-

-

Identifying rail highway crossings 

that need safety improvements is an 

important element of State Section 

130 Railway Highway Crossing 

Programs. Agencies must develop 

processes for identifying crossings 

with safety concerns in addition 

to practices for determining which 

safety treatments to install to achieve 

the greatest safety benefts. 

Noteworthy Practice 

DIAGNOSTIC REVIEWS FOR RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS: 

Efective Partnering in California 

Source: FHWA 

Source: Caltrans 

In California, rail-highway safety is a partnership between the California Public Utilities 

Commission (CPUC), and Caltrans, the State transportation agency that receives 

Federal-aid funds, including Section 130 Railway-Highway Crossings Program funding. 

CPUC prioritizes and selects safety improvement projects under the Section 130 

Program by using a two-phase methodology. The frst phase analyzes data to identify 

and rank crossings with potential safety issues, and the second phase involves 

conducting a rail-highway diagnostic review to determine the specifc safety needs 

of the highest ranked intersections. 

With more than 7,000 rail-highway grade crossings in the State, California has 

institutionalized a rail-highway diagnostic review process that includes a team 

of safety professionals with diverse backgrounds and safety perspectives. 

According to the requirement in 23 CFR 924.9(a)(4)(ii)(B), 

States are required to: 

“(ii) Develop a Railway-Highway Crossings program that: 

(A) Considers the relative risk of public railway-highway crossings based 

on a hazard index formula; 

(B) Includes onsite inspection of public railway-highway crossings; and 

(C) Results in a program of highway safety improvement projects at 

railway-highway crossings giving special emphasis to the statutory 

requirement that all public crossings be provided with standard 

signing and markings. 
 

 

DIAGNOSTIC REVIEWS FOR RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS: Effective Partnering in California 

The Diagnostic Review Process 

The process for rail-highway crossing field diagnostic reviews generally parallels that of a 

traditional Road Safety Audit, which is a multi-step process designed to employ both data 

analysis and visual observation of a location to determine safety gaps and the treatments that can 

potentially address them.1 

Preparation. The frst step in the CPUC diagnostic review process takes place prior to meeting the 

team in the feld. Information about the crossing is reviewed, including crash history, complaints from 

nearby residents or businesses, near-miss data from railroads, and any relevant locational factors 

that could have a safety impact (such as, a nearby school or community center). The review team 

leader is responsible for ensuring each team member has proper personal protective equipment for 

the feld visit. 

Field Review. The Field Diagnostic Team, which consists of 

representatives from the railroad company(s), local agency(s), 

Caltrans, CPUC staf, and other rail safety partners as appropriate 

(for example FHWA Division Ofce staf), then conducts a review 

of the selected crossing location. Each feld review begins with a 

safety briefng and an overview of the process the team will use 

to review the site. The scope of the review is generally divided 

into two parts: vehicles and pedestrians. The diagnostic team 

frst reviews vehicle behaviors and potential issues, then turns 

their attention to pedestrian safety concerns. 

It’s never a waste of time to observe 

a crossing,” said Bree Arnett, the 

CPUC Section 130 Coordinator and 

a diagnostic review team leader 

for CPUC. “So many times I’ve 

made observations and identifed 

safety hazards based on observed 

behavior,” she noted.

Summary of Findings and Follow Up. At end of the review, the Field Diagnostic Team develops 

a summary of their fndings, including any suggested safety options or improvements. Once all the 

diagnostic reviews for the year are completed, CPUC selects the highest ranking crossings for treatment 

based on the funding anticipated to be available. CPUC then develops individual project packages for 

Caltrans, including a scope of work, conceptual plans, project development report, project timeline, and 

a cost estimate. The project packages, along with a fnal priority list, are then submitted to Caltrans for 

programming, environmental clearance, right-of-way certifcation and, ultimately, funding. 

CPUC Section 130 Coordinator Bree Arnett believes the California diagnostic review process is a success 

because CPUC and Caltrans have been able to install treatments at locations selected for improvement 

based on data analysis. As a result, California applied robust safety improvements that address a 

rail-highway crossing from a holistic safety perspective, eliminating lingering safety issues that 

would require additional reviews year after year. 

1

 FHWA, “Road Safety Audits” web page. Available at: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/ 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov FHWA-SA-18-071