues: Douglas Taylor, Operating Practices Division, 1120 
Vermont Ave., NW., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (tel: (202) 493-
6255).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 11, 1997, FRA issued an Interim Policy Statement 
Concerning Small Entities Subject to the Railroad Safety Laws (62 FR 
43024, August 11, 1997) (Interim Policy Statement) in compliance with 
the requirements of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121) (SBREFA). SBREFA establishes requirements 
for federal agencies to follow with respect to small businesses, 
creates duties for the Small Business Administration (SBA), and amends 
portions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.) and 
the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (5 U.S.C. 501, et seq.). The 
primary purposes of SBREFA are to implement recommendations developed 
at the 1995 White House Conference on Small Business, to provide small 
businesses enhanced opportunities for judicial review of final agency 
action, to encourage small business participation in the regulatory 
process, to develop accessible sources of information on

[[Page 24892]]

regulatory requirements for small business, to create a cooperative 
regulatory environment for small business, and to make federal 
regulators accountable for ``excessive'' enforcement actions.
    SBREFA, among other things, requires federal enforcement agencies 
to institute two new policies. The first is a communication policy, 
described in section 213 of SBREFA, in which each agency must ``answer 
inquiries by small entities concerning information on, and advice 
about, compliance with'' statutes and regulations within the agency's 
jurisdiction, ``interpreting and applying the law to specific sets of 
facts supplied by the small entity.'' The second is an enforcement 
policy, required by section 223 of SBREFA, in which each agency must 
establish a program to provide for the reduction, and under appropriate 
circumstances for the waiver, of civil penalties for violations of a 
statutory or regulatory requirement by a small entity.
    SBREFA incorporates the definition for ``small entity'' that is 
established by existing law (5 U.S.C. 601, 15 U.S.C. 632, 13 CFR part 
121) for those businesses to be covered by the agency policies. 
Generally, a small entity is a business concern that is independently 
owned and operated, and is not dominant in its field of operation. 
SBREFA defines ``small governmental jurisdictions'' that serve 
populations of 50,000 or less as small entities. An agency may 
establish one or more other definitions for this term, in consultation 
with the SBA and after opportunity for public comment, that are 
appropriate to the agency's activities.
    In the Interim Policy Statement, FRA invited comments on the 
definition of ``small entity,'' potential alternative definitions, and 
supporting rationale for suggested alternative definitions. FRA also 
held a public meeting on September 28, 1999 to further explore the 
issue.

II. Definition of Small Entity in the Railroad Industry

    Pursuant to its statutory authority, the SBA promulgated 
regulations that clarify the term ``small entity'' by industry, using 
number of employees or annual income as criteria. 13 CFR 121.101-108, 
and 201. In the SBA regulations, main line railroads with 1500 or fewer 
employees, and switching or terminal establishments with 500 or fewer 
employees constitute small entities. The SBA regulations do not address 
hazardous material shippers in the railroad industry, or commuter 
railroads. However, commuter railroads are governmental jurisdictions, 
and some may fit within this statutory delineation for small 
governmental jurisdictions, or small entities addressed in SBREFA.
    Prior to the SBA regulations establishing size categories, the 
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) developed a classification system 
for freight railroads as Class I, II or III, based on annual operating 
revenue. (The detailed, qualifying criteria for these classifications 
are set forth in 49 CFR part 1201.) The Department of Transportation's 
Surface Transportation Board (STB), which succeeded the ICC, has not 
changed these classifications. The ICC classification system has been 
used pervasively by FRA and the railroad industry to identify entities 
by size. The SBA recognizes this classification system as a sound one, 
and concurred with FRA's decision to use it in the Interim Policy 
Statement, provided the public has notice of the classification system 
in use for any particular proceeding and an opportunity to comment on 
it.
    In the Interim Policy Statement, FRA defined ``small entity,'' for 
the purpose of communication and enforcement policies, the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), and the Equal Access to 
Justice Act (5 U.S.C. 501, et seq.), to include only those railroads 
which are classified as Class III. FRA further clarified the definition 
to include, in addition to Class III railroads, hazardous material 
shippers that meet the income level established for Class III railroads 
(those with annual operating revenues of $20 million per year or less, 
as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1); railroad contractors that meet the 
income level established for Class III railroads; and those commuter 
railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 
50,000 or less.

III. Analysis of Comments

    FRA received ten comments regarding the definition of a small 
entity (which can be accessed on-line at DOT's Docket Management System 
at http://dms.dot.gov). FRA also received additional comments from 
several organizations during the public meeting held on September 28, 
1999. While a number of commenters expressed the view that FRA has been 
very helpful and flexible in its approach to dealing with small 
businesses, commenters differed on their proposed definitions of 
``small entity.''
    Two small railroads agreed that FRA should retain the definition of 
a small railroad, as it has been used historically, and as it was used 
in the Interim Policy Statement: Class III railroads. One other 
commenter also agreed with that definition, and also agreed with FRA's 
definitions for other entities: contractors and hazardous materials 
shippers meeting the economic criteria established for Class III 
railroads in 49 CFR 1201.1-1, and small governmental jurisdictions or 
commuter railroads that serve populations of 50,000 or less.
    The American Short Line Railroad Association (ASLRA) (now The 
American Short Line and Regional Rail Association) suggested the most 
expansive definition, proposing that FRA regard all entities classified 
as Class II and Class III carriers by the Surface Transportation Board 
(STB) as small entities. ASLRA did not address application of the 
definition to hazardous materials shippers, contractors, governmental 
units, or commuter operations. ASLRA believes that its proposed 
definition is consistent with SBA's ``1500 employees for main line 
railroads'' and ``500 employees for switching or terminal 
establishments'' definitions because the SBA's definition would include 
all except one Class II and Class III carriers. ASLRA also claimed that 
the definition would not impose any additional burdens on FRA beyond 
what FRA already undertakes during its communication and enforcement 
processes. However, as ASLRA commented, ``FRA has consistently 
recognized the special needs of Class II and Class III railroads, and 
has specially tailored its regulatory requirements or implementation 
dates for them in many instances.'' As noted, FRA does have a history 
of being very responsive to entities' concerns during its rulemaking 
and enforcement processes, and does not feel that Class II entities 
have been adversely affected by FRA's treatment of their concerns. FRA 
will continue to address those concerns in its regulatory and 
enforcement actions. Nevertheless, including Class II railroads as 
small entities in this policy would require that FRA provide those 
railroads, which are of considerable size and sophistication (with 
annual operating revenues of up to $250 million), the benefits of the 
agency's communication and enforcement policies, which are clearly 
designed for much smaller entities that truly merit such special 
attention. FRA will continue to provide compliance guidance and 
consideration of financial condition to any particular Class II 
railroad entity that needs these actions, but will not include all of 
the Class II entities within these policies because they are intended 
for a class of railroads much more likely to need such actions. As 
such, FRA sees no justification in expanding its current definition of 
a

[[Page 24893]]

small entity to meet ASLRA's proposed definition.
    Several other entities suggested a narrower definition, limiting 
the definition of a small entity to those entities having less than a 
total of 400,000 annual employee hours. Some commenters also included 
other qualifiers, such as including operating revenue as a qualifying 
threshold. Commenters generally believed applying these measures would 
ensure consistent treatment to all entities throughout the railroad 
industry, regardless of whether they are a carrier, switching or 
terminal operation, hazardous materials shipper, or contractor. The 
National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association (NRC) 
believed that for contractors specifically, this approach was fairer 
than applying the STB's Class I, II, and III monetary thresholds. The 
NRC claimed that operating revenues for contractors are sometimes 
artificially high because labor and material costs are included in the 
contract price, thereby potentially putting a small contractor above 
the $20 million threshold set by the STB.
    Other commenters agreed with NRC that 400,000 annual employee hours 
was an appropriate measure that would ensure consistency, yet felt that 
further limiting those entities to $20 million in annual operating 
revenues would eliminate the possibility that larger railroads would 
sneak into the ``small entity'' category if they increase operating 
efficiencies, and thereby limit employee hours. The Brotherhood of 
Maintenance of Way Employes also proposed that all hours of persons 
engaged in the operation or maintenance of a railroad or its 
infrastructure (i.e., railroad contract employees or volunteers) be 
included in the total annual employee hours calculation to avoid 
underreporting of actual work performed for one railroad. The theory is 
that if contractor hours are not included in the total employee hour 
calculation, a railroad who is above the 400,000 annual employee hour 
threshold could contract out most of its work to reduce its total 
employee hours, so that it could still receive ``small entity'' 
treatment.
    Although FRA has used the 400,000 annual employee hour designation 
when conducting regulatory analyses for several rules, FRA has also 
used the Class I, II, and III categories to differentiate compliance 
dates when necessary to lessen the burden on small entities. FRA 
believes that, although the 400,000 annual employee hour criterion is 
useful in certain rules, the use of STB's Class III definition as its 
measure of a small entity for carriers, switching and terminal 
operations, hazardous materials shippers, and contractors is more 
appropriate for the purposes of this broad policy. Under the Final 
Policy Statement issued today, FRA retains the ability to use different 
criteria to tailor the applicability of any regulations it issues to 
address appropriately the specific safety problem at issue. For 
example, even though FRA is retaining the Class III standard for 
``small entity'' for its communication and enforcement policy purposes, 
FRA may issue a rule that applies only to railroads with more than a 
certain number of annual employee hours or to all railroads, regardless 
of size.
    The American Public Transit Association (APTA), which represents 
several commuter operations, proposed that FRA define rail systems with 
less than 200 cars as small entities. APTA believes there are very few 
entities that would fit the definition of operations serving 
populations of 50,000 or less. FRA did not believe the 200-car limit 
was a useful distinction, and determined it is appropriate to retain 
commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve 
populations of 50,000 or less (a standard based on SBREFA's own 
definition of a small governmental jurisdiction) as its definition of a 
small commuter railroad.
    The September 28, 1999 public meeting gave commenters an 
opportunity to iterate many of the same ideas expressed in the written 
comments FRA received. Aside from the merits of each definition, the 
attendees discussed the logistics of tracking the number of small 
entities for the proposed definitions. For example, if FRA adopts STB's 
definition, how will FRA ensure that STB is keeping accurate records of 
Class III carriers? STB requires regular reporting of the necessary 
information, and FRA has complete confidence in that process. Attendees 
also discussed what effect the number of entities considered ``small 
entities'' would have on FRA's litigation costs under the EAJA. FRA 
notes that the only provisions of EAJA affected by this definition are 
5 U.S.C. 504 (a)(4), and 28 U.S.C. 2412 (d)(1)(D). These provisions 
permit recovery of costs and fees only if a civil penalty demand is 
held to be substantially in excess of the judgment finally obtained, 
and is unreasonable when compared with that judgment. Because FRA pays 
special attention to the circumstances of small entities in assessing 
or collecting civil penalties, such a situation is extremely unlikely. 
The definition of ``small entity'' contained in this policy has no 
effect on EAJA claims brought in response to other types of agency 
action; such claims are governed by the EAJA definition of ``party.'' 
Note that the principles concerning the aggregation of company 
affiliates set forth in DOT's regulations at 49 CFR 6.7(f) apply to 
this definition for purposes of claims brought under EAJA.
    FRA indicated in the Interim Policy Statement that the Final Policy 
Statement would establish a definition of ``small entity'' for 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) purposes. While FRA will generally use 
the ``small entity'' definition adopted here in doing RFA analyses, it 
needs to retain sufficient flexibility to use a different definition if 
appropriate in the context of a particular RFA analysis. FRA has, and 
will continue to comply with the RFA's provisions requiring notice and 
comment, and consultation with the Small Business Administration's 
Office of Advocacy, when it uses a definition of ``small entity'' that 
differs from that adopted here to complete RFA analyses.

IV. FRA's Small Business Communication and Enforcement Programs

    FRA's purpose in publishing this policy statement is to formally 
announce and explain its communication and enforcement policies 
concerning small entities in the railroad industry, which have already 
existed for some time. FRA is hopeful that this publication will, in 
addition to achieving compliance with the SBREFA requirements, enhance 
railroad safety in several ways: (1) Increase the number of small 
entities that participate cooperatively in the safety compliance and 
enforcement program; (2) better inform small businesses of railroad 
safety requirements; (3) encourage small entities to communicate more 
freely with agency personnel to alleviate potential safety risks before 
they become hazardous; and (4) improve FRA's understanding of small 
operations.
    FRA's small business communication program has existed for some 
time, and continues to grow to meet the needs of our customers in the 
railroad industry. FRA Office of Safety and Office of Chief Counsel 
personnel, at the headquarters, regional and local level, devote a 
great deal of attention to the inquiries and concerns of small 
entities. FRA's program is flexible and responsive to the particular 
need expressed. The agency's response takes a variety of forms: oral 
and written answers to questions received, training sessions for new or 
existing small businesses on the substance of railroad safety 
regulations, and advice on a particular standard or

[[Page 24894]]

interpretation of a standard. Some of the FRA Regional Administrators 
have established programs in which small entities in the region meet 
with FRA regional specialists on a regular basis to discuss new 
regulations, persistent safety concerns, developing technology, and on 
going compliance issues. FRA regional offices hold yearly conferences 
in which specific blocks of time are set aside to meet with small 
businesses and hear their concerns. In addition, FRA has instituted 
innovative programs that expand our existing communication policy for 
small entities. The Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) plays an 
integral role in the development of railroad safety regulations, and 
includes representatives of small businesses.
    Similarly, FRA's enforcement program devotes special attention to 
ensuring that the limited financial resources of small entities are 
considered during the enforcement process. FRA inspectors have and 
utilize discretion when determining whether a civil penalty citation or 
other enforcement action should be taken against a small entity. Staff 
attorneys in FRA's Office of Chief Counsel regularly assess information 
provided by a company concerning the degree to which fines will impact 
the viability of a small business, and the extent to which a fine may 
prevent the business from improving the safety of its operation. In 
fact, the federal railroad safety laws include the requirement that 
agency personnel consider a respondent's ability to pay in any civil 
penalty action taken. 49 U.S.C. 21301-21303. Staff attorneys regularly 
invite small entities to present information concerning financial 
status and other factors that may result in a reduction or waiver of 
penalty assessments. This policy statement will be codified in the Code 
of Federal Regulations as an appendix to 49 CFR part 209, so that all 
members of the public have access to it as needed. The terms ``small 
business'' and ``small entity'' have identical meaning for purposes of 
this document, and are used interchangeably throughout.
    The Final Policy Statement issued today is substantially the same 
as the Interim Policy Statement. However, FRA edited language that has 
become outdated since the initial statement was published, and further 
clarified FRA's position in some instances, none of which alter the 
substance of the policy statements themselves. FRA also added language 
that makes clear that the Final Policy Statement's definition of 
``small entity'' is applicable to RFA, and to the ``excessive demand'' 
provisions in the EAJA, but not other provisions of that law.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 209

    Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties, Railroad Safety, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Policy Statement

0
In consideration of the foregoing, chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 209--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 209 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20111, 20112, 20114, and 49 
CFR 1.49.


0
2. A new Appendix C is added to 49 CFR part 209 to read as follows:

Appendix C to Part 209--FRA's Policy Statement Concerning Small 
Entities

    This policy statement required by the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121) (SBREFA) explains 
FRA's communication and enforcement policies concerning small 
entities subject to the federal railroad safety laws. These policies 
have been developed to take into account the unique concerns and 
operations of small businesses in the administration of the national 
railroad safety program, and will continue to evolve to meet the 
needs of the railroad industry. For purposes of this policy 
statement, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), 
and the ``excessive demand'' provisions of the Equal Justice Act (5 
U.S.C. 504 (a)(4), and 28 U.S.C. 2412 (d)(1)(D)), Class III 
railroads, contractors and hazardous materials shippers meeting the 
economic criteria established for Class III railroads in 49 CFR 
1201.1-1, and commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions 
that serve populations of 50,000 or less constitute the class of 
organizations considered ``small entities'' or ``small businesses.''
    FRA understands that small entities in the railroad industry 
have significantly different characteristics than larger carriers 
and shippers. FRA believes that these differences necessitate 
careful consideration in order to ensure that those entities receive 
appropriate treatment on compliance and enforcement matters, and 
enhance the safety of railroad operations. Therefore, FRA has 
developed programs to respond to compliance-related inquiries of 
small entities, and to ensure proper handling of civil penalty and 
other enforcement actions against small businesses.

Small Entity Communication Policy

    It is FRA's policy that all agency personnel respond in a timely 
and comprehensive fashion to the inquiries of small entities 
concerning rail safety statutes, safety regulations, and 
interpretations of these statutes and regulations. Also, FRA 
personnel provide guidance to small entities, as needed, in applying 
the law to specific facts and situations that arise in the course of 
railroad operations. These agency communications take many forms, 
and are tailored to meet the needs of the requesting party.
    FRA inspectors provide training on the requirements of all 
railroad safety statutes and regulations for new and existing small 
businesses upon request. Also, FRA inspectors often provide 
impromptu training sessions in the normal course of their inspection 
duties. FRA believes that this sort of preventive, rather than 
punitive, communication greatly enhances railroad safety. FRA's 
Office of Safety and Office of Chief Counsel regularly provide oral 
and written responses to questions raised by small entities 
concerning the plain meaning of the railroad safety standards, 
statutory requirements, and interpretations of the law. As required 
by the SBREFA, when FRA issues a final rule that has a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, FRA will also 
issue a compliance guide for small entities concerning that rule.
    It is FRA's policy to maintain frequent and open communications 
with the national representatives of the primary small entity 
associations and to consult with these organizations before 
embarking on new policies that may impact the interests of small 
businesses. In some regions of the country where the concentration 
of small entities is particularly high, FRA Regional Administrators 
have established programs in which all small entities in the region 
meet with FRA regional specialists on a regular basis to discuss new 
regulations, persistent safety concerns, emerging technology, and 
compliance issues. Also, FRA regional offices hold periodic 
conferences, in which specific blocks of time are set aside to meet 
with small businesses and hear their concerns.
    In addition to these communication practices, FRA has instituted 
an innovative partnership program that expands the extent to which 
small entities participate in the development of policy and process. 
The Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) has been established 
to advise the agency on the development and revision of railroad 
safety standards. The committee consists of a wide range of industry 
representatives, including organizations that represent the 
interests of small business. The small entity representative groups 
that sit on the RSAC may appoint members of their choice to 
participate in the development of new safety standards. This 
reflects FRA's policy that small business interests must be heard 
and considered in the development of new standards to ensure that 
FRA does not impose unnecessary economic burdens on small 
businesses, and to create more effective standards. Finally, FRA's 
Web site (http://www.fra.dot.gov) makes pertinent agency information 
available instantly to the public.
    FRA's longstanding policy of open communication with small 
entities is apparent in these practices. FRA will make every effort 
to develop new and equally responsive communication procedures as is 
warranted by new developments in the railroad industry.

[[Page 24895]]

Small Entity Enforcement Policy

    FRA has adopted an enforcement policy that addresses the unique 
nature of small entities in the imposition of civil penalties and 
resolution of those assessments. Pursuant to FRA's statutory 
authority, and as described in Appendix A to 49 CFR part 209, it is 
FRA's policy to consider a variety of factors in determining whether 
to take enforcement action against persons, including small 
entities, who have violated the safety laws and regulations. In 
addition to the seriousness of the violation and the person's 
history of compliance, FRA inspectors consider ``such other factors 
as the immediate circumstances make relevant.'' In the context of 
violations by small entities, those factors include whether the 
violations were made in good faith (e.g., based on an honest 
misunderstanding of the law), and whether the small entity has moved 
quickly and thoroughly to remedy the violation(s). In general, the 
presence of both good faith and prompt remedial action militates 
against taking a civil penalty action, especially if the violations 
are isolated events. On the other hand, violations involving willful 
actions and/or posing serious health, safety, or environmental 
threats should ordinarily result in enforcement actions, regardless 
of the entity's size.
    Once FRA has assessed a civil penalty, it is authorized to 
adjust or compromise the initial penalty claims based on a wide 
variety of mitigating factors, unless FRA must terminate the claim 
for some reason. FRA has the discretion to reduce the penalty as it 
deems fit, but not below the statutory minimums. The mitigating 
criteria FRA evaluates are found in the railroad safety statutes and 
SBREFA: The severity of the safety or health risk presented; the 
existence of alternative methods of eliminating the safety hazard; 
the entity's culpability; the entity's compliance history; the 
entity's ability to pay the assessment; the impacts an assessment 
might exact on the entity's continued business; and evidence that 
the entity acted in good faith. FRA staff attorneys regularly invite 
small entities to present any information related to these factors, 
and reduce civil penalty assessments based on the value and 
integrity of the information presented. Staff attorneys conduct 
conference calls or meet with small entities to discuss pending 
violations, and explain FRA's view on the merits of any defenses or 
mitigating factors presented that may have resulted or failed to 
result in penalty reductions. Among the ``other factors'' FRA 
considers at this stage is the promptness and thoroughness of the 
entity's remedial action to correct the violations and prevent a 
recurrence. Small entities should be sure to address these factors 
in communications with FRA concerning civil penalty cases. Long-term 
solutions to compliance problems will be given great weight in FRA's 
determinations of a final settlement offer.
    Finally, under FRA's Safety Assurance and Compliance Program 
(SACP), FRA identifies systemic safety hazards that continue to 
occur in a carrier or shipper operation, and in cooperation with the 
subject business, develops an improvement plan to eliminate those 
safety concerns. Often, the plan provides small entities with a 
reasonable time frame in which to make improvements without the 
threat of civil penalty. If FRA determines that the entity has 
failed to comply with the improvement plan, however, enforcement 
action is initiated.
    FRA's small entity enforcement policy is flexible and 
comprehensive. FRA's first priority in its compliance and 
enforcement activities is public and employee safety. However, FRA 
is committed to obtaining compliance and enhancing safety with 
reasoned, fair methods that do not inflict undue hardship on small 
entities.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 1, 2003.
Allan Rutter,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-11450 Filed 5-8-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P