[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ROLE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN RAIL ACCIDENTS
=======================================================================
(110-18)
FIELD HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 16, 2007 (San Antonio, TX)
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
34-789 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia JOHN L. MICA, Florida
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon DON YOUNG, Alaska
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
Columbia JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
JERROLD NADLER, New York WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
CORRINE BROWN, Florida VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
BOB FILNER, California STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana
GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey
JUANITA MILLENDER-McDONALD, JERRY MORAN, Kansas
California GARY G. MILLER, California
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa Carolina
TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
RICK LARSEN, Washington SAM GRAVES, Missouri
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
JULIA CARSON, Indiana JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine Virginia
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California TED POE, Texas
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington
DORIS O. MATSUI, California CONNIE MACK, Florida
NICK LAMPSON, Texas JOHN R. `RANDY' KUHL, Jr., New
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio York
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, Jr.,
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania Louisiana
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio
HEATH SHULER, North Carolina CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOHN J. HALL, New York
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
JERRY McNERNEY, California
(ii)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
CORRINE BROWN, Florida, Chairwoman
JERROLD NADLER, New York BILL SHUSTER, Pennylvania
LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin
JULIA CARSON, Indiana WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio
NICK LAMPSON, Texas JERRY MORAN, Kansas
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio GARY G. MILLER, California
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota Carolina
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois SAM GRAVES, Missouri
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine LYNN A. WESTMORELND, Georgia
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois JOHN L. MICA, Florida
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota (ex officio)
(ex officio)
(iii)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vi
TESTIMONY
Berriozabal, Maria, Former San Antonio City Council Member....... 25
Chipkevich, Bob, Director of the Office of Railroads, Pipelines,
and Hazardous Materials Investigations, National Transportation
Safety Board................................................... 3
Cothen, Jr., Grady C., Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety,
Standards, and Program Development, Federal Rail Administration 3
Fritz, Lance, Vice President-Southern Region, Union Pacific
Railroad....................................................... 25
Hardberger, Phil, Mayor of the City of San Antonio, Texas........ 17
Velasquez, Ralph, Community Advocate Injured at the Macdona
Accident....................................................... 25
Villarreal, Michael, State Representative........................ 25
Wolff, Nelson, Bexar County Judge................................ 17
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Brown, Hon. Corrine, of Florida.................................. 57
Gonzales, Hon. Charles A., of Texas.............................. 61
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES
Berriozabal, Maria Antonietta.................................... 70
Chipkevich, Bob.................................................. 73
Cothen, Jr., Grady C............................................. 83
Fritz, Lance..................................................... 103
Hardberger, Phil................................................. 107
Vegasquez, Ralph................................................. 110
Villarreal, Michael.............................................. 117
Wolff, Nelson W.................................................. 120
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
THE ROLE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN RAIL ACCIDENTS
----------
Friday, March 16, 2007
House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous
Materials
San Antonio, TX.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
City of San Antonio City Council Chamber, Municipal Plaza
Building, 103 South Main Avenue, San Antonio, Texas, Corrine
Brown, [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Ms. Brown. Will the subcommittee please come to order. Good
morning. I'm Congresswoman Corrine Brown, and will the
Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
Field Hearing on the Role of Human Factors in Rail Accidents,
March 16, 2007, officially come to order.
I want to say good morning, and I want to welcome our
distinguished panelists and guests in today's hearing on the
Role of Human Factors in Rail Accidents. I want to thank
Congressman Gonzalez for inviting us, and for hosting us in
this great city. Thank you.
Congressman Gonzalez testified at one of a series of safety
hearings that the subcommittee held this Congress. He made it
clear that the people in San Antonio was extremely concerned
about the large number of train accidents that have occurred in
their community, and want to work with the Federal Railroad
Administration and the National Transportation Board, and the
railroads to provide solutions to the problems.
Our subcommittee has held several hearings on safety and
fatigue in the rail industry, and is in the process of
developing legislation that will address training, fatigue, and
other human factors, which constantly rank as one of the top
two causes of all rail accidents each year, and accounts for
approximately 40 percent of all rail accidents annually.
Congress last passed legislation to re-authorize the FRA in
1994. That authorization expired in 1998. Since that time, the
railroad industry have changed, economic growth, and an
increase in international trade have led to record traffic
levels. Unfortunately, that has put a lot of pressure on our
rail system, and had a significant impact on work and public
safety.
According to the FRA, there were 2,835 train accidents in
2006, which resulted in six fatalities, and 172 injuries.
Twelve percent of those accidents, or 342 train accidents,
occurred in Texas, the highest number of train accidents among
all of the states. But I believe that working together with all
the stakeholders, the federal government, the state, the
railroad, the workers, and the local communities, we can
improve safety and security in the rail industry.
Again, I want to thank the Congressman from this area, and
the City of San Antonio for hosting this important hearing on
rail safety. I'm looking forward to everyone's testimony today.
Before I yield to Mr. Gonazalez for an opening statement, I
ask unanimous consent for Mr. Gonzalez, and any other Member of
the House, who wish to participate in today's hearing to sit
and ask questions of the witness. Without objection. So
ordered. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman, and
it's an honor to welcome you here to San Antonio. I know that I
speak for all the elected officials and the citizens in San
Antonio, that you found that this was something that was
meritorious, that brings the subcommittee that you chair to our
wonderful city, to address a problem that obviously has come to
the very forefront in the past few years.
I would like to request permission at this time to submit
my full written statement into the record.
Ms. Brown. Without objection.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, and I really would like
just to move on with some of the testimony. I know that our
colleague and dear friend, Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, who also
represents part of San Antonio, and shares to the same degree
that I do, the concern regarding rail safety, not just in San
Antonio, but throughout the United States, so I welcome you,
and I join you in this endeavor in seeking answers and remedies
to those problems that we have, that have resulted in these
accidents, not, again, just in San Antonio, but with some
frequency in San Antonio, but the rest of the nation. And I
yield back.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, and Congressman Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Chairwoman Brown, let me, first of all,
thank you for coming to San Antonio, and I hope you have an
opportunity to stay here a few days. I want to also thank you
for, not only your leadership as Chairman of this committee,
but I also want to thank you for your leadership, because I
know that you are also on the Veterans Committee, and you
played a very significant role there in terms of the struggles
that we've had in terms of funding the VA. So I want to
personally thank you, and the relationship that I had with you
when we both sat together in that committee.
I, also, just want to indicate to you that I sit on the
Appropriations Committee and the Subcommittee on
Transportation. And we've had, also, some hearings on rail, and
there's no doubt that there's a need for us to re-examine, and
see how we can participate, and how we can help in the process
of preventing the multitude of accidents. And I think you've
outlined a good 2,600 throughout the country, and the fact that
there's a disproportional number here in this state. So, once
again, I do want to thank you.
And I, also, just want to indicate to you that my District
runs for 700 miles through the border to El Paso. I have a
meeting in approximately an hour and a half in Uvalde, so I'm
going to be leaving, but I do want you to spend your money
here. Okay? Thank you.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. Now, before we begin, several of the
people in the audience have asked that they have an opportunity
after the hearing to make testimonies or comments. And I am
amenable after the witnesses that we have invited, if the staff
would have them to sign-up, but we're going to keep with the
rules of the House, and those rules are one minute. So you will
get one minute, an opportunity to make your presentation, if
you have some presentations or comments, and then you can
follow-up with written comments.
Okay. Without objections.
Who is the staff person who's going to get those names?
Okay. Thank you.
We are pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses
this morning. Before I introduce them, I ask unanimous consent
to allow 14 days for all members to revise and extend their
remarks, and to permit the Subcommittee for additional
statements and materials by members and witnesses.
Without objection. So ordered.
I want to welcome Mr. Cothen, who is the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Safety, Standards, and Program Development
for the Federal Railroad Administration. He has brought with
him some experts from the FRA to help answer questions.
Welcome.
Next, we have Mr. Chipkevich, who is the Director of Office
of Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials Investigations
at the National Transportation Safety Board.
Let me remind the witnesses, they are under committee
rules. They must limit their oral statements to five minutes,
but the entire statement will appear in the record. I recognize
Mr. Cothen.
TESTIMONY OF GRADY C. COTHEN, JR., DEPUTY ASSOCIATE
ADMINISTRATOR FOR SAFETY, STANDARDS, AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT,
FEDERAL RAIL ADMINISTRATION; AND BOB CHIPKEVICH, DIRECTOR OF
THE OFFICE OF RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
INVESTIGATIONS, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
Mr. Cothen. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and Congressman
Gonzales, also Congressman Rodriguez.
On behalf of Secretary Peters and Administrator Boardman,
let me express the appreciation of the Department of
Transportation for your invitation to participate in this Rail
Subcommittee Field Hearing.
Our thanks, as well, for your role in the introduction by
request to the Department's Rail Safety Re-authorization Bill,
H.R. 1516.
With me today are Bonnie Murphy, our Regional Administrator
for Region 5, headquartered in Fort Worth, and Robert
Castiglione, our Deputy Regional Administrator, and, by the
way, proud son of San Antonio. They can help me answer any
questions that you may have this morning.
At the outset, let me note that despite the difficult
experience that San Antonio, Bexar County, and nearby
communities have had over the past several years, there is
positive news that should bode well for the future, wherever we
live. Specifically, based on preliminary numbers for 2006, last
year's train accident rate for the nation was at an all-time
low. The total of train accidents was also down from 2005,
nationally, and as you have noted, for the State of Texas, but
we can do better.
The theme of this hearing is Human Factors. As the
Secretary's National Rail Safety Action Plan emphasizes, over
the past few years, human factors have been responsible for
more train accidents than any other major category. And human
factors also play a predominant role in employee casualties,
and on-the-job incidents. So what are we doing?
Very quickly, to summarize just the items that I can fit
in. First, to ensure that rules are clear, and that everyone is
accountable for compliance. FRA issued last fall a notice of
proposed rule making on Railroad Operating Rules. This proposal
would address three major areas of Operating Rules compliance,
which are responsible together for one-half of all human factor
train accidents, including handling of switches. It will also
ensure that managers and supervisors are actively conducting,
and that they're learning from their Programs of Operational
Testing, that evaluate rules compliance on the ground, and in
the cabs, where the work is done.
We're currently seeking resolution of comments to the
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, will issue a final rule
later this year.
Second, we're maintaining a clear focus on training. This
has always been an FRA emphasis, but just last week, we
concluded a series of meetings with Labor and Management
regarding the Railroad's training programs for remote control
operators. The agreements we reached last week will result in a
thorough review of the Railroad's programs, to ensure that
standards for practice and proficiency are sufficient, and that
they're applied in the field.
Third, we're working to build a positive safety culture in
the railroad industry. Together with Labor and major railroads,
FRA has launched the confidential Close Call Reporting Program,
with an initial pilot in North Platt, Nebraska. And we're
working with three additional railroads to get pilots in place.
DOT's Rail Safety Re-authorization Bill proposes to build
on this concept with a broader risk reduction program that
would seek to identify areas of hazards before accidents occur,
and encourage railroads to address them rapidly.
Fourth, FRA's moving beyond its pioneering efforts in
control of alcohol and drugs of abuse to a broader concern for
overall fitness to perform the duties of safety critical jobs.
The Railroad Safety Advisory Committee has established a
Working Group on Medical Standards for Safety Critical Railroad
Employees, and that group is off to a strong start. But to be
rested, we must have the opportunity to rest. Our Rail Safety
Re-authorization Bill asks for regulatory authority over hours
of service. After 100 years of checking some of the worst
abuses, the Hours of Service Act needs to give way to science-
based fatigue management.
We have the tools we need to implement that authority,
Madam Chairwoman, including a fatigue model newly validated
with the help of Railroads and Labor, but we need to ensure
that knowledge is applied. This is not an issue exclusively for
collective bargaining, because communities are threatened by
the accidents that can occur.
Finally, we're promoting the use of technology to re-
engineer job requirements, and provide a safety net when humans
err. Positive Train Control is a reality on high-speed
passenger lines in the United States, but the road to
affordable PTC from general freight system has been a very long
one.
In December of 2006, FRA approved the Product Safety Plan
for the first freight railroad PTC system under a performance-
regulation that we issued in March of 2005. The BNSF Electronic
Train Management System is now approved for revenue service in
its initial configuration, and the three other major freight
railroads are working on their own versions.
Working with FRA, BNSF has also taken a leadership role
developing the Switch Position Monitoring System for non-signal
territory. Just this week, FRA placed into clearance a proposed
rule to facilitate introduction of electronically controlled
pneumatic brakes. ECP brakes will make the locomotive
engineer's job much more reasonable by eliminating the risk of
inadvertently depleting the train air line, which is used to
command brake applications, and by giving the engineer a better
tool for train handling. The nation will benefit by reducing
fossil fuel use, and diesel emissions.
Let me close with a local focus, because in the end, Madam
Chairwoman, that's where we all live, including FRA and
participating state safety personnel, who endeavor to address
these issues every working day.
Beginning with the fatality in Remote Control Service in
late 2003, San Antonio, Bexar County, and surrounding
communities experienced an usual number of severe events that
brought us to this place and time. If there's any organizing
principle that might be assigned to these events, particularly
in 2004, it was that supervisors and workers were stressed by
heavy workloads, and long hours. And the railroad could not
adjust fast enough to change circumstances.
As Acting Associate Administrator for Safety, I personally
responded to the Crystal Cold Storage Facility in November of
2004, where a fatality to a contractor in that private business
had just occurred.
Bonnie Murphy and I then conducted a very short, intensive
negotiation with the Union Pacific with an agreement to address
oversight of Operating Rules Compliance on the San Antonio
service unit. We used similar agreements to handle similar
issues on two other services units in the region.
The lessons we learned in that process have flowed into the
proposed rule that I've already described, so that we reduce
the possibility of ever going down that road again.
A great deal more has happened in San Antonio over the past
several years. UP added staff and facilities, a local fatigue
study funded by FRA heightened awareness among people here in
San Antonio. Presently, UP and its employees in the San Antonio
service unit are engaged in an innovative peer-to-peer
observation program funded by FRA, and UP has already decided
to extend it two other terminals. But we know more work needs
to be done.
The most recent accident of concern in this area occurred
in October of 2006, and resulted in damage to two local
residences. Our investigation showed that it was caused by
excessive dynamic braking, that resulted from the failure to
set up the locomotives properly, in accordance with UP's
special instructions, and failure to provide locomotive crews
with information concerning the number of axles a dynamic
breaking in effect, something we require by regulation.
We're processing enforcement actions, and the railroad has
taken a number of steps to prevent a reoccurrence. In November,
FRA inspectors and UP managers conducted the first of a series
of joint operating testing audits in UP's southern region, and
they started right here in San Antonio. That effort is going to
continue at least through September.
Sometimes lost in the story is the number of times that
railroads and their employees get it right. And the broad range
of initiatives that we're undertaking together to drive down
risk associated with rail transportation, we do believe that
with continued effort, we'll see additional reduction in
accidents, injuries, and we're confident that progress will be
evident here and across the nation.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Mr. Chipkevich. Good morning, Chairwoman Brown, and Members
of Congress. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on
Human Factors in Rail Accidents.
Since 2001, the Safety Board has investigated 29 railroad
accidents involving train collisions, and over-speed
derailments. Most occurred after train crews failed to comply
with train control signals, failed to follow Operating Rules in
non-signaled or dark territories, or failed to comply with
other specific Operating Rules, such as returning track
switches to normal positions after completing their work.
Our accident investigations have identified human
performance failures related to fatigue, medical conditions,
such as sleep apnea, and the use of cell phones. We've
repeatedly concluded that technological solutions, such as
Positive Train Control systems, have great potential to reduce
the number of serious train accidents by providing safety
redundant systems to protect against human performance
failures. The objective of Positive Train Control is to prevent
trail collisions and over-speed accidents by requiring
automatic control systems to override mistakes by human
operators.
We are pleased that today several railroads are moving to
develop Positive Train Control systems, and although we are
encouraged with progress underway by some railroads, we note
that Positive Train Control systems are needed across the
entire country.
FRA certification requirements for locomotive engineers
focus on specific vision and hearing acuity standards, but do
not provide guidance regarding medical conditions that should
be considered in the course of an examination. We've
recommended that the FRA develop a standard medical examination
form that includes questions regarding sleep problems, and
require that the form be used to determine the medical fitness
of locomotive engineers, and other employees in safety-
sensitive positions.
In 2002, two trains collided head-on near Clarendon, Texas.
The engineer of one train had used his cell phone for two
personal calls the morning of the accident, one for 23 minutes,
and the second call for 10 minutes. He was on the second call
as he passed the location at which he should have stopped and
waited for the arrival of another train. The Safety Board does
not share the FRA's confidence that the railroad industry has
taken sufficient steps to prevent the use of cell phones for
personal matters, when crew members should be attending to the
operation of the train, and has recommended that the FRA
promulgate appropriate regulations.
Dark territory presents a unique problem for rail safety.
In dark territory, there are no signals to warn trains as they
approach each other, and the avoidance of collisions relies
solely on dispatchers and train crews adhering to Operating
Procedures.
The Board has recommended that the FRA prohibit the use of
after-arrival track warrants for train movements in dark
territory not equipped with Positive Train Control System.
In early 2005, a train encountered an improperly positioned
switch in Graniteville, South Carolina. It went from the main
line onto an industry track, where it struck a parked train
head-on. The track was in dark territory, and nine people died
from chlorine gas inhalation.
Later that year, a train entered a siding in Shepherd,
Texas, and struck a parked train head-on, killing a crew
member. Again, the track was in dark territory. And, again, the
previous crew failed to return the main track switch to the
normal position after they had secured their train on the
siding.
Measures beyond additional Operating Rules, forms, or
penalties are needed. The Safety Board has recommended that
railroads install an automatically activated device that would
compelling capture the attention of employees involved in
switch operations, and clearly convey the status of the switch.
In dark territory, and in the absence of switch position
indicator lights or other automated systems, trains should be
operated at speeds that will allow them to be safely stopped in
advance of misaligned switches.
Finally, because of the time that it will take to design
and construct improved tank cars, the Safety Board believes
that the most expedient and effective means to reduce public
risk from highly poisonous gases in train accidents is for
railroads to implement operational measures that will minimize
the vulnerability of tank cars transporting these products.
Madam Chairman, this completes my statement. I'll be happy
to answer any questions.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. I guess I want to go right to one of
the questions pertaining to the cell phones. Why hasn't the FRA
adopted federal regulations that prohibit a locomotive engineer
from using a cell phone while at the control of a moving train?
Mr. Cothen. Madam Chairwoman, we have discussed this issue
in some depth at the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, at the
Full Committee, and with the Board. This is one of those things
that I think we can all agree on, in principle. If we could get
some of our friends out on the streets in Washington, D.C., and
in San Antonio not to use their cell phones while they're
driving, we'd all be a lot safer. And the same things goes for
a locomotive cab.
One of the issues we have from a FRA standpoint is how do
you enforce? And, as a practical matter, because train and
engine crews are self-supervising, it's very difficult to
enforce that kind of requirement from a federal standpoint,
except after-the-fact. And by then, needless to say, it's too
late.
However, we're not through in terms of working this issue
with the Board. Our Railroad Safety Advisory Committee,
Railroad Operating Rules Working Group, when it gets through
with the rule that I talked to you about, is going on to Board
recommendations on after-arrival orders, and cell phones. We're
going to talk about some other issues that we've got live with
that group, as well. And we commit to the committee that we're
going to look at it thoroughly, and do what's required.
Ms. Brown.Would you like to respond to that?
Mr. Chipkevich. Thank you. Nothing specific, other than we
do believe that there are means that can be found to enforce
that requirement. And, certainly, as we've seen in that
particular accident, it is a distraction to crews. It may
inhibit one crew member from talking to another crew member,
and not wanting to bring something up because they're on the
phone, and interrupting, and we think it's an important issue.
Ms. Brown. My understanding is that mic in the center is
also working at this time, so you can use the mic at the
podium, or the hand mic. Okay.
The FRA has told the NTSB that developing guidelines for
local skill development, and that contribute to good situation
awareness, is worthy of consideration. But says that it did not
currently have funds available, and it will try to identify
resources to undertake this work. Have you done that, and why
don't you ask for the funding in your re-authorization
proposal?
Mr. Cothen. Madam Chairwoman, that comes out of Research
and Development budget. My understanding, that the funds are
currently obligated. We do believe it's an important task. FRA
has a simulator in Cambridge at the Volpe National
Transportation System Center, provides a platform for doing
this kind of program development, and we're going forward.
Ms. Brown. Would you stay there. Just, in reviewing the
2006 safety figures, it seemed that the accidents caused by
track defect supplants accidents caused by human factors. Why
did this occur, and what is the FRA doing to prevent accidents
caused by track defects?
Mr. Cothen. It's absolutely correct. In 2006, we actually
saw a reversal, as a result of the numbers going down in the
Human Factors category, and the track category is the
predominant category, again.
The Federal Railroad Administration has ordered a second,
and a third track geometry vehicle. We've got delivery of that
second vehicle, and the third is on its way, so that we can do
track geometry evaluation across the core of the National Rail
System on a more current basis. And, thereby, quality control
the efforts of the railroads, themselves. We're also, as
always, working energetically on enforcement of the Track
Safety Standards.
This year, the Congress gave us, and we thank you, nine new
positions for Rail Integrity Specialists under the President's
budget request, and we're working now to fill those positions.
And what we'll do there is to build a more effective program to
deal with broken rail derailments. That's the category of main
line track-caused accidents that's going to be our biggest
issue in the coming years. So we know we've got to get more
traction there, and thank you for giving us the resources to do
it.
Ms. Brown. Okay. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My first
question would be to, is it Cothen? How do you pronounce the
last name?
Mr. Cothen. It's Cothen, just a short O.
Mr. Gonzalez. Cothen. Mr. Cothen, of course, I was
introduced to the whole regulatory scheme on railroads as a
result of the accidents that have transpired in the past few
years.
One thing that I want to point out, is we do have a
relatively new administrator. The individual we worked with in
the past, when we had the more serious accidents, as opposed to
the administrator we have today, and that is Mr. Boardman. Is
that correct?
Mr. Cothen. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez. And how long has Mr. Boardman been the
administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration?
Mr. Cothen. He joined us in the summer of 2005.
Mr. Gonzalez. And I do want to say, and acknowledge from
the outset, that he has been much more responsive, timely, and
substantively, also, to some of our inquiries and requests.
I've reviewed some materials that have been provided by the
committee for background in my previous testimony in
Washington, and it's something that I always sensed was
occurring when it came to the FRA in my previous experiences.
And I'm not indicating that Mr. Boardman shares some of that
particular history, but what I believe has been, basically, a
culture within the FRA and the relationship with the railroads
that I think did impact its ability to regulate in a manner
that promoted safety. And this is what I'm going to allude to
at this time. And I'm going to read from the information that
was provided me some time ago.
``Central to the success of the Federal Rail Safety Program
is the ability to understand the nature of rail-related
accidents, and to analyze trends in railroad safety. To do
this, the FRA relies heavily on information that is reported by
the railroads following accidents and incidents.''
I always felt that there was an over-dependency as far as
the fact-finding duties performed by FRA, based on information
provided by the railroads. That's been a concern, and I will
ask you a question on that in a minute.
Further, railroad accident reports, ``The FRA does not
routinely review locomotive event recorder data, police
reports, and other sources of information to determine the
causes of the collisions, or the need for further
investigation.''
So my question goes to, do we still have that reliance base
when you investigate, or decide to investigate accidents, based
almost totally on information that is provided you by the
railroads?
Mr. Cothen. I don't think so, Congressman. We get a lot of
help from our friends. Mr. Chipkevich and his colleagues at the
National Transportation Safety Board provide an objective
perspective on major accidents, as they occur.
People on our staff, like the colleagues that I've
introduced to you today, bring to us a railroad background. Try
to sell them a line of goods, and you're going to find yourself
coming up short real quick, because they know how things
operate out on the railroad.
FRA does its own accident investigations. We do over 100
assigned investigations a year for major events, and the
regions, themselves, elect to do additional investigations, at
greater or lesser depth, as required by the circumstances.
And, finally, we've got rail labor representatives in the
hall today, and they're not at all reluctant to pick up the
phone and call us. They have my cell phone number, Joe Strang,
who is our Associate Administrator, cell phone number. And if
something is transpiring out on the property that's seriously
amiss, we find out about it pretty quick.
Now, having said that, we're about 500 people in the field,
about 400 inspectors with territories, and this is a national
rail system that employs 235,000 people, operates over about
150,000 route miles. And we've got over 200,000 grade
crossings, and it generates an awful lot of work. So we try to
stay on top of it, and I think we do.
You asked the question about grade crossing collisions, and
there's been a lot of public interest in that. And we work
carefully with our office of Inspector General. They have
actually been doing audits of our grade crossing program now
continuously, in terms of having an open audit, I think it's
correct to say for over four years. The reports that they
produce are worth reading. They're now finalizing a report,
again, on accident reporting in this area. And what we've been
able, I think, to demonstrate to them as a result of audits we
have done of the railroad's own accident reporting systems; we
go on the property, and we check the police records, and we
check the Op Center records, and we compare that with what we
got in, and so forth, is that, substantially, we're getting the
reports.
Now having said that, having said that, it is always the
case that any database is going to have imperfections in it.
And when we sit down with the Railroad Safety Advisory
Committee, for instance, with a batch of train accidents, go
over them and say what does this mean in terms of what we
should do for rule making, you're going to have somebody from
the same railroad that did the report saying that's not right.
There's a detail wrong here, and we need to fix that, because
it's a massive effort, gathering up that kind of data. So I
don't want to mislead you on either side. I don't want to tell
you we know everything that's happening everywhere, all the
time, because that's physically impossible. But I think we
have, overall, a good handle on what's transpiring in the
railroad industry.
Mr. Gonzalez. And there's going to be another Inspector
General report coming out regarding investigative practices by
the FRA.
Mr. Cothen. Yes, there is. We've been talking to them about
recommendations, and the last we saw of their draft
recommendations, they look pretty good.
Mr. Gonzalez. And the reason, again - and this information,
again, is based on previous reports by the IG. ``The Inspector
General also found that the FRA investigated few accidents. It
investigates two-tenths of 1 percent of all accidents and
incidents involving railroads, and recommended few findings of
violations for critical safety defects identified through those
inspections.'' So I'm going--the jury is out on this new
report, and I'll wait to read that, with the assistance of the
Chairwoman here.
One last thing is just an observation. If you've identified
cell phone use as the culprit in some of these accidents, and
you're saying enforcement would be difficult, have you
already--it wasn't clear to me, have you already established a
rule, recommended a rule, promulgated a rule that simply says
no cell phone use, period? I mean, we have laws in different
states and cities that prohibit the use of cell phones while
you're driving. I mean, it's an absolute prohibition. How it's
enforced is one thing, but I assure you that it definitely has
some affect on the use of cell phones by drivers of
automobiles.
Mr. Cothen. And I understand what you're saying. What we've
done is we've ascertained that the railroads, themselves, have
established appropriate limitations on use of cell phones. And,
you know, railroad employees are very often issued company cell
phones, because railroad radio channels are so congested. You
need to have multiple means of communication, in order to talk
to the dispatcher, the trouble desk, whatever the issue may be.
So the cell phones are going to be in the cab, and nobody is
going to be inspecting people's grip to see if the personal
cell phone is in there. But I understand exactly what you're
saying about the notion of the moral as suasion attached to an
official prohibition. And that's precisely what we've got to
look at, and make a decision on.
Mr. Gonzalez. You know, my suggestion is you simply get
tied up, and there's no tolerance, and no understanding or
accommodation. I think it just has to be an absolute. I think
you're going to see some results. And, again, I just want the
FRA to be more aggressive in its recommendations and rule
making. But I do thank you for your participation here, and I
look forward to working with you in the future. And I really
appreciate your indulgence. Obviously, we've had these
questions going for some time here in this area, and I would
direct the questions to the second witness, and that is, is it
Chipkevich?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez. Pretty close. Right?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez. For the benefit of the audience, your
relationship to the FRA, National Transportation Safety Board.
We read about you all the time when there are accidents
regarding airliners, and such, but what is your relationship?
What service do you provide in a couple of sentences, so
everybody understands.
Mr. Chipkevich. NTSB is an independent agency, not
associated with the FRA or the Department of Transportation, at
all. And we report directly to the U.S. Congress, and do
independent accident investigations. We don't regulate the
industry, so we look at what are factors that caused an
accident, and what are factors that need to--or solutions that
need to be made to prevent future accidents.
Mr. Gonzalez. Regarding recommendations, and I've always
been very impressed by your staff, by the way, when we've had
our inquiries and our discussions. There are many people in San
Antonio, to be frank with you, were pretty disappointed with
the findings regarding the Macdona accident, in which we had
some residents die as a result of the chlorine spill and cloud,
as well as the conductor on that train, because you found that
it was human error, and such. And many others really thought it
was something to do with infrastructure, signals, and so on.
Nevertheless, we live with that, and that's what this hearing
about. Obviously, we've traced many of the causes of the
accidents to fatigue and human factors.
You have pointed out Positive Train Control. That's
something that you all have been advocating for some time. In
your opinion, based on what you know, and the recommendations
that you had made in the past to the Federal Railroad
Administration, have your recommendations been adopted?
Mr. Chipkevich. With regard to Positive Train Control,
that's been on the NTSB's Most Wanted list of safety
improvements for 17 years, and so it has been many years before
there was any significant progress in this area. We're finally
seeing progress in this area, but not by all the railroads.
Second, with regard to the acceptance of safety
recommendations; overall, the acceptance rate across the
nation, across all modes, is about 82 percent for the modal
administrations. The FRA, overall, has been about 76 percent in
the past, but in the recent last 10 years, is also at about 82
percent acceptance rate, so it is comparable in the last 10-
year period to the other modal administrations.
Mr. Gonzalez. We're talking about technology that will
assist us addressing the problems with human error. It will
override human error. And a lot of the technology that is
utilized today in the cars that we all drive home today, is
something that is not in the railroad industry.
Mr. Chipkevich. Correct. We believe--we've got many
accidents, as I noted today, 29 accidents that we looked at
just since 2001, where we investigated collisions and over-
speed accidents, where we believe that Positive Train Control
would have done just what you said. It would have been a safety
redundant system to stop the train prior to the accident.
Mr. Gonzalez. I think both of the witnesses--one point of
clarification, because my staff wanted to make sure. And I
fully understand the cell phone use is essential for
communication relating to work conditions, and instructions,
and such. We're talking about cell phone use that's entirely
different, that you alluded to by an engineer or conductor.
That was personal use, and it's obvious, again, how that plays
into the accidents.
But with that, Madam Chair, thank you very much. I yield
back.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. Would you explain for all of us what
do you mean by ``Positive Train Control?'' Because I have this
car, and we jokingly say that I got my driver's license from
Sears a long time ago. But if I back up into a wall, or into
another car, it starts making a noise, and so that's, I guess,
Positive Control. Is this--can you kind of explain to us, as
far as the industry, what does that mean?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Brown. Because you mentioned that this has been on your
top list for the past 17 years.
Mr. Chipkevich. That's correct. Positive Train Control
System is a system that, basically, a computer-integrated
system with the train. As the train is proceeding down the
track, there are signals which the engineer needs to comply
with. And there'll be an advance signal, or a stop signal,
which will tell him how to operate the train. If the engineer
fails to comply with the signal, for example, to slow a train
from 50 miles an hour, to 30 miles an hour, be prepared to
stop.
The computer system will identify the failure to act and
slow the train to the appropriate speed; and, therefore,
automatically apply the brakes. And it will also sense ahead
for a red or a stop signal, how far the distance is, compute
the stopping distance, and then actually apply the brakes, if
the crew has not slowed the train to a specific speed.
Additionally, just for operating, if a crew member is
operating above a specific speed, and exceeds a certain
threshold, then the train will apply the brakes, and bring that
train back down to the appropriate speed.
Finally, I've been on a train being tested with a switch
being left in the open position in dark territory, where that's
incorporated into the system. And if a train approaches that,
the brakes will automatically apply again and stop the train.
Ms. Brown. I guess my question, or follow-up to that is
that you indicated that some trains was adhering to this, and
some was not. Can we get a list of the trains that are using
this technology, and those that need to be dragged into the
21st century? Yes, sir? We can get that. Yes.
Mr. Cothen, why hasn't the FRA adopted federal regulations
that prohibit a local engineer--well, we just talked about the
cell phones. Okay. I think we've answered that one. What was
his other question?
You mentioned drugs and alcohol regulations. Are all
railroad workers subject to drug and alcohol regulations? If
not, why, and why are they not covered?
Mr. Cothen. Madam Chairwoman, we focused our attention on
safety critical employees, pretty much as defined by statute
under the Hours of Service Act, so these are folks who are
operating trains, issuing authorities from a dispatching
center, working on signal systems. And we found, over time,
that that seems to be a good area of emphasis. However, we have
also collected specimens from deceased employees who were
involved in other events, and we have seen prevalence of drug
use and other crafts.
Ms. Brown. Did you want to answer that question I asked
about the tracks in more extensive, the Positive Train? You
said you're going to get us a list.
Mr. Cothen. Madam Chairwoman, we can certainly do that. And
I think Mr. Chipkevich did a very good job of explaining. The
railroads generally describe it as being an electronic system
that consists of a locomotive segment, a wayside segment, and
an office segment. And they're all linked together, and when it
works right, and it takes a good deal of effort to make it work
right, the trains run on time, and they run safely. And a
mistake that the engineer makes, or that the conductor makes,
does not result in an unfortunate mishap. So it's a very
powerful technology. It can protect roadway workers within
their authorities. It can keep trains from going over speed,
and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe has got a production
version of it for their Configuration One territories, which
are territories that are dark single track, or dark traffic
control. And I just got another email this week on
Configuration Two, so I think we're seeing very substantial
movement.
Ms. Brown. In reviewing the material for this hearing, I
guess I was a little distressed about the number of accidents
that was caused by defective tracks. What are we doing as an
industry to correct that, because many of the accidents, many
of the loss of life, seem like could have been prevented if we
had put in the technology that we're talking about, or if the
tracks was inspected, or just minor things that could be very
disruptive to a community, or to the safety of the engineers,
or the people that's working for us.
Mr. Cothen. Madam Chairwoman, a great deal is being done.
Frequent inspections are required, visual inspections, by the
Federal Railroad Administration twice a week on most tonnage
territories. We also require use of internal rail flaw
detection technology, and railroads actually exceed our
requirements on a regular basis in terms of checking the inside
of the rail, using inductive or ultrasonic techniques. This is
not destructive testing. And their car or rolling equipment
mounted devices that check as they go along the track.
We come back around with our automated track inspection
vehicles, and we check for property track geometry. Our
inspectors go out on the ground with railroad personnel, and we
check. And I would say that, in general, we've got a big
challenge here.
The challenge is very heavy tonnage. And once you get
something right, here comes another train, and it's pounding,
and there are issues. And the next thing you know, you've got a
problem, so it's a constant challenge. The railroads are trying
to manage it, and we're trying to watch them as closely as we
can.
One thing I think you know we need to get to an extent that
we haven't over the past few years, again, is rail integrity,
and that's our next area of focus at FRA.
Ms. Brown. Cars lining up, there is some discussion about
hazardous material. Do you want to respond to that?
Mr. Cothen. The status of hazardous materials tank car
work, Madam Chairwoman?
Ms. Brown. Yes.
Mr. Cothen. We have a very active team at the Volpe
National Transportation System Center that is evaluating
derailment forces, under what conditions will a car breach?
They're developing a model for a new approach to tank car
safety. We have a cooperative relationship with Union Tank Car
Dow Chemical, and Union Pacific Railroad to put together a
package of proposals, engineering work and proposals, and our
objective is to get that out this year.
Technically speaking, and I've worked on tank car issues
now since the 1970s, it is a very challenging area, because the
potential forces in these accidents are very high, but we're
aggressively looking at it. We have also put out for comment a
suggestion which plays off of some of the suggestions that the
National Transportation Safety Board has made in its
recommendations out of Graniteville, that maybe for a while for
these most hazardous chemicals, and that would be chlorine and
hydrous ammonia, and other toxic inhalation hazard materials,
in dark territory maybe we need to train staff. And we have
that proposal out in December for comment in the informal
public comment process that we're doing. Our third meeting will
be coming up here in the next couple of weeks.
Ms. Brown. Okay. Mr. Chipkevich, would you answer those
same questions, please? Particularly, about the defection, as
far as the tracks is concerned.
Mr. Chipkevich. We found in accidents that it's important
for the FRA inspectors to, when they're doing track
inspections, to really compare the deficiencies that are found
to the railroad's own track maintenance program. Under
continuous loaded rail, they have a means of both installing
the track, and how they're supposed to maintain it.
We made recommendations in the past, and FRA has been
responsive on requirements that they are going to have on their
track inspectors to have copies of the programs with them while
they're doing the inspections. And then we found that a
Mississippi accident where there was a major Amtrak derailment,
to make sure that there's follow-up after the inspections to
make sure that the repairs are made to tracks.
We've also seen the need for improved ultrasound inspection
of rail, looking at the interior of the rail following an
accident. At Nodaway, Iowa, where there was an Amtrak train
that had derailed, we found that the railroad had done
ultrasound inspections, found a defect in the rail, cut out
that piece of rail, put in a replaced piece of rail, and that
replaced piece of rail had a defect in it, and failed under the
load of the train. And so we've made recommendations that the
replacement rail be ultrasound inspected before installed into
the track, so there is some area that needs to be improved.
Ms. Brown. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Just real
quick question, because I know you've been up here a long time.
In reviewing your summary of your accident report and
investigation of the June 28th, 2004 Macdona accident, in which
we had fatalities. We had at least 50 people hospitalized, some
very seriously. Conclusion 13 reads: ``The Macdona, Texas
accident is another in a long series of railroad accidents that
could have been prevented had there been a Positive Train
Control System in place at the accident location.'' And you've
touched on that. As a matter of fact, you described how it
would have slowed the train down, and so on, and then maybe it
wouldn't have clipped that other train that led to that
horrible accident.
You may these findings and conclusions, but you also make
recommendations, do you not?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez. And you make recommendations to all parties.
That's going to be FRA, the Railroad Administration, as well as
to the railroads, and so on. You made recommendations in this
particular accident, did you not?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez. And of those, have they been complied or
adopted? Is there anything you can--whether they're adopted or
not--first of all, have they been adopted, and if not, to what
extent can you do anything about that?
Mr. Chipkevich. Yes, sir. The NTSB cannot require that its
recommendations be adopted. And when they are not, and there's
not appropriate action, our means is to be able to report to
the Congress on the progress of those recommendations, in
particular, when they're made to modal administrations.
With regard to the Macdona accident, that is correct. When
the engineer missed the signal and did not slow the train, a
Positive Train Control would have slowed the train, and would
have stopped the train before it reached its stop signal.
Mr. Gonzalez. Have your recommendations been adopted?
Mr. Chipkevich. Those have not been adopted, as of yet.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much. I yield back, Madam
Chair.
Ms. Brown. Yes. I have a question. How many recommendations
did you come up with?
Mr. Chipkevich. We can provide you a list, for the record,
of all the rail recommendations that have been made. There are
currently about 45 recommendations open to the Federal Railroad
Administration.
Ms. Brown. And as of the time of this hearing, none has
been adopted?
Mr. Chipkevich. No, ma'am. Over a period of time, many have
been adopted. And the acceptance rate, over the last 10 years
where they have been completed and adopted, has been about 82
percent.
Ms. Brown. Okay. Well, thank you very much for your
testimony, both of you. And we will get you the additional
questions in writing.
Mr. Chipkevich. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. We're going to break up the panel into Panel Two
and Panel Three. And Judge Wolf and Mayor Hardberger will be on
the second panel.
Mr. Mayor, I want to tell you, I like your digs here. So
you could come up. I know this is an unusual position for you
to--
Mr. Hardberger. Well, I'm very happy to have you in that
spot, and we're very glad to have you here.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
Mr. Hardberger. Would you like me to go ahead and give a
few remarks here?
Ms. Brown. Yes, sir. I'm looking for the Judge.
Mr. Hardberger. The Judge is right here, Judge Nelson
Wolff.
Ms. Brown. Yes, Judge. Would you mind coming up?
TESTIMONY OF PHIL HARDBERGER, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO,
TEXAS; NELSON WOLFF, BEXAR COUNTY JUDGE
Mr. Hardberger. I'll take the lead, but I will tell you
that Judge Wolff and myself have been working on this together.
We've authored several letters, and made some recommendations
together, so in many ways on this issue, we speak with one
voice.
First, let me thank you, though, for being here. And,
Congressman Gonzalez, thank you so much. It's an appropriate
place for you to have these hearings, because we've had some
bad experiences, and we could have had a lot worse experiences.
And it doesn't take a whole of imagination to get from what
might have happened, to many hundreds of deaths. So it's a very
timely subject.
San Antonio's history is actually linked with our
railroads. They helped make San Antonio what it was, and the
reason that we grew as a city in the 17th, 18th century, early
19th century. Railroads were rivers of commerce that allowed
San Antonio to flourish.
Our city grew along these tracks, naturally attracted the
house and the industry along the tracks. The irony, though, is
today, those houses and those businesses are very much
threatened and present a problem for our society, as well as
the railroads.
I would say that railroads today represent our greatest
threat in terms of a catastrophic event. We have an emergency
responder team, and, of course, we are ready and trained for
things like hurricanes, or a terrorist attack. We plan for
those, but the more likely thing that will happen is a major
derailment of a train going through the middle of our city
carrying hazardous material. In my own opinion, that is several
times more likely to happen than a terrorist attack in San
Antonio.
Depending on what the train that's derailed is carrying,
chlorine, natural gas, or other chemicals, you really would not
have--it's not an exaggeration to say hundreds of people might
die, and thousands might be injured. You actually have a person
here in the audience, Ralph Velasquez, whose health is
permanently injured because of the lasting damage done to his
lungs, which has just about stopped his quality of life, and
certainly will shorten his life. So these are very real things.
October of last year, I got a call around 11 a.m. in a very
populated part of our area, it's called Five Points, houses all
up and down those tracks. And just a few feet away, not much
further than I am from you, Madam Chairwoman, 17 cars had
derailed. Some of them had gone right straight through the
houses. I'd never seen a derailment up close. It's rather
horrific. I mean, the utility poles are snapped off like
matches. The pavement itself nearby is ripped up like you'd had
a bulldozer got all of these twisted tracks, and the tie
sticking straight up in the air, instead of being horizontal. I
mean, you really can see the power that is there. The house is
no protection whatsoever for a box car. I mean, it'll go right
straight through it, and never even slow down.
Actually, nobody got hurt. They weren't carrying any
hazardous materials. It was actual paper products, and just so
happened, the people weren't in the houses at 11 a.m. They were
out and about. But boy, that is a close one, really close,
especially when you put that with our past experience with
Macdona, where four people died, and many others were injured.
That's the one Mr. Velasquez was involved in. And then, of
course, we've had another one where it went through a warehouse
and killed somebody else. These are all fairly recent
happenings. We're not having to reach real far back in our
memory for this.
Judge Wolff and I went immediately to the scene of the one
that happened in October. In fact, I think we were there within
about 30 minutes. It was still truly dust, and smoke, and
everything else was still in the air.
The cause of the derailment, Union Pacific later told us,
was excessive braking force. And I guess in common language,
they put the brakes on too hard. It ma have been the trains
weren't strung together as they should have. Certainly, though,
it was human error, and that's why you're here. But I will tell
you, what if they had been carrying bad chemicals, and somebody
had hit the brakes too hard?
I don't think it's enough that we can hope our luck holds
out. The odds would be against it, for one thing. And the
safety of our city and the seriousness of this issue require a
lot of attention from our national leaders, Union Pacific,
itself, National Transportation Safety Board, and certainly,
the local leaders here.
The truth is, most accidents, whether you're talking about
airplanes, cars, or trains, are probably, strictly speaking, a
proximate cause, if not the proximate cause, is to do with
human factors. It's a condition of life, and we have to keep
working on those. But the truth is, you will continue to have
accidents caused by humans, for one reason or another. You just
try to, as you were talking about, keep them off the phone and
other things, go slow, keep the tracks in good condition.
A derailment itself may be, of course, caused by the
condition of the roadbed, and that, too, is a human factor,
too. Deals with something hard, but somebody made a decision
not to fix the roadbed. Trains traveling too fast, same thing,
are human factors. And, actually, even allowing trains to carry
highly hazardous material through crowded areas, I submit, is a
human error. That's an error in judgment.
We, of course, as official policymakers and officials, we
can, ourselves, be guilty of a human factor and human error, if
we don't regulate the trains and the cargo properly. And we
don't take heed of the now, at least three strong warnings
we've had in a fairly short period of time. So I'm really glad
you're here, because it gives us a chance to be able to talk to
somebody that's important.
And I will say, when we call Union Pacific, they have been
absolutely courteous. They're very quick to get back to you.
They apologize sincerely, but that's really not enough. That
won't quite get it, although, I appreciate the courtesy and the
quick phone calls.
I have a few recommendations, for what they are worth. We
set some of these out, Judge Wolff and myself, in a joint
letter that we sent the National Transportation Safety Board.
We are seeking support from our current Texas legislature at
this time, and at least one of our representatives, Mike
Villarreal, is in the audience, to relocate the rail traffic
out of highly populated areas. We're asking the State of Texas
to help us on that.
We would also ask some federal help on that, as well. It's
expensive. It's going to cost about $2 billion, and it will
probably take about 10 years. Those are obstacles, big
obstacles, but the quicker we work on the big obstacles, the
more they become medium-size obstacles, and then small
obstacles. And the size of this problem must not deter us from
taking the necessary action. And it is necessary. This is not
you could do it, it's we must do it.
We would also like the City of San Antonio to ask this
committee to consider granting the local government
authorities, the city and the county, a multi-jurisdictional
rail district that would allow us to know and share manifests,
to identify hazardous cargo, and do what we can to seek
alternative routes from hazardous cargo going through heavily
populated area until we get the tracks moved.
Of course, that is the long-term goal, but the short-term
goal is we'd like to know what's coming through here, and when
it's coming through. And we don't know that. I couldn't tell
you whether hazardous material came through here last night, or
this is just about the time that the last accident happened
three months ago. For all I know, there's more coming through
right now as we're talking. And we would like to know about
that.
So we ask for your support in these requests, Chairwoman
and Congressman Gonzalez, to do so and help us with this. I'm
afraid it always does get down somewhat to money, as well as
rule making. You will make our city a safer place, and I know
that we all want to do that. I know that's why Congressman
Gonazalez was especially anxious to bring it here, which I
appreciate.
I know that you all are committed to this task, and I
appreciate your commitment, and I ask you to do your best to
translate some of that commitment in money. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. Are you going to be with us for a
minute?
Mr. Hardberger. Yes, I will. And we'll hear what County
Judge Wolff has to say.
Mr. Wolff. Well, thank you, Chairwoman Brown, for coming
here to San Antonio today, and the great support that
Congressman Gonzalez has given to this tremendous effort.
On that June 28th, 2004 accident that happened in Macdona
where people were killed, and some 50 people were injured from
60 tons of chlorine gas that escaped, I went to that accident
site. And I don't think you could see a more horrifying
element, when you see the fumes still coming out. The bulldozer
people had to stop operations because it was such a dangerous
situation. But they did react, and they did clean up.
Very shortly after that, on November the 10th, 2004, the
Crystal Cold Storage was crushed. An employee of a rental
company was inside doing business and was killed. I went to
that site, also.
The National Transportation Board did investigate these and
found human failures with that. During that period of time, I
learned that freight trains were being parked in sidings with
locomotives left running and unsecured, leaving them ready to
accessibility, anybody who wanted to board and set the train in
motion. I heard from employees who were left waiting hours for
transportation back to their terminals following expiration of
available hours of service. And employees also reported they
were being called back to work on such a frequent basis, they
could not get the proper rest.
We went to Washington. We met with the Federal Rail
Administration, we met with the National Transportation Board,
we met with Congressmen, and we talked about exactly what
they're talking about with you today, some three years later.
We talked about the need, and has been recommended for some
17 years, of Positive Train Control. Nothing has been done in
the last three years. We talked about hours of service, where
an employee can work up to 432 hours a month, four times more
than an airline pilot, twice as much as a person working in the
shipping industry, and twice as much as a truck driver. Again,
nothing has been done.
We felt, after that trip, there was too cozy a relationship
between the Federal Rail Administration and the railroad
companies. I must say, since then I think that they have
improved greatly on both sides.
After the accidents, Union Pacific changed their local
management people here. They hired more employees. They beefed
up their training and safety operations, and the Federal Rail
Administration assisted by sending more teams of inspectors to
San Antonio. But on two of the biggest issues, they continue to
talk, and they continue to do nothing, and we hope that this
hearing will give the emphasis for them to move forward on the
Positive Control, and limit the number of hours that a person
can work. And, also, handle this limbo time when crews are
waiting for transportation to their final release point, with
neither time, nor duty for time off during that period of time.
As Mayor Hardberger stated, a real major issue facing the
state, the federal government, and local entities is to get the
freight out of the major urban areas of San Antonio. Seventy
percent of the freight that comes in San Antonio is pass-
through freight, not destination. Freight is expected to double
in the next 20 years, with twice as many trains on the existing
tracks that we have today. It doesn't take much to imagine the
much greater hazard that we're going to face in the future, so
we hope you will be a partner, along with the state. They have
a fund that they're beginning to put in place, and hopefully
will pass this session, some $200 million to begin a fund to
relocate rail, but we will need federal funds in that, also.
Locally, we're getting close to finishing a rerouting
program that would pull some of the traffic around the
southeastern part of San Antonio, rather than going through.
Union Pacific has done another good. They have created a multi-
modal yard with a building outside of the urban area, which
will reduce the number of trucks and trains coming into the
inner city on the west side, so we have made headway. We think
there's a heck of a lot more to do, and we ask your assistance
in helping us make that come about.
Ms. Brown. Thank you so much, both of you. Your testimony
is very targeted, and just very crucial. And I want to thank
you.
First of all, let me just ask for copies of the letters
that you sent to Washington, and to NTSB, so we can make it an
official part of the record. And second, the subcommittee have
had several hearings on fatigue. And as we look toward re-
authorization of the Federal Rail Safety Program, Judge, what
do you think we should do to prevent fatigue, and what
specifically should we be doing to address limbo time?
Mr. Wolff. Well, first of all, on the fatigue issue, I
think a rule very much at least in line with the number of
hours per month that someone can work. Perhaps the number
dealing with shipboard personnel, and truck drivers, might be
the proper way to look at it. That would be half of what
they're allowed to work today.
And I know, I just heard the steps taken forward on
Positive Train Control. I think the faster that you can
implement that, and move that forward, would be a tremendous
help. After all, it's only been recommended for 17 years.
Hopefully, this Congress with the change that's come about,
which I might add I'm delighted about that change, and I hope
that he will be aggressive in pushing forward on this issue.
With respect to the limbo time, while they're waiting for
transportation from their release points, somehow there has to
be a better method, some planning of where they're released
from, to begin with. And if they're going to have to be
released in the middle of the countryside somewhere, then they
ought, at least, be able to get credit for time still on duty.
They ought not to be released there, to begin with. There needs
to be some flexibility to get them in closer to the
metropolitan area, and closer to where they're going to be. But
I don't know that a rule can be promulgated in that limbo time,
other than compensation. Ithink that the railroads have to work
a little better in terms of planning of where this crew will be
released.
Ms. Brown. I have a real follow-up question for you. The
railroad, including Union Pacific, have proposed limiting their
liability in train accidents involving hazardous material. They
have proposed a cap in damages at $200 million. What do you
think of this proposal?
Mr. Wolff. I hadn't heard of that one. Doesn't sound good.
If it's their fault, they ought to pay for it.
Ms. Brown. All right. All right.
Mr. Hardberger. You know, you pay for the damage that you
do. Maybe $200 million is enough, maybe it isn't. Depends on
how many people are injured and killed, and how much property
is destroyed. I don't think there should be any caps. The caps
are what the damage is, and needs to be--you need to cut the
cloth to fit the damages, not some arbitrary figure.
Ms. Brown. In the areas that occur in this area, do you
know whether or not the people that was involved, have they
been compensated for what happened to them, or is it still in
litigation?
Mr. Hardberger. I know that at least some of them have been
compensated and the suits have been settled. I don't know if
it's 100 percent, but I believe most of them have, and that the
litigation is at an end.
Ms. Brown. Let me just say one other thing, before I turn
it over to my colleague for his questions or comments. In
TEALU, we appropriated, authorized $350 million for just what
you requested, partnership, relocation of tracks, and the
President zeroed that out, or put no funding, or no
recommendations in the budget for that kind of partnership. You
may have a little bit more influence with him, since he's from
this area, and he's going to be coming back here soon.
Mr. Wolff. Well, we will encourage him. Quite frankly, I
don't think that's enough money, because we're looking to the
state for 150-200 million dollar fund.
The State of Texas, by the way, passed that. Again, another
positive sign that Union Pacific is doing the right things, is
that they have stepped up and said that they have signed an
agreement with the governor to do a joint proposal to move
these lines out of part of San Antonio, out of the Austin-San
Antonio corridor.
Ms. Brown. How much is that going to cost, total?
Mr. Wolff. That's probably going to be a billion dollars or
more, just for this. But the $200 million, maybe closer to two
billion, the $200 million leverages up to two billion in the
ability to provide for relocated lines, so I would think that
the--this is going to be a huge problem for you.
I've got to know Matt Rhodes well, who is the Chairman and
CEO of Burlington Northern, and I've got to know Jim Young very
well. And I must say, Jim Young, President of Union Pacific,
was right here on the ground, went to visit the people that
were injured, and really stepped up and did the right thing.
But bottom line is, this country is facing, somewhat, what
President Eisenhower faced with respect to highways in the
1950s. Rail is growing at about 5 percent a year. As I say, it
will double, and the rail infrastructure is not there to handle
it. The rail infrastructure is in the wrong place. And if
Congress would take a look at this, as they did at highways
some 50, 60 years ago, I guess, now, I think it's a major issue
facing all of us. And as Mayor Hardberger said, if you are
worried about a terrorist attack or something going wrong, a
train moving through the heart of a city is the most dangerous
threat that we could face, as Mayor Hardberger said, so we need
to get them out of the urban areas. And we will significantly
need your help to address this for every train that we can
reroute out, and not have them on the highways, dangers on the
highways. I think one train, 200 trucks or something like that,
so it makes sense. It's a good investment for safety, both on
the highways and on the railways.
Ms. Brown. I agree with you 100 percent. I'm excited about
the challenges that the railroad face, but before the 1950s, we
were number one in the world, and now everybody is ahead of us,
if you look at China, or you look at all these other countries.
And, basically, the communities or the country that the
infrastructure is not in place, then we're going to be left
behind, because we want to be able to move these goods and
services throughout our country. And even though $1 billion
sounds like a lot of money, we're spending, I want to say, $15
billion every, what, five weeks in Iraq?
Mr. Wolff. Yes.
Ms. Brown. Yes, so the taxpayers--
Mr. Wolff. I hope that you all will move aggressively on
this. For transportation, also economic development, as the
Chairwoman pointed out, it's economic development, as well as
safety. And it just has to be done, I think, and this Congress
hopefully will be the one to step up and allocate the resources
where they belong, and away from where they don't belong.
Ms. Brown. Thank you so much. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much. Now you know why I enjoy
serving with Chairwoman Brown. We're getting a little taste of
her personality, and very strong-held convictions, which are
quite admirable.
I guess a couple of observations. You know, we have worked
really close, and I've known the Mayor and the Judge for so
many years. And it's been frustrating on the federal level not
being able to really provide you adequate answers or the
funding.
A couple of things that could easily be addressed, though,
and I still don't understand why they're not. And, Mayor, you
had indicated, you would really like to know what hazardous
materials are coming through the city, and when. That
information is not available, and I'm thinking of first
responders. And I know that Nim Kidd is not going to be here
today, and he probably could have shed some light on this. But
even outside would be the normal course of business for the
city, in the first responder mode, and, of course, with the
threat of terrorism and such, they could take advantage of
hazardous materials coming through a highly populated area; do
you have any authority, or manner, or means to obtain that
information, so that it can be coordinated? Or you can,
actually, maybe try to reach agreements to have the materials
transported during those periods of time when there's less
traffic, less population out there, and so on.
Mr. Hardberger. We do not have the authority to make that
happen. I think we would need some enabling legislation from
the federal government that that material would be shared.
Otherwise, we are merely asking the railroads to do that for
us, and they have indicated that they want to do that. So I
think we'll probably need some help from you to be able to get
that done.
Mr. Gonzalez. The issue of authority, of course, is a big
one, and I guess I'll kind of play the devil's advocate on this
thing. Not that we would--at the federal level, why not share
some of the responsibility with the state and local
authorities? I don't know if that's really going to happen.And
let me just toss this out for consideration.
Anticipating where I think the railroads would come on
that, is that they really do like a federal scheme so that they
wouldn't have, let's say, 50 different sets of regulations in
50 different states that they would be operating out of. On top
of that, given local authorities some jurisdiction over some of
these matters, could also complicate things, because you always
hear that, that the regulatory scheme out there, especially
when it's distributed at the federal, and state, and local
levels, really makes the cost of business - it drives it up, it
makes it difficult and so on.
How would you address that particular argument that might
be advanced by the railroad industry? And that's a question for
both of you.
Mr. Wolff. Well, I think you guys are the guys that need to
do this. The problem is they haven't really stepped up and did
it. And it needs to be uniform throughout the country. But I
think what Mayor Hardberger was referring to was just
information, so that if we knew something was coming through,
when it was coming through, that we could respond, and be ready
to respond to that.
And as you so aptly stated, there may be a way to have that
kind of freight coming through when there's less congestion on
the highways that may cause an accident. I know what you're
going to run into, I've already heard it. You're going to run
into National Security, about if they knew a train was coming,
and they got that information, maybe they would do something to
it, so I know you're going to bump up against that, because
that was one of the issues we raised, and that was one of the
push-backs on it, regarding National Security. I don't know,
still might be.
Ms. Brown. Let me just say that this committee is working
with Homeland Security in coming up with a safety bill that
would include how we could work together to--because the first
responders have a need to know, and so we're working through
these issues. And you can rest assured that we're talking, and
we're going to come up with some recommendations, and some
bill. Keeping in mind, we've only been in charge since January.
And we've had 91 Oversight Hearings since that time, so we're
going to do our part to not just talk about security, but walk
that walk.
And I want to thank both of you for your leadership, and
for you comments. And we are looking forward to your statements
and letters that you sent to the committee for the record. And
we may have additional questions that we will forward to you.
Any closing remarks, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Hardberger. No, but I want you to know that I do have
the letters right now. And I also have my remarks, that I gave
this morning reduced to writing.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. And thank you, Judge.
Mr. Wolff. Thank you very much.
Ms. Brown. I'm going to let Mr. Gonzalez introduce the next
panel.
Mr. Gonzalez. I appreciate it, Madam Chair. It is a
privilege to.
Ms. Brown. I think you have it.
Mr. Gonzalez. Oh, absolutely. And I'm going to start off--
and he is on this particular panel. Is that correct? Okay.
She may not be here as a witness, presently, and I think I
may have seen another council member, but we have Sheila
McNeil, who's here, someone that we're all very proud of in the
capacity as City Council Member. I know Councilman Roland
Gutierrez was here earlier, and I don't know if he's still
here. And we have any other member of the City Council or
Commissioner's court that I--oh, Councilwoman Herrera, good to
see you. So we have two members that are here.
Testifying today in the next panel, a good friend and one
of the most--what I always consider one of the more
imaginative, creative state legislators, and hardworking state
legislators, State Representative Michael Villarreal. Mike, if
you'll come up and be positioned wherever staff finds you a
place.
Another good friend, community leader, former council
member is Maria Berriozabal. And, Maria, if you would please
come up. An acquaintance of many years, very prominent family
who, unfortunately, had a very terrible experience, because he
was one of the individuals out at Macdona who resided near the
accident site, Mr. Ralph Velasquez.
We also have, of course, representing the southern region
for Union Pacific Railroad, Mr. Larry Fritz. And we appreciate
Mr. Fritz being here today.
Thank you, one and all. And I yield back to the Chairwoman.
Ms. Brown. We're going to be opening with the State
Representative, with his remarks. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL VILLARREAL, STATE REPRESENTATIVE; MARIA
BERRIOZABAL, FORMER SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL MEMBER; RALPH
VELASQUEZ, COMMUNITY ADVOCATE INJURED AT THE MACDONA ACCIDENT;
LANCE FRITZ, VICE PRESIDENT-SOUTHERN REGION, UNION PACIFIC
RAILROAD
Mr. Villarreal. Madam Chair Brown, thank you for giving me
this opportunity. Congressman Gonzalez, thank you for bringing
the subcommittee to our community.
Though we've heard earlier that the number of accidents and
incidents in the nation in regards to rail accidents have
declined, that has not been our experience. That's not what we
are feeling here in the San Antonio community.
I believe government's first priority is to protect us. I
fight to make sure, on the state level, I can do everything I
can to make that happen. My constituents have asked that I take
action. In doing so, I have discovered that I have very limited
number of options.
This problem, the nature of the problem, is a federal
nature. However, I filed House Bill 1345.
Which would require that the 87 schools in Bexar County
that are located within 1,000 yards of a railroad track develop
emergency response plans. This is not only for the 60,000
students that occupy these school buildings along the railroad
tracks, and I brought a diagram to just show you. I'm happy to
give you a smaller copy of this map.
The red lines represent the railroad lines. The orange
figures represent the number of school houses along railroad
lines within 1,000 yards. There are 87, totally 60,000
students. That's larger than the San Antonio Independent School
District. They're counting on us to protect them.House Bill
1345 will require their schools to develop emergency response
plans in case of train derailments.
I've also authored House Current Resolution 91.
Respectfully requesting that the federal government take
appropriate steps to address our concerns with rail safety.
The Mayor and the County Judge have done a good job in
describing our recent history, accidents in `04 and `05, and
most recently, in `06 with the 17-car derailment. I won't cover
that. I want to jump straight to my recommendations.
Number one, steps must be taken to improve the
predictability and regularity of engineers and conductor's work
schedules. Union Pacific, and most other railroads, use a work
system in which an engineer or conductor have a set time for
rest, but may be called in at any time during that period of
rest. According to Union Pacific's Director of Fatigue
Management, this is their own person, such a work schedule
results in ``erratic, unpredictable shifts ''.
I've spoken to engineers and conductors, and what they tell
me is even though they are required to have an eight-hour rest
period, they can receive a phone call in the middle of that
eight-hour period calling them back to work. That's
unacceptable. That's not rest.
Recommendation Two, data. The fox is guarding the henhouse.
Today, railroad companies control the fact-finding, Congressman
Gonzalez, that you referred to earlier. They control the data
collection process. They also control the ability to classify,
to interpret the data before reporting it to the federal
government. That's unacceptable. We need to change that. What-
if data collection and classification was conducted by the
government, not Union Pacific, or other rail carriers.
There should be full disclosure of data collected by defect
detectors. Also, the reporting of excess hours of service, of
rule violations, and of all incidents, not just reportable
incidents. This would empower not just the federal government,
but it would empower us, at the state level, to act
appropriately when we observe trends that are climbing toward,
building toward a potential accident.
The FRA and the NTSB should improve information sharing.
You heard that earlier from the Mayor and the County Judge. If
the federal government were to take control of the fact-
finding, data collection process, I would ask that you empower
us, at the state level, by sharing that information.
Recommendation Three, the FRA must enforce current
regulations more aggressively. You heard others talk about the
Macdona incident in 2004 that claimed three lives, and injured
up to 50 people. The National Transportation Safety Board
report notes, and I'll quote: ``The Safety Board examined FRA
inspection data for calendar years `03 and `04. No FRA
violation reports were submitted during that period for non-
compliance.''
What that tells me is there was an accident, people died;
yet, there is no official blame placed on the engineer, the
railroad company. We need to do better about aggressively
enforcing our current rules.
Finally, I want to offer just a suggestion; and that is,
the policy focus should be less on finger-pointing that often
occurs after an accident, putting it on the shoulders of a
sleepy engineer, or human error of a conductor. That seems to
always follow an accident. I think what we should do, as policy
makers, is to step back and identify what the root causes of
these accidents are.
My own mind gravitates towards how hard the conductors are
being worked, and how little rest time they're being given.
That results, that systemic problem expresses itself in human
error, and train derailment tragedies, as we have seen here in
San Antonio.
In conclusion, I thank you for refocusing attention on
safety. I thank you for coming to our community, who have seen
a rash of accidents. You have given the citizens of this town a
feeling that our voice is being heard. I thank you for that.
Mr. Gonzalez. The Chairwoman has given me the additional
privilege of introducing my local witnesses here. I would call
at this time as the next witness, Maria Berriozabal.
Ms. Berriozabal. Good morning, Chairwoman Brown. We're so
glad that you came to our city today, and responded to the
invitation of our Congressman Gonzalez. We're very happy that
you came, and thank you very much for inviting me to provide
some comments.
I am Maria Antonietta Berriozabal, and I come here as a
resident of this city, trying to voice concerns of so many
people who are very concerned about this issue in San Antonio.
My particular neighborhood is sandwiched between two
railroad lines. One of them is three blocks from my house, the
other one is two blocks from my house. This neighborhood is
about two miles and a half from City Hall, where we are here
today.
On the morning of October 17th, 2006, I got a call from my
sister asking if I was being evacuated since there had been a
train derailment near our house. I did not wait for much more
information, and I ran out to see if I could see the wreckage
from my porch. I could see nothing, but immediately thought of
a friend who is 30 yards from the railroad tracks, Mrs.
Torralva. So I started to go out and see how I could help her,
and others. But then it struck me that I had my own human
error, my human factor. What if there was toxic chemical in the
train? So I went back into the house, turned the TV on, and
learned that there were no hazardous materials; however, two
houses had been struck by a train. Later, I learned that the
house of the Alvarez family. Mr. Martin Alvarez, his wife, and
his daughter, were left homeless.
In this story, there are several obvious points that I have
pondered, even more closely every time I hear the whistle of
the train at night, or during the day. The Union Pacific
Railroad Lines, as they cross our city, are lined with hundreds
of homes, businesses, many belonging to working-class people
and poor people. Within a block of the derailment were located
two publicly subsidized apartment complexes for the elderly,
and handicapped individuals. One of these is a high-rise
apartment where mostly elderly people live. Within half a mile
are three schools, one junior college, our San Antonio
Community College.
A major threat for all of us, whether we live yards from
the railroad tracks, or miles away, is the danger of the
derailment of a train carrying hazardous cargo. Whether we are
rich or poor, we are seconds away from a major disaster during
the day or at night, and we are not ready for such an accident.
Our city and county are very limited in the kind of investment
that needs to be made to prepare a city this large for this
disaster.
As a community, we grieve the loss of Gene Hale, Lois
Koerber, Heath Pape, Rob Whitworth of Macdona, Texas. For them,
all these discussions were too late to save their lives. What
happened to the Ralph Velasquez family of Macdona, can happen
to any of us. And we resonate with the pain of the Alvarez, who
lost their home, a home their father had built with his own
hands.
One major concern we have is for chemicals that are being
transported in these trains. It was chlorine that killed the
four people in Macdona, and did irreparable damage to the
health of the Velasquez. A huge problem is that we do not even
know which chemicals are being carried, and when they are
crossing our neighborhoods. Are they during the day when people
are home? Are they at night?
Both the train collision that injured the Velasquez, and
the derailment that uprooted the Alvarez, were caused by human
error. We know that both of these accidents were caused or
aggravated by train crew fatigue. It is simply irresponsible
for railroad companies to schedule train crews in the erratic
and unpredictable shifts they now use.
The railroad companies knowingly put their crew members
into a state of perpetual exhaustion, and then allow them to
drive dangerous trains through highly populated areas. My
neighbors and I worry about the callous disregard for human
life that is reflected in these practices. And we worry about
the indifference of government agencies who are supposed to be
protecting us.
We need the help of the federal government in several
areas. Some of them are, in cases like the Alvarez and others
like them, they should be compensated for all their losses,
including the serious emotional disruption, and multiple
economic consequences of the tragedy. Cities and counties
should be reimbursed for costs incurred for emergency response
in cases of train derailments, which would include community
education on how to respond to train derailments, especially
when toxic chemicals are involved. People should not be put in
the situation that I was put in, to run and help my neighbors,
when I could have been hurt, also.
Union Pacific must address the condition of all its rails,
bridges, rail crossings, and their infrastructure, in general.
We who live right close to the railroad tracks know that there
has been much deterioration in recent years. These are old
tracks. Trains carrying hazardous materials must be rerouted
away from our highly dense populations. And finally, and most
important, all of our rail lines must be relocated from the
midst of our cities.
Our local and state officials are doing the best they can
with very limited resources. We are grateful to them. But we
trust that under the new leadership of this committee, Chairman
Oberstar, Chairwoman Brown, Congressman Gonzalez, yourself, and
the other committee members, that our pleas of so many years
are going to be heard. And we are trusting in you that you are
going to take care of the lives of our people, particularly
those who live very close to the railroad tracks. And when they
lose a house, they lose everything.
Thank you very much for having me here today.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much for your testimony. And
at this time we would call--the next witness would be Mr. Ralph
Velasquez.
Mr. Velasquez. This is--I prepared a statement, because I
was asked to. And there's a lot that I said in here, and you
all can read it. This is difficult.
First, before we get into this, I want to thank you for
coming to our city, and experiencing the caldo we call San
Antonio. It's a diversity of culture, and great visionaries.
And you've experienced how we love this city, because we love
our representatives. Our representatives, thank you, Charlie,
thank you, Mike, are visionaries, and they care. They were
elected to represent, and they have excelled at every level.
And you've experienced them, you've listened to them. They are
passionate, but they are the best. And I think that from San
Antonio, you will see solutions come out, because San Antonio
has a brain-trust second to none in the city, and in the
nation. We have experienced things that no other city should
experience. We have got the best representatives, and for that
I want to thank you.
Charlie, I want to thank you for spearheading this
investigation. You initiated the investigations at the highest
levels. You brought this thing home, and for that, I thank you.
For State Representative Mike Villarreal, I want to thank
him very much from the bottom of my heart, for initiating the
evacuation plans for schools. It was very visionary, very
great, and very heart-felt. Thank you.
Judge Nelson Wolff and the Mayor, I want to thank them for
bringing all affiliated parties together, and finding the
causes of this tragedy.
City Councilwoman Delicia Herrera, she was there from the
very beginning, and I want to thank her for having the vision
to create a bridge between the railroads and the city to create
the first regional training facility outside of Pueblo,
Colorado, here in San Antonio. That way, the first responders
and their families will have someone coming home after an
accident. And for that, I want to thank you. We have great
people here.
But also, I'd like to thank many of the citizens of San
Antonio, and those first responders. No one has thanked them
today. These are young kids, a lot of them are young kids, and
they were scared to death. I spoke to several of them, and
thanked them personally. They had to be rescued from my front
door. It was bad, and it was horrible. They're still having
nightmares, so imagine the nightmares that my children still
have.
But the primary reason for my testimony is to present an
opinion on rail safety, and to offer suggestions that might
provide venues to increasing public safety. But to begin with,
I think that you need to hear from a survivor. And this is very
difficult for me to talk about, so please bear with me. I wrote
these things from the heart, and sometimes the heart can't
speak very well, so I might have to ad lib a little bit. Okay?
Since there's nothing that can be done to undo the
incredible pain and continued suffering of those who have had -
I thought I was kind of tough, you know.
It was 4:48 in the morning, and I've skipped a lot. You all
can read what I was going to say. It is 4:48 in the morning
when my son, Ralph, woke me up and said, ``Dad, there's a
strange noise outside.'' And I got up and went out, and when
you live out in the country, you live with your windows wide
open, your doors open, and your ceiling fans on, and you've got
a bunch of dogs. We're no different. It's a very safe place. It
was my Xanadu. It was a place where my kids would go fishing
along the river right next to us, and they built tree-houses,
and they were just a bunch of Tom Sawyers and Huck Finns. They
were great kids. But when somebody wakes you up and says
there's a strange noise, it's best to investigate it, so I went
outside, and I didn't see nothing. I just heard the trains. And
I came back inside, and my ex-wife, who came by to stay with my
kids on the weekend, she came in a few minutes later, and she
was making these gestures, going like this. And I asked her
what's wrong, and she didn't say anything. And so I got up, and
went to the kitchen, and I asked her if she had spilled some
chlorine. And she said--I mean, she didn't say anything. She
was just going no, like that. And then I thought somebody was
up to something, you know.
You got out there, that's not normal stuff, you know. So I
went outside and the smell of chlorine was getting stronger,
and stronger. It was dark outside, you know. And I went around
the house, looked all around, didn't see anything. And then I
went up to my front gate, and I looked towards the railroad
tracks. And I thought I saw like a bunch of ghosts or
something. And then all of a sudden my tree line kind of
disappeared, and this huge cloud, about 60, 70 feet high, and
like a donut, was real long, as far as I could see, came
rolling pretty hard through the forest. And that's when I
started--I ran back to my house, and I yelled to my kids to
cover up and get out. And we were going to go into my car that
was parked right next door.
By the time I hit the house, got into my house, the cloud
was already hitting--just a few seconds later hit the house
pretty hard. It was like a thud. And right after, that you
couldn't see a thing. The lights were on, and they became like
a little red glow. You couldn't see anything. And we got out,
and we found our car, bumped into the car. And my kids got into
the car, and everybody was scared.
And I went to get my dogs, because it was the dogs that
saved us. My dogs were yelping, and making all kinds of noises.
And we couldn't find them, because at that time, then it got
pretty near zero where you couldn't see anything. And the pain
wasn't immediate, it grew on you.
After we started the car, I turned the lights on, you
couldn't see anything, so I put it on parking lights and drove
through the back gate by my barn. And, unfortunately, someone--
my neighbor had borrowed my barn, and he put bailing wire on
the gate, and I couldn't get out. And we cut our hands and
everything just trying to open it, and we couldn't do it. And
at that time, it was already zero. We couldn't see anything, so
I backed the car up and rammed right through the gate, busted
our windshield and everything. And we went out. We were going
to go to the back end to break through onto Lackland. I was
going to break through their gate. That would have alarmed
people, brought somebody to our neighborhood.
We didn't make it that far. There was a divine intervention
or something, something told me to stop, and I did. And I went
outside, and ran in front of the car, and ended up in a sea of
mud. If we had kept on going, we would have died right there.
So I came back, and my kids helped guide me back, and we went
across the cornfields and the sunflower fields, and everything.
It was like seven foot tall. And that's what kept us from
sinking into the mud.
We eventually got out of there. My daughter, when I got out
the first time, my daughter, Nicky, said, ``Daddy, don't leave
us. Don't leave us.'' It was at that time they were already
starting to bleed, and I came back in with all mud and stuff,
and came back in, and we went across country, and they were
bleeding pretty much, coughing up a lot of blood, and that's
when Nicky said, ``Daddy, are we going to die?'' And like I've
told folks, that's one of the hardest things any father can
hear from their children. And I vowed that that wouldn't
happen. And we made it, through the grace of God, and the
Virgin Mary, we made it through.
I'm not a very good Christian, but I'm a damned good
Catholic, so we really got to get into--and I really believe in
the Virgin Mary, because that was a woman's voice I heard. It
was a woman's voice that told me to slow down, stop. It was
woman's voice that told me go this way. And that's when I saw
that, busted out, and we got out there.
And when we crossed the last gully, the car was falling
apart. It had gone through hell. And I saw this 18-wheeler
coming up, and I knew where we were at, but we knew we had to
go get our neighbors, so we went and got our neighbors, and got
them out. But the things that we went through, it's just very
hard.
People say, ``Well, what did it feel like?'' Well, you can
only imagine a man on death row getting that cyanide cloud
coming up, and knowing that if he's going to breathe it, he's
going to die. Well, that's the same thing we felt. Those
chemicals burned us pretty much. It scarred us not only
physically, but mentally, emotionally. It took its toll. It
took it's toll. My kids don't sleep anymore, I don't sleep
anymore, or sleep not very much. And these are things that
we're going to have to live with the rest of our lives. And one
of the reasons I'm here is how do we fix this? How do we just
say no. I mean, we don't want this to happen again.
Well, when I got out of the hospital, I found out that my
neighbors died, the ones you had mentioned, wonderful ladies.
We had been helping them. My daughter had bought a bonnet for
Ms. Hale, and was going to give it to her that Monday because
we were helping them in their garden. And she had just finished
her garden, finished her fence and things. But what was very,
very difficult was to know that a young man died in my
driveway, young Mr. Pape, a very courageous conductor. A very
young man, 23-years old.
And it's taken me a long time as a father to accept that.
As a father, all of us here who are fathers, would move any
mountain to go save a child. And there's a young boy, he died
on my driveway. That's been very, very difficult, and I could
never forget that, because if had I known he was there, I would
have moved everything in my power to get him, but I didn't.
So what do we do to avoid such tragedies in the future? I'm
an ex-union organizer, so I don't particularly like to blame
Labor. I think it's a dual thing, maybe bad planning and stuff.
People don't go on drugs just to go on drugs when they've got
hard responsibilities. But they sometimes use those things just
to keep their jobs; in other words, keep working.
Maybe we should figure out ways of how to create a good,
strong relationship between corporate and labor, because
there's enough blame to go around. But blaming doesn't
accomplish anything, it only alienates and stifles meaningful
cooperation, and potential partnerships.
There are some things that were said today that I disagree
with, and I disagree with them very strongly, and said by my
friends, who I respect and admire greatly, that we have that
friendship because we can disagree. I disagree with the
relocation of the tracks. I don't feel that we need to pit the
culturally affluent southside against the economically affluent
northside.
We tend to see rail lines predominantly in people of color
neighborhoods. We predominantly see that. We cannot continue
that. If we move them out, then they're going to be moved out
into rural, and you're going to have people who have less voice
being affected by this. You're going to have people who rely on
these spurs for the merchandise that are presently now small
businesses. They're going to have to shut down, because they
won't have to relocate. This relocation, in my opinion, only
benefits speculators and developers, because that's prime
property downtown. And if we're going to do that, if we're
going to go that way, then make sure the developers and
speculators have zero access to that prime property, and make
it into linear parks, so that the entire community can enjoy
it, not just the affluent.
But I just think that we're brighter than that to move
things. I think we can find solutions. One of them, I would
think is, let's theoretically deconstruct the rail system.
Let's partner with them. Let's bring them into the fold,
because, after all, they are part of our community, as well.
Now people say, Ralph, you should be angrier than heck with
them. I am. You know, I'm very angry. I'm very angry for the
damage that was done to my family, that was done to my
community, and to the friendships I lost, and to that young man
who lost his life. I'm very angry, and I will be angry for the
rest of my life about that, but that accomplishes nothing. That
anger would be misplaced if we don't look at it to find
solutions.
And so with that, I'm trying to bring some kind of
suggestions that might be solutions. For example, concrete rail
ties. I'm an ex-railroader. Okay? Concrete rail ties would go a
long ways, because the nature of wood is that it expands and
contracts with the weather. And when you put something metal
into it, it doesn't naturally hold it. It'll expand because of
the traffic of the thing. The weight of the thing. If you use
concrete ties, one, you're going to benefit the environment
because we stop cutting down trees. And two, we don't have to
use cancer-causing carcinogens preservatives, that eventually
leach into our water table.
Let's think broader. Let's think, if you use the concrete
like they do in Europe and other places, they don't have the
derailments. They just have -- okay. If we can avoid
derailments because of materials, well, then let's do that. If
we're going to do that in the high traffic areas, let's put
concrete ties in every metropolitan area. That way the chances
of derailment are minimized. Plus, you're going to create a new
industry. You will create a new industry with the partnerships
of the affiliated parties. You'll create new economic
development opportunities.
Containers. Containers made before 1987, and that's you
guys numbers, suffer from extreme metal fatigue. Just like
airplanes after 9/11, they all got x-rayed, they all got--well,
a lot of the rail cars did, too. And they had stress, metal
stress, metal fatigue, simply because of all the different kind
of chemicals being carried in these things. They said well, you
know, if it's made before 1987, it should be taken out of
service.
Well, the one that derailed on our property was, I think,
1973 or 1976, something like that. It's not saying that the new
containers are going to withstand puncturing. That's not saying
that, but it's the alternative that we'd have to look at.
Ms. Brown. How much longer?
Mr. Velasquez. One more minute, or two. One more minute.
Let's go to the 911 upgrade. You heard the tapes. There was
mask confusion. If we go with the 911 upgrade to include a
border trace, a rail trace, that way the 911 operators will
know exactly what is on that manifest, and they'll know exactly
what evacuation routes to use. That's where we just wanted to--
I made sure you put that in.
Manufacturers of hazardous materials should be required to
transport their products only on approved containers that meet
or exceed all federal guidelines.
And in closing, I want to thank my Congressman and our
great elected body here, and to all those brave first
responders. You are, indeed, a credit to our community. But
please remember that the other side of tranquility is hell.
Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Thank you very much for your testimony, all of
you. I guess, I'm thinking that maybe, if it's possible, maybe
we could take about a five minute water break, and then we'll
come back to Mr. Fritz. You've got a lot to answer, and I want
to give you a moment. Maybe we can get you some water.
[Recess.]
Ms. Brown. Let's get started because we have several people
that need to testify and have to leave. Will you please take
your seats. Once again, while they're taking their seats, you
all need to know that you all have a wonderful representative
in Mr. Gonzalez, who was very emphatic about us holding this
hearing here. And we had planned on doing a hearing here, and
then going on to California. And when California dropped out,
there was no dropping out of coming to San Antonio. I can tell
you that.
All right. Mr. Fritz, we're going to let you give your
opening remarks, and then we have questions. I understand that
some of the panelists have to leave, but I have a couple of
questions that we want to ask you before you leave. And any
additional ones, we'll just give it to you in writing, and you
can respond. Mr. Fritz.
Mr. Fritz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Congressman
Gonzalez. Good morning. My name is Lance Fritz, and I am the
Vice President of Union Pacific Railroad Southern Region, which
includes our facilities and operations here in Texas. I'm
pleased to be here today, and I thank you for the opportunity
to testify.
We recognize why this hearing is being held in San Antonio.
All of us at Union Pacific regret the accidents that have
occurred in San Antonio, and in Bexar County. We work very hard
to prevent accidents of any kind on our railroad, and we have
implemented numerous measures to help ensure a safe operating
environment for our employees, and through the communities
through which we operate.
Having said that, I've been advised by our counsel not to
discuss any specific incidents, as they may be subject to
litigation. I'm here to tell you of the many positive things
our employees are involved in, both here in San Antonio, and
across our rail system.
Our objective with these programs is to provide safe
reliable rail service that supports this region's growing
transportation needs. Over the past several years, we have
increased employee training and testing. Our managers provide
more ride evaluations, and they review more black box downloads
to ensure compliance with our Operating Rules. In addition, in
San Antonio we employ a state-of-the-art train simulator, so
our crews can take advantage of advances in computer-based
training and evaluation.
What we have learned from our intense reviews has led to
several systemwide operating rules changes, including changes
in locomotive cab communication rules to avoid distractions at
critical times. I would add at this point, including the use of
cell phones.
Working with our union leaders in the San Antonio Service
Unit, we've implemented a safety center to facilitate daily
start of shift communications for all our employees. In
addition, working with Labor and the FRA, we have implemented
an employee-led peer-to-peer process to reduce and eliminate
human factor accidents in train operations. You've heard a
little bit about that this morning from previous witnesses.
We have invested heavily in San Antonio's rail
infrastructure to help provide a safe operating environment. In
the last two years, we've invested $62 million in track and
infrastructure in this area. This year we're going to invest an
additional $17 million.
We've also supported job growth in the local area. We
invested $26 million to support the new Toyota manufacturing
facility. And you heard this morning, we've announced a new
$100 million facility that's an inter-modal facility.
Increased emphasis on fatigue management, rules compliance,
improved infrastructure, and operating process improvements
have made our operations in San Antonio more predictable. This
has led to fewer overtime hours, and fewer hours of service
tie-ups. We've also added a substantial number of employees,
with the addition of 13 managers, and 166 agreement employees.
As we've minimized variability in the operation, it has
allowed our employees a more predictable, and a higher quality
of work life. The activities are showing positive results.
Since 2004, we've reduced the employee safety incident rate by
over 25 percent, and reduced rail equipment incidents by over
23 percent. Here on the San Antonio Service Unit, the employee
safety incident rate has been reduced by over 24 percent, and
rail equipment incidents by over 36 percent. We are proud of
these gains, but clearly, more can be done, and will be done.
Our goal is zero incidents.
Madam Chairwoman, Congressman Gonzalez, let me conclude by
saying that Union Pacific is committed to providing safe,
reliable rail transportation, not only in San Antonio, but
across our system, and we will continue to work towards that
goal. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Fritz. The Mayor and the Judge
mentioned the needs to ensure that the local communities and
emergency responders receive timely information on the
hazardous material going through the communities. What is Union
Pacific doing to make sure that this happens?
Mr. Fritz. Union Pacific currently provides immediate
response to the emergency responders when they request for the
consist of a train that's been involved in an incident, so we
do provide that information currently, immediately upon
request.
Ms. Brown. After an accident.
Mr. Fritz. At the request of an emergency responder. And I
would presume that's as a result of an incident.
Ms. Brown. Okay. So they don't get that information prior
to.
Mr. Fritz. They get information from us that includes the
types of hazardous materials that are being transported through
the community. And they also receive from us special training
in how to handle those hazardous materials.
Ms. Brown. You mentioned that Union Pacific has employed a
train simulator for San Antonio engineers and conductors. Do
you provide the same training for all engineers and conductors
in other states?
Mr. Fritz. Yes, we do. We have these simulators across our
system.
Ms. Brown. And you mentioned that you're spending $62
million, and an additional 17 in `07. But given the fact that
30 percent of the accidents in Texas is caused by defective
tracks, what do we need to do?
Mr. Fritz. Yes, I'm glad you asked that question. We have
numerous programs targeting track infrastructure, and the safe
operating of track infrastructure. We use detector cars, as was
mentioned earlier, in terms of trying to find rail defect. We
use geometry cars. They try to find defects in the
configuration of the track, the interaction between the rail
and the ties. We use track inspectors, who are assigned
particular main line territories, and they have defined
responsibilities for inspecting those main line territories.
We also design our maintenance of way, our programs for
investing in track infrastructure and refurbishing it. We
design those around the wear and tear that a particular main
line is receiving from the type of traffic that is on it. All
of those are targeting rail infrastructure to operate safely at
the speed it is designed to operate.
Ms. Brown. Union Pacific is one of the trains or rail
industry that have indicated that you want to put a cap on--I
want to say $200 million on damages. Can you respond to that?
One of the things that our Chairman, Chairman Oberstar likes to
do with the committee is remind us how we got to this point
with freight, and how you receive the public tracks, and how we
actually gave it to the industry and why. And so, there is some
responsibility as far as the community is concerned. I mean,
that's why you have to carry the hazardous material; but, in
addition, you can talk about the new cars, the new generation
of cars that will--I know the community--we think about the
hazardous material, but we need the chlorine for the water in
the community, or else we won't have the clean water, so it's
kind of a catch-catch. But can you deal with that, please?
Mr. Fritz. Yes, Madam Chairwoman. I am not intimately
familiar with what we are attempting to move through Congress,
if you will, as an industry. What I can speak to is the fact
that we haul hazardous materials because we have to. We are
under a common carrier obligation to haul those commodities.
We'd prefer not to.
Having said that, given that we do haul them, we design our
routes around the safest available route. They represent a very
small fraction, particularly TIH, or Toxic Inhalants, represent
a very small fraction of the commodities that we haul.
When it comes to San Antonio, some of those do move through
the community, and some relatively fair share of that is
consumed locally, as you point out, for things like water
purification.
When it comes to the cars that are hauling hazardous
materials, we are working, as you heard this morning, with Dow
Chemical and Union Tank Car to design what we would consider
the tank car of the future. And it is specifically being
designed to handle some of the significant stresses that are
found in a train incident, or derailment.
Ms. Brown. Okay. I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Gonzalez,
and then we will ask questions to everybody else.
Mr. Gonzalez. Madam Chair, I know that Representative
Villarreal - do you need to be leaving in a minute, Michael?
And Mr. Fritz, can you stay a little longer? Are you okay?
Mr. Fritz. Yes, I can.
Mr. Gonzalez. Do you mind if we take State Representative
Villarreal out of order right now?
Ms. Brown. Yes.
Mr. Gonzalez. And finish with Mike, and then let him get to
where he needs, because I know it's family-related.
Ms. Brown. And she, also. Yes, she has family related.
Okay. Would you just take your seat for a minute.
Let me ask you, Mr. State Representative, one question. You
mentioned the importance of clearing vegetation, like trees,
bushes, and other along railways. Some states have laws on the
books to do this. There is no minimum standards in clearing
vegetation. Do you think that it should be particularly in a
state that do not have laws in place? And maybe this is
something that you can, as a State Representative, address.
Mr. Villarreal. That was actually part of my comments, but
thank you for bringing it to my attention. And the suggestion
is that other states have laws that govern the clearing of
trees and bushes near easements that support rail lines.
Ms. Brown. That's correct. Also, can you get us information
on, we were talking about a partnership between the state,
local, and federal as far as the track relocation. I can see
it's going to be a source of discussion and hearing, but I'm
just interested in knowing what is it that the state will be
willing to--because as we move forward, we want to be able to
have a package. And even though we authorized 350 and the
President didn't offer anything up, 350 million is nothing in
comparison to the needs of even this community, much less the
entire country. And I wanted to--I was trying to find out from
my staff how much have we provided for the Iraqis for
transportation and safety, and just in this area. And I
understand it's over $1 billion so, I mean, you know, the
people that actually pay the bill, seem to me they should be
able to sit at the table also.
Mr. Villarreal. I agree wholeheartedly with you. And what
we are looking at is a cost of $2 billion in debt acquisition
to solve the rail relocation. And I believe it's from Austin,
around San Antonio. That's just our segment. There are
proposals to extend that bypass all the way further north
around Dallas. But for our region of the state, the capital
improvement cost is about $2 billion. And to issue that debt,
we're looking at, I believe, a figure of $200 million to
capitalize that.
And the last session, we meet once every two years, the
last time we met we created a fund in order to issue debt and
carry out these kind of projects. This year, our challenge is
to put money into that fund. Any help that can come from the
federal government would be greatly appreciated. If it's a
matching program, where you tell us, State of Texas, for every
dollar you put up, we'll match you a dollar, or even 50 cents,
we would jump on that. And so I would encourage Congressman
Gonzalez, and you, Madam Chair, to put forth those kind of
ideas. I think they would be well received by our state
government, because today, we don't have that kind of
partnership with federal government. We're looking at it solely
as a state and local investment that's going to be carried just
by the state and local taxpayers. We'd love to partner with the
federal government.
We believe that to really solve this problem, it's going to
require partnerships. The railroad carriers are not going away.
We depend on each other.
Ms. Brown. And I think they should be at the table, also. I
think it should be--all of us should be--the stakeholders would
benefit from it, the citizens, so I think everybody should be
at the table.
Mr. Villarreal. I agree. In fact, I filed legislation
applying a sales tax on railroad cargo. I've discovered that I
can't only apply a tax just on the rail lines, without
including truckers. I think that can be fixed. I think it's
going to be a challenge to pass that, but I believe that that
kind of solution makes sense, because as you heard earlier from
Mr. Fritz, Texas is generating a lot of economic activity, not
just for itself, but also for the railroad companies. And
that's why they're making these investments. To tax them, and
to dedicate that new money to infrastructure improvement seems,
to me, to be a win-win on both sides. It brings forth better
infrastructure that they can rely on, and also more public
safety for our citizens.
Ms. Brown. All right. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mike, you pointed out
that, I think, when the session started this year in Austin,
you were pretty ambitious about your plan, which I really do
commend you. And I think, basically, you had to scale back, but
I still say what you're doing here is so important, and it's
contingency planning. And I know you're thinking in terms of
being proactive, and ahead of it, and preventive in nature. But
I wanted to read to you the problem that you faced just a
couple of months ago, and this is from the materials that are
prepared by our staff on the committee.
``A state may adopt or continue to enforce an additional or
more stringent law, regulation, or order only in instances
where the law, regulation, or order is necessary to eliminate
or reduce an essentially local safety or security hazard.'' But
then this is the kicker. ``Is not incompatible with a law,
regulation, or order of the United States Government, and does
not unreasonably burden interstate commerce.''
The pre-emption standard has been a concern among some
states and localities that have tried to adopt regulations
requiring trains to operate at lower speeds and railroads to
re-route hazardous materials around heavily populated areas.
And I think you pointed out, this is a federal issue. It is a
federal problem. Like so many things, we fail to act,
communities then attempt to move forward, and what happens,
basically, you don't have jurisdiction and such. And the
immigration issue is a great one. Congress is frozen, it's grid
locked, you have communities moving, and I believe in the wrong
direction; nevertheless, they're moving. So we have something
like that here, and I'd like to tell you that Maria's
observation that this is a new Congress, this is a new
Chairwoman of this subcommittee. There's a new Chairman of the
big committee, and we're going to be as aggressive as we can.
There are limitations, no doubt, as to what we can pass.
And I don't want to get people's hopes up on something on the
scale of relocating rails, when it would be $2 billion or
above, because every community is similarly situated. If we
start multiplying that by the billions, it's an incredible--but
there are so many things in your suggestions that I think we
can do to achieve tremendous safety, never to the degree that
if we relocated something.
Ralph points out, though, well, wait a minute. Where are
you relocating it? Why are those people any less important than
other people, and so on. It's usually density in the number of
people, I understand that.
As far as monies, I'm not sure, and I think the Chairwoman
is in a better position down the line to identify what would be
a realistic federal contribution, Mike. And I don't know, just
because I know that every community in the United States is
going to want some assistance with relocating. And I think some
things can be relocated without great disruption, or tremendous
cost. But I wanted to thank you for your suggestions today,
which from the state level, making these recommendations to the
federal level. And I will definitely--I know that the
Chairwoman will make these known. They're part of the record,
and Chairman Oberstar has been a real champion on rail safety
since he got there. And he's been there quite a while, but if
there's anything else that you need from us, please always feel
free.
I know that you have some obligations with the family, and
unless the Chairwoman has anything else, I just want to say
thank you for all your work.
Ms. Brown. I want to thank you also, and we will follow-up
with any additional questions and getting you some additional
information on what other states are doing.
Mr. Villarreal. Madam Chair, thank you for bringing our
federal government to our community.
Ms. Brown. It's your federal government.
Maria, I had a couple of questions for you, because I
understand that you have some family obligations, also.
You mentioned that Alvarez, his family and young daughters,
have been homeless since the October 17th, 2006 train accident.
What have Union Pacific done to compensate the Alvarez family
for their damage?
Ms. Berriozabal. My understanding, Madam Chairwoman, is,
they do have an attorney, and they have been working on the
issue. Their house was demolished by the city, and they're in,
I don't want to say litigation, but they are working with their
lawyers.
My understanding is that right now Union Pacific will
provide them the market value of their home, and to us in the
community, their neighbors, we think that's not enough. There's
been pain, there's been suffering. They lost a home. There was
a long history. It was very painful for me to see some events
where the whole family gathered to say goodbye to their family
home. There's costs, intangible costs involved in these
situations. But that is my understanding, that the Union
Pacific will give them the market value of the house.
Well, that's good, but we feel that more needs to be done,
not just for them, but other families. It's not just a house
that they lost. They lost lives, a lifetime of history, of
memories.
Ms. Brown. I guess my question is, are these people still
homeless?
Ms. Berriozabal. No. No, no.
Ms. Brown. Oh.
Ms. Berriozabal. I used that word, they lost their home.
Ms. Brown. Okay.
Ms. Berriozabal. But they have a place to stay right now.
It's temporary, but they have a place to stay.
Ms. Brown. What are some of the recommendations, that if
you could get your top one, two, or three recommendations, what
would they be?
Ms. Berriozabal. One thing that I would like to reinforce
is what the Congressman was asking other people from Union
Pacific. There's got to be a way that we, as citizens, know
what's crossing our communities. I understand the whole
Homeland Security situation, but it's very scary. And I've been
talking to people. What I did, I sent out a notice when the
Congressman's office advised me that I would, perhaps, be
invited to be a witness. And I'm very conscious that I did it
as a member of a community. It's not just me coming, it's my
community, so I sent out a notice through my email asking
people, tell me what I should say, so my little statement is a
compilation of what people wrote, and said, ``This is what
we're worried about.'' And one of them is, we don't know what's
going through our railroad tracks. We're scared. And ever since
the issue of Macdona, another one is the care of the railroad
property. The city can't go in there and clean it up. It's not
their's. And the debris, sometimes the danger in flooding
because of inappropriate care of the railroad.
I was on the City Council for 10 years representing this
area, and one of my biggest problems was trying to figure out
how do you get a hold of this Union Pacific company that seems
so far away from our daily life. I mean, who do you call?
There's an 800 number in the little boxes, but they're not
going to come and clean the debris.
Checking the railroad ties regularly, seeing that they're
in proper shape, the lights. You know, you trust that when
you're coming to a railroad crossing and there's a train
coming, you trust that the light is going to work, and that the
little arm is going to come down. Those things for us who are
right here are inconvenienced every day because of it, we just
want to make sure that they're taking care of their property.
Ms. Brown. I agree with you. And, in fact, I went to one of
the training simulators, and clearly, a lot of our citizens may
feel that they can go around those railroad crossings. And let
me tell you, when the engineers see it, if you're on the
tracks, it's too late. They can't stop, and so it's very
important that we educate the community, that you can't, if the
train is coming. I mean, just that little will prevent some
accidents.
Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Maria, I know that--I think Mike Villarreal had a Town Hall
in the area regarding the accident and such. I know you've been
very active, and that's why you were immediately identified.
And I appreciate that you were willing to testify, but also, to
canvass the neighborhoods and find out what's on their minds.
When it comes to dealing with Union Pacific, I will tell
you, we've had our differences of opinion and such. And maybe,
because I'm a member of Congress, we get treated differently or
something. They respond timely, I will tell you that. They may
not go through all the recommendations and suggestions, and I
think the Mayor and Nelson Wolff said that that has not been a
problem. The communication is good. And I think there's follow-
through to the extent that there's an agreement.
What has been your experience, because I think they're much
more sensitive than ever before because of the accidents, and
what's transpired, and lessons learned. But have you, yourself,
experienced some difficulty communicating with a
representative, or maybe trying to assist the individuals whose
home was--it was so damaged, it had to be demolished.
Ms. Berriozabal. We agree. We agree.
Mr. Gonzalez. Yes. Have you--what has been your experience
when you attempt to assist people in their dealings with Union
Pacific?
Ms. Berriozabal. Well, that's why I mentioned when I was on
City Council. I have to say that like right now, until this
issue came up, it's something that you really don't think
about. Like I said, the first time we started thinking about it
again is when this happened to the Ralph Velasquez family,
because these are very close friends of our's, of a lifetime.
But I was referring to the time that I was on City Council, and
we would have that problem. But, I guess, Congressman, the
issue is that sometimes we don't even--it doesn't even enter
our mind that we can pick up a phone and call somebody about
it. And, actually, entities like Union Pacific, with the
tremendous power they have, should really have community
relationships, community relations people that we--I work with
my neighborhood association. In fact, I brought our
neighborhood association president to be with me today. But
just to have somebody that we can call, and can come to
neighborhood meetings, that can do Town Hall meetings, instead
of us calling them, for them to say here we are. Let us tell
you how we work. Let us tell you about the cargo. Let us tell
you why we have to cross your city with this cargo. Just some
communication.
Companies have community relations departments. Do they? I
don't know. So when you ask me that, like it doesn't even enter
my mind that I can pick up a phone and call them. That's how
far they seem from me. And I'm a person that pretty much can
find answers when I need them, because people call me. To this
day, I get a lot of calls from people just on all kinds of
things. But I was very surprised when I sent out my little note
on, does anybody have any suggestions for my little statement
that I'm going to give. All these people writing and saying the
hazardous cargo, the condition of the railroad by their
neighborhood, and then the concern that some of the most
vulnerable populations are the ones that live close to the
railroad. A couple of them were from people from Park--you've
very familiar with Park Apartments by San Pedro Park. It's a
high-rise. People are on their little walkers. They were saying
well, if there had been a toxic chemical there on Hickman, what
would we have done? Well, I can't tell them. They're in
walkers. Do we have a plan for that? And it's not just the
federal government. We, as the city, need to do that.
And, Madam Chairwoman, I'll be very honest to say that we
really hold our local officials accountable, too. I mean, we're
not just demanding, or speaking out to our federal government
because you're here. We work with our local officials, and
we're very proud of what they have done. But we also need to do
a better job locally of responding ourselves. What do we do? Do
you run to help your friends, or do you run away? And how do
you know what to do?
Ms. Brown. Thank you for your participation today.
Ms. Berriozabal. Well, thank you, because your coming here
has done a lot.
Ms. Brown. I know Mr. Fritz heard what you said about the
big company having community relations, and having someone that
is working with the community and interfacing. I'm sure he has
this team available, but we don't know the number, and we don't
know who the person is, and so they probably don't need a
bonus, because the community needs to know who to contact.
Ms. Berriozabal. Thank you very, very much.
Ms. Brown. And I know you heard that.
Ms. Berriozabal. Yes.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
Ms. Berriozabal. You give us hope. We know you can't do
everything, but to be able to talk to somebody is very
important. And I will give my report to my community on what
happened today.
Ms. Brown. But one of the things I do think is important,
that government should be personal and up close, and that's why
we're here.
Ms. Berriozabal. And you're here. And we thank you, and we
recognize that. Thank you very much.
Ms. Brown. Okay.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Ralph, I have a couple of more questions for
you, and then we'll go back to Mr. Fritz, before we open it up
to the public. And my question to you is just very general.
You are a former rail employee, and have knowledge of the
industry, and one of the major causes of accident have been
human factors. And I understand one of the crews had worked 22
hours without breaks, so can you give us some recommendations
in that area? And any other closing comments that you would
like to make.
Mr. Velasquez. Yes, ma'am. I think the regulations are
already in place. We've got the Hogg Act, make them adhere to
it. It's just enforcement. I mean, the rules are already in
place, just have them enforce it. There are many things that we
can work together, if we just communicate. And if we agree to
communicate, and we agree to do something, then if we don't do
it, then we need to be punished, or held accountable. But yes,
you've got all kinds of already rules. And I understand
business, and a lot of times the bottom line runs a lot of
things, but corporate responsibility should never be negated at
the expense of public safety.
With that said, I think the corporate relations between
them and the Labor unions could improve. Sometimes, Labor
unions are pretty terco, terco meaning stubborn, but it works.
You know, I mean, as long as they can communicate and work
together, that's important.
Ms. Brown. What we're discussing, as we speak, as we move
forward with the safety bill, and the question is whether or
not Congress need to weigh-in, because Labor and Management
don't seem to be able to resolve this issue of limbo time and
fatigue. Do you want to weigh-in on this?
Mr. Velasquez. I understand that. And in my opinion, it's
just simply bad planning. You know, you've got a critical path
that you've got to follow, well, follow it. If you know you're
going to have a train crew waiting out in Uvalde somewhere, and
they're gong to stop right there, well, then you should already
have the limo waiting for them, instead of having them just sit
there for hours and hours. And then, you know, a lot of times
they run back-to-back.
Just follow the rules. You know, the rule says hey, you've
got to have X amount--see, because one of the little things
that they like to do is, if you--I think it's 12 hours. I'm not
exactly sure. I think it's 12 hours, and so they clock off at
11:59, or 11:58, 11:57. Well, that's kind of cheating a little
bit, you know. Let's just do it right.
We were talking about the emergency 911 things. And you
were talking about the manifest, and things like that. Well, we
had--the Councilwoman Herrera had been talking about, was the
fact that if we had a 911 upgrade to work with the railroads
and the 911 system to create--and it's easy, with the
technology we have today, if there is a derailment, just like
there was at Hickman, I happened to go, and they never broke
the lines. You're supposed to break the line so the emergency
systems can go through. The lines were still stuck for hours,
and so somebody has to go way around to get, in case there was
an emergency. But there were rules already in place, you have
to break them. They didn't do that.
But on a 911 upgrade, to include a border or a rail trace,
that would identify it to the dispatcher, and the dispatcher
would automatically know what is on the manifest, and he or she
could relay that to the first responders. And the first
responders, with the proper training from the railroads and the
chemical companies, know how to respond. That's why they
created, or they're in the process of negotiating creating the
first regional training facility outside of Pueblo, Colorado,
here in San Antonio. And that's going to go to benefit not only
the firefighters and the first responders in San Antonio, but
that's also going to benefit all the volunteer fire
departments. These mom and pop communities, who don't have the
money to send them to Colorado, and they could train them here.
And that's what I mean by partnerships. You've got corporate
and community partnerships to create a better safety system.
Ms. Brown. All right. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And, Ralph,
thank you for sharing what I know is a really emotional
experience, that will continue to be an emotional one for you
and your family. So special thanks to you.
And I don't want to violate any agreements or anything that
you may have, because I don't know of them, but I do know some
general, like the general nature of some negotiations that you
had with Union Pacific as a result of your claim on your behalf
and your family. And, of course, there's the monetary part,
which we discussed about caps, and all that. I'm going to leave
that alone.
But my understanding is that there are aspects of your
negotiations with Union Pacific that were not monetary in
nature, but rather maybe corrective action, or policies, or
procedures on the part of the railroad regarding safety
practices, and such. Is that correct?
Mr. Velasquez. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez. And I guess what I'm trying to get at is, I
just think that somewhere there's room for the communication.
There's room to reach some sort of agreement, and then
legislation takes over. You know what I'm saying?
Mr. Velasquez. Yes.
Mr. Gonzalez. And I think you've been alluding to that.
We've got rules, we can just go ahead and enforce them. But,
also, there's things they can do, outside the rule making
process and so on; like Maria was saying, it's about community
relations and things like that.
In your opinion, and the extensive negotiations I would
imagine during the course of your litigation with Union
Pacific, how would you characterize their cooperation, and how
receptive they have been to your recommendations made by you
and your attorneys?
Mr. Velasquez. I would like to commend them. They said that
this was the first time in their history that anyone has ever
negotiated for a community benefits package, and that's what we
did. We didn't go for ourselves. You know, there was something
there, but the primary thing was the community benefits
package, because we didn't want to see this happen again. We
didn't want to see it happen to our neighbors or community, or
anyone else. And that was very, very strong. And I commend the
railroad for being very receptive. I know it caught them off-
guard, because no one has ever asked them for something like
that. And it was very unusual, to say the least, but then we're
an unusual family.
Mr. Gonzalez. Second that. Second that. All right. Thank
you very much, Ralph.
Mr. Velasquez. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
Mr. Velasquez. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Brown. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Fritz, I want to go back before--and I just want you to
reiterate for me what sort of technology would help prevent
train accidents. Can you just go over that once more?
Mr. Fritz. What types of technology help prevent train
accidents?
Ms. Brown. Yes.
Mr. Fritz. Well, they're numerous.
Ms. Brown. For example, would you suggest railroads to
implement some form of Positive Train Control? We've talked
about that. We talked about the human factor, we talked about
fatigue.
Mr. Fritz. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Brown. I just want you to just go over it, since you
are representing the industry here today.
Mr. Fritz. Yes, ma'am. I will start with Positive Train
Control. Union Pacific is on record that we are aggressively
pursuing Positive Train Control. We are in the process of
developing the technology for two tests on our system. We
anticipate running those tests in the near to medium term
future.
I would tell you that from what I heard in the testimony
today, it sounded like that technology is already readily
available, and can be pulled off the shelf. I assure that is
not the case, otherwise, we'd have it implemented. It is more
complex than that. Complexity is around how to control a train
of different weight cars, different lengths, over different
types of terrain in a manner that doesn't shut the railroad
down, from the standpoint of being able to stay fluid. So that
is a very complex issue to be addressed.
The BNSF has proven a prototype system. I know that they
will continue to develop that system, and we are also
developing a system along the lines.
To address your question from the standpoint of all the
things that railroads do to prevent train accidents, let me
break that up into track-related, or infrastructure-related
activities, employee-related activities, and then let's say
just systems and processes.
From the standpoint of track, it has been mentioned today
already that we employ technology in the form of ultrasonic
testing and detector cars; also, technology in the form of
geometry cars. We also use algorithmic technology to determine
where we should be investing our dollars.
I'd like to mention, we spend about 20 percent of our
revenue every year on investing in the railroad. The vast
majority of that goes towards maintaining the infrastructure
that we've got right now. That's a phenomenal number. Last year
it was $2.8 billion. We target that investment so that it's
spent at the right spot, so that it does prevent rail
accidents.
Concrete ties were mentioned today. We are implementing
concrete ties on our highest density, heavy haul portions of
our railroad. We're implementing those in a prudent but rapid
fashion. We also happen to use composite ties in areas where
wood ties tend to degrade relatively quickly. I use those, to
the extent they're available, I use them extensively in the
south. So, on the track side, we design our systems, we employ
technology, all with a design of running at design track speed,
and doing so safely.
As regards our employees and human factor derailments, it
was mentioned today that Labor and Management need to work
better together. I fully agree. We're driving those
conversations and that cooperation. Here on San Antonio, on the
San Antonio Service Unit, there's a program that we call the
Cab Red Zone Program, CAB, an it is targeting safe operating
behavior in a peer-to-peer observation in the cab of a
locomotive. It's unique in the rail industry. We are getting,
what we would consider, positive results from it. It is showing
up in statistics on the service unit from the standpoint of
reduction in human factor derailments, and human factor
incidents. And that was created jointly between Labor,
Management, and the FRA. The FRA is maintaining a position in
that program.
We also use technology as regards making sure that our
train crews are trained to operate safely and effectively. We
use, as you heard, train simulators, so that conductors and
engineers know the territory they're running on, know how to
run on it safely. We go through extensive rules classes before
any new hire has the ability to actually operate a piece of
rail equipment. If they were to actually get into the seat of
the locomotive, as the engineer of the locomotive, we take them
through another series of extensive months of training prior to
being able to operate the locomotive as an engineer.
And then as regards our systems, we implement rail
signaling, signalization on our main lines, where we can, as is
prudent in terms of investment. We're doing that so that at
some point in the future, and I'd prefer in the near future,
our main lines are signalized. That takes away the dark
territory discussion, and it's also in our railroad's best
interest. That gives us derailment detection or broken rail
detection, which--I meant broken rail detection, which is very
important to us. Because at the end of the day, Madam
Chairwoman, my employees here in San Antonio, are citizens.
They're interested community members. We do not want to have
incidents in this community. We do everything in our power to
improve our safety record, and our safety policies and
procedures, so we avoid them. I mentioned, our ultimate goal is
zero incidents.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. I guess I do have a couple of other
follow-up questions. The incident that we've been talking about
with the 22 hours, and the fact is that you said you're going
to have zero tolerance. I guess I'm interested in what
provisions are you putting in place so that that limbo time is
correct? I mean, I've heard a lot of discussion from the
industry about it. We've had a hearing in Washington on it. I
don't think you were there, but the question is, that takes
planning and coordination. I understand that there are going to
be some emergency times, some train is going to break down, and
you need the authority to be able to deal with emergencies, but
it should not be day-to-day operations. I mean, it's just not
for the safety of the industry to have your people out
somewhere in the middle of nowhere for five hours.
Mr. Fritz. Madam Chairwoman, I would agree with you. We are
aggressively reducing limbo time, at least the portion that is
within our control. You did mention that limbo time will
happen, periodically. A great example is when we suffer a snow
storm or an ice storm, which we have at the beginning of this
winter, earlier in the year. And when that happens, the safest
path is to keep the crew on the train until we can figure out a
way to safely get them tied up at their destination.
But having said that, regarding the limbo time that is a
failure, if you will, a cost of quality, we are working with
our van companies; that is, the companies that provide
transportation. We are working on our own systems so that, to
Mr. Velasquez' point, we plan better, further in the future for
where a train is going to tie up, and being able to get that
crew off that train, and get them to their official tie-up
destination as expeditiously as possible. Because, again, it's
in our best interest to have rested crews, and crews with
positive work attitudes.
Ms. Brown. One other thing. We, in the last couple of
Congress', you all were getting, I think it was 4-1/2 cent
deficit spending, and you've given it back to the industry. And
we're looking at additional ways that we can support industry,
but can you tell us how much, maybe you can't, but maybe you
can put it in writing, how much have you received, and how has
that investment gone into the infrastructure of your railroad?
Mr. Fritz. Madam Chairwoman, if I understand what you're
asking, you're asking how much money have we received?
Ms. Brown. Of the gasoline tax. We were taxing you 4-1/2
cents.
Mr. Fritz. Right.
Ms. Brown. Yes, 4.3 cents, and we've done away with that.
Mr. Fritz. Yes.
Ms. Brown. And with the understanding that the industry was
putting it back into the infrastructure of the railroads. And,
I guess, my question is, how much have you received, and how
much has gone into--reinvested into your railroad?
Mr. Fritz. I'll have to get back with you on that. My
understanding of the 4-1/2 cent tax that we were paying was a
deficit reduction tax.
Ms. Brown. That's correct.
Mr. Fritz. And my understanding is that we received
virtually none, if any. But I will have to verify that, and get
back to you in writing.
Ms. Brown. No, I know that you've received, because we're
no longer doing it, so you have received. But why don't you
just check with your staff.
Mr. Fritz. I will.
Ms. Brown. Okay.
Mr. Fritz. We are no longer being taxed that tax.
Ms. Brown. That's correct.
Mr. Fritz. That is correct.
Ms. Brown. So the question is, how much money have you
received from that tax, that we no longer doing it?
Mr. Fritz. Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. So you're asking the
question, with the tax relief.
Ms. Brown. Yes.
Mr. Fritz. That has provided cash flow.
Ms. Brown. Yes.
Mr. Fritz. How much was that? I can't give you an exact
figure.
Ms. Brown. And how are you investing it?
Mr. Fritz. I will tell you that all of our cash flow is
being either invested in the railroad and infrastructure. And I
mentioned we invest at about a 20 percent of revenue level.
Last year was a $2.8 billion spend, this year's game plan is a
$3.2 billion spend. It either goes into the infrastructure
investment. It pays employees, or it goes to a return for our
shareholders. But I will get you an exact figure of what that
dollar figure is in terms of relief of that tax.
Ms. Brown. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. Mr.
Fritz, a couple of things. The first observation, and as full
disclosure, I am not a formal member of the Committee on
Transportation, so, obviously, I not a formal member of the
subcommittee. It's just my privilege to participate, so I don't
speak for any of the members.
My own impression of it, though, as a member of Congress,
we appreciate the necessity many times for uniformity when
you're dealing in interstate commerce. And if you're in
transportation, if you're in the rail, we understand that, and
so we recognize that states and localities would like to do
many things on their own, but that could very well complicate
matters. And as you noticed, I was very frank with my state
legislator, and my Mayor, and my County Judge, that that may
complicate things. We may never be able to have that kind of
authority vested, other than the federal government. But the
federal government has to do right by the localities and the
states, so that's first understanding. And I want you to know
that.
The other is, railroads are indispensable. We really need
you. This economy needs you. We turn the lights on here today
because we have, in all respects, a coal-fired plant over here,
and that--if Wyoming coal wasn't being delivered as it is by
rail, we'd have a lot of problems on our hands.
I think someone alluded to Toyota, a brand new plant out
there. Well, how do you think the finished product gets
distributed, so we understand the need. And I think we have to
have this partnership. And there is no reason why there
shouldn't be some sort of meeting of the minds.
The thing that has troubled me for some time has been this
fatigue factor. And I think we had Mr. Cothen here, and I may
be wrong, Madam Chair, as to where we are in this whole debate.
And my materials are a couple of months old, but they were
prepared by staff, and they're excellent, by the way, whoever
put all this together. See if I can try to get a handle on this
fatigue so that when I report to my local officials and such, I
say we're doing something on not just identifying the main
cause of the accidents, especially in San Antonio, which
resulted in fatalities.
``The Department of Transportation, on numerous occasions,
has formally submitted legislation to reform the Hours of
Service law, supplemented with fatigue management requirements,
or authorize the FRA to prescribe regulations on fatigue in
light of current scientific knowledge. Currently, the statute
contains no substantive rule making authority over duty hours.
The FRA's lack of regulatory authority over duty hours, unique
to FRA, among all the safety regulatory agencies in the
department, precludes FRA from making use of almost a century
of scientific learning on the issue of sleep/wake cycles, and
fatigue induced performance failures.''
Do you think we need to be making changes? I know that Mr.
Cothen had alluded to, we're making some progress. And I don't
know if that's a matter of just suggestions, recommendations, a
meeting of the minds, and such, but do we finally have to do
something legislatively? Like I said, I'm not speaking for the
committee. They may be way ahead on this thing, and they could
probably inform me now or later on it, but what is the position
of Union Pacific as far as rule making authority vested in the
FRA, to come in and simply tell you, as the employer, and then,
of course, the employee that may be represented by the unions.
Do you all have a position on that?
Mr. Fritz. Yes, sir. We would prefer to be able to work
this out with our unions. Clearly, as stated already, that
would be the best overall outcome, and we're working very hard
to do that.
Absent the ability to create a more conducive work/rest
cycle that would satisfy all parties, both Labor and Management
and the railroad industry, we believe that the responsibility
should reside with Congress and the Rail Safety Act for Hours
of Service legislation.
Mr. Gonzalez. But to specifically address it, as I just
read this portion from the report that was provided me, does it
appear that we need to do more to vest some sort of additional
authority, to get into the specifics. If the parties can't work
it out, and to be honest with you, I think, Madam Chairwoman,
they probably have the best of all worlds, because if you have
the employer, let's just say that's corporate America or
whatever, and you have those members of Congress that obviously
would be on your side. And then you have the unions on the
other, and you have other members of Congress, and both of you
all are saying the same thing, it's let us work it out, let us
work it out. But the truth may be that it hasn't been worked
out. And I guess I'm just trying to figure out--I know that
your position is, we're going to continue working on it.
There'll be recommendations. But somewhere along the way, if
it's not worked out, do we simply say we're going to vest that
authority in the FRA, like we do other regulatory agencies, and
they go forward.
My last observation is, I know that you say the technology
may not be there, or whatever. I just find it almost impossible
to believe that Positive Train Control technology hasn't
reached a state where some of it would have been adopted, maybe
in its very primitive, and its expensive form. And it's not as
simple as the Volvo commercial, where they're driving and it
tells the driver that there's a motorcyclist to the right in
that blind spot, or the driver who's fumbling with something
and comes to another stationary object, and it warns him. But
surely, there's something out there for railroads, and there
has to be some aggressive adoption.
Again, I've been informed today that it appears that we
have some technology that's reached that point, but I think you
all definitely have to be much more aggressive.
My last observation is going to be on the public relations.
You heard Maria Berriozabal, that the neighbors worry and such,
and it is about public relations. And I know that you all have
endeavored to do more here in San Antonio, for all the obvious
reasons. But truly, take it from members of Congress,
politicians, elected officials, people just want to know
they're being heard, and the questions have to be answered. And
sometimes it's simply saying, you know what, we messed up. Our
employee was at fault, applied too much pressure, or whatever
it is, on the brake and created the accident.
You want to know what hazardous materials are coming
through here. Well, we can't give you specifics for some
reasons, but we'll tell you, it's minimal, or it doesn't even
come through this area, to be honest with you. But these are
small things, but you hear the citizens asking for that, that
would go a long way.
Those are just my own suggestions and recommendations. I
will definitely follow this issue closely, just because of the
accident history in this city, but I surely will defer to the
expertise that will be demonstrated by Chairman Oberstar and
Chairwoman Brown. And I yield back. Thank you so much.
Ms. Brown. I personally want to thank you for coming. I
know you've heard the comments of the committee, and comments
from the citizens. And I know that you will govern yourself
accordingly.
The current law--and thank you very much.
Mr. Fritz. Thank you.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, again. I want to thank you for being
here today, and for your testimony. And you need to know that
as Chair, the railroads--I just didn't happen to get this
committee. I've been involved in transportation for over 25
years, and been on this committee for 15 years. And when I was
born, I used to tell people the Silver Meteor ran through my
house, and my brother has worked with the industry for over 30
years. And I think the industry is very important to the
community. And for years, it's been operating in the red, and
now it's in the black. And I tell people all the time, we're
not competing with Georgia and Alabama, we're competing with
the Chinese and other countries, and so we need to stay on top
of it, and we need to work together. And the key, in my
position, is that I want to always be fair, but I think there
are some things that the industry can work out without Congress
telling them to work out.
If we look at the Fatigue law, it's over 100 years old, and
so, I mean, modern technology and people's goodwill, you all
can solve this, and we don't have to. But it's in your hands,
and we're looking forward to leadership from people like you,
Mr. Fritz.
I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony,
and members for their questions. Again, the members of the
subcommittee have additional questions for the witness, and
we'll ask you to respond in writing.
The hearing record will be held over for 14 days. And with
that, we have 14 people from the community that would like to
make testimony, or comments. And I'm going to turn it over to
Mr. Gonzalez to take their testimony. I'm going to be right
here. And I know this doesn't sound like very much, but in
Congress, every morning we have one minute that we can come and
make our comments, our remarks, and then you can extend and
give additional comments in writing. So now this is your
chance. We have several people, and I'm going to turn it over
to Mr. Gonzalez to chair this portion of the hearing. Have them
come up.
Mr. Gonzalez. If you will come up and take the podium
there, and use that microphone. And the Chairwoman has
indicated it is one minute; but, of course, we'll entertain
something beyond that at a later date. I'm going to go by the
order that I have here, so if it's, I didn't take this down.
Glenn Sellars. Glenn.
Mr. Sellars. Thank you for this meeting, Congressman. I've
been working with Stephanie, and a lot of the things I'm going
to say, you have already in your possession. I never did get a
definitive answer on the cell phone, but I do have it for you
now.
On the Union Pacific policy, cell phones are to be used for
company use only, but a dispatcher will call a dispatcher on a
train and say, ``Do you have a cell phone? Please call me.''
And the dispatcher will relay sensitive safety matters by cell
phone to the conductor. That's number one.
Fatigue. Fatigue, well, first let me tell you about myself.
I've been with the railroad since 1966. I got 1.7 million miles
as an engineer. I never had a derailment. I never had a
personal injury with my crew members. I know railroad back and
forth, and the Union Pacific, I wish you would ask the Vice
President here; the employees must stay marked up or available
91 percent of the time. That's nine out of ten days they have
to be available, but why is there 100 people laid off,
furloughed here in San Antonio right now?
Mr. Gonzalez. Glenn, I'm going to have to hold you to that
one minute. Actually, I've gone to a minute and a half.
Mr. Sellars. Sir?
Mr. Gonzalez. I have to hold you to that one minute,
because that is the Chairwoman's order.
Mr. Sellars. Is my minute already up?
Mr. Gonzalez. Oh, believe me, one minute--members of
Congress, if we can do one minutes in the morning in Congress,
we figure just anybody can do one minutes. But we'll follow-up.
And you know Stephanie will take your name right now, and we do
want the benefit of what you're telling us today based on your
experience, so if you'll just--and, of course, you know
Stephanie. But if I don't cut this--because the Chairwoman,
we're going to have to have another meeting, and then we're due
over at the Editorial Board, so I apologize.
Mr. Sellars. I appreciate the Congressman holding this
meeting, but, Congressman, please let me say one final thing.
Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sellars. Make it a federal law, make it a federal law,
remote controls cannot be used while using hazardous material.
Please make that a federal law.
Mr. Gonzalez. Definitely we take that under advisement. And
I think there's some action on that. It's Laura or Lara
Cushing.
Ms. Cushing. Good afternoon. My name is Lara Cushing I'm
with the Southwest Worker's Union. We're a grassroots
community-based organization representing 2,500 families in San
Antonio that are concerned about economic and environmental
justice.
San Antonio is crisscrossed by train traffic, and 70
percent of that is merely passing through the city on its way
to somewhere else. The low-income communities of color that we
organize on San Antonio's southside are boxed in by tracks, and
could be trapped without an escape route were an accident to
occur. There are over 140 train crossings without over or under
passes, and 162 hospitals or schools within a mile of tracks.
In seven short months in 2004, 21 derailments occurred in
Bexar County, five lives were lost, and dozens were injured.
However, in the two and a half years since then, we still don't
have even a basic emergency notification system, or evacuation
plan for the city. Instead, we've seen more accidents,
including the one last fall that Ms. Berriozabal spoke about.
Southwest Worker's Union feels that no amount of measures
to reduce human factors in accidents will be adequate to
protect our health and safety. As long as hazardous material is
carted through our communities, there are going to be
accidents, and there will be deaths.
Union Pacific's profits rose by over 50 percent last year.
Now is the time for Union Pacific and federal regulators to
invest in a just relocation of train traffic away from where
people live, work, and play, and a conversion of the current
tracks to a commuter light rail system. Until then, we need an
emergency notification system, and an immediate moratorium on
transport of hazardous waste through San Antonio. Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Ms. Cushing. Next we
have Igenio Rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you for your
patience. And, again, I remind you that you have about one
minute.
Mr. Rodriguez. Madam Chair and Committee Members, my name
is Igenio Rodriguez. I'm a retired firefighter of the City of
San Antonio, and also have a compilation title, Fire and
Hazardous Materials containment over the Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone.
Because of property rights, this issue requires multi-
agency cooperation. I respectfully request that prior to
implementing any recommendation, that it be reviewed by local,
state, and federal emergency personnel, and others. Please
consider studying, or suggesting the possibility of a prudent
standard related to buffer zones, occupancy types, density,
land use, sensitive environmental protections, serious
consideration for response time, natural or manmade terrain or
hazards involved that can affect communication, safety,
evacuation, and containment. A benefit analysis should be done
regarding trucks versus trains, consumer cost, and warehousing.
I commend you for having come to us, and for having the
courage and diligence to bring this forth to us, and for being
proactive, versus reactive. Thank you very much.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Rodriguez.
Ms. Brown. I want to thank you for making sure that we open
it up to the public.
Mr. Gonzalez. Harry Sandgill.
Mr. Sandgill. I'll try to use one minute for Rail Labor.
I'm a law professor, and 30 years of pro bono experience in
rail safety matters. I have a creative solution. I take up the
UP on their offer. Let's do something about not carrying hazmat
through cities. Let's do something that hasn't been done for
years. Let's go back to the STB, the successor to the ICC, go
for a red flag or an embargo on ultra-hazardous materials, go
together with rail labor, corporations, cities, local
governments, and say the FRA is not doing it safely. We can't
guarantee safety, and until we get it right, let's not carry
this stuff. Let's just do this, and we'll do this for an
interim period until we've gotten better safety protection
across the board.
This isn't hard. We should just go do it. I know that's not
the human factors issue. This is possible. We ought to go down
that path before.
AAR members tried this in the Rail Classification cases,
and the only reason they lost was despite the fact that they
had the only testimony from Dr. Cards and Dr. Gregory, there
was no opposition by the shippers at all. The ICC, the
forerunner of STB, said look, the FRA says it's safe. We have
no choice but to say you're still going to carry it. But if we
all agreed it's not safe, and got the FRA to help us build the
statistical case for why it's not safe yet, we can protect San
Antonio, we can protect Minott, which has been blown up
already, Scotts Bluff, which has been blown up twice, and
protect against something else that no one has talked about,
which is this.
Three different federal circuits have held that railroads
when they're negligent are not responsible in money damages for
the damages they created to cities. That happened in Scotts
Bluff, and in Minott, and the Baltimore Fire Tunnel. I think
this committee knows about this, so this is a good creative
step, we ought to take this path. Thanks very much.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much.
Mr. Sandgill. I'm going to be in Washington working with
staff next week.
Mr. Gonzalez. Appreciate it. Mary Ozuna.
Ms. Ozuna. Hi, Mary Ozuna. I'm a member of South Central
Community Planning Team in the city. I'm also the county
precinct chair for 10-03, which is the area between the two
railroad trails on South Alamo, and South Florez. I would like
to look at this as a proactive. This has happened for many
years. My cousin was in an accident 30 years ago, same area by
Brackenridge High School, and survived. The person in front of
her did not. But I'm also on the zoning--I get all the zoning
notices from the city because I'm on the Community Plan.
I offer--I thought the gentleman was over here, to someone
from the railroad to be in our committee. The South Central
Planning Committee is from South Alamo Street, which is a new
city building, and it goes all the way to Toyota, right before
it, on Military Drive. We get all zoning issues. I continuously
ask if the Union Pacific has been invited, and I'm told
generally no.
I also would like to--I'd love to have somebody on the
team. I also would like to suggest that zoning, city, state,
whatever, needs to be looked at. There are individuals when I
go to meetings who are just starting off with condos. That was
mentioned earlier, and they're right by the tracks. That is
ridiculous.
I'm a product of a person that was in the railroad, came in
1800s here, so I'm not against them, but I think we need to
work together. And I think that some other issues can be done.
I agree with Mr. Velasquez, who actually is a friend of mine,
didn't realize he was going to say he's against moving the
tracks. I don't think that's the answer.
Taxpayers also do not want to pay more money for those
ideas. I think in the modern-day time, we have a lot of
opportunities that are available, and we just need to use our
individual minds and work on it. Thank you very much for
coming.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you.
Ms. Ozuna. Thanks, Charlie.
Mr. Gonzalez. Betty Edward. Betty.
Ms. Edward. Well, I'm going to talk about something
entirely different. I am a Senior Advocate for seniors in San
Antonio. I run a senior center, and the trains go right by our
senior center. And I know that we're not ready when we have the
next train wreck, and incident, and event in San Antonio. I
know seniors are not ready, but my recommendation is a little
bit different.
The train and the railroads are the history of our country.
They were here before we were here, and we built next to them.
I would like to see something, and I don't know who can do it,
whether it starts with Charlie, or whether it starts with Mike
Villarreal, or where it starts, state, local, city, that we not
build anything else next to the railroad tracks in our city,
county, or state until all of these things that we talked about
today, these safety issues, are put into place, or at least
part of them, in order to prevent what will happen.
On the day of October 17th, I was en route to a zoning
meeting here in San Antonio to change the zoning on a piece of
property right next to the railroad track in the neighborhood
that I represent. The zoning was changed. We talked to the
developer. We tried to get him to give the property back and
not build there. We haven't made any headway with him, at all.
He's going to build. They are going to bring families in. The
families will bring children. The children love the trains. We
know what's going to happen.
At Dora Street, San Pedro and Dora, we've had--I've
witnessed, personally, one death, two others have occurred
there, because one person took their life on the railroad
track, believe it or not, 46 years old, a homeless lady. One
child wandered to the railroad track, two years old, was
killed. And one young lady going to college was killed because
she had her radio on, air condition on, she couldn't hear the
train.
Now we do have the railroad guards there now because of
Mike Villarreal, and the railroad, of course, put them in, and
we appreciate that. But I think that we need better guards at
our tracks. We needs guards that will close completely so
people will not attempt to go around them. They can't hear the
train. And I'll tell you, if I hear the train, I know I better
not cross that track.
Mr. Gonzalez. Betty, the time is up.
Ms. Edward. I know my time is, too. Okay. Thank you very
much. Thank you for coming. Thank you, Chairperson Brown. We
appreciate it. We hope something results from this meeting.
Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez. Brad Smith.
Mr. Smith. Congressman Gonzalez, thank you very much. And
thank you for insisting that your committee be here. And I did
speak with Chairwoman Brown earlier. I think she and I see eye-
to-eye regarding this. I am here today. I'm a political
candidate more than once, but today my opponent spoke earlier,
Mr. Hardberger. And so thank all of you that tried to get more
attention to this.
Obviously, not enough has been done, in my opinion. I
honestly thought that Big Brother was already watching the
transport of hazardous materials here. In other words, that one
hand knew what the other hand was doing. I can promise you that
this will be an issue.
In my campaign, I'm calling for however many billions of
dollars, 90 or 100 billion, since we've heard that that much is
going to the Iraq war on a short-term basis, why can't we
invest here the same amount of money. Our government can
certainly borrow eight trillion dollars, so I don't think $100
billion is too much to ask to come and take care of many, many
safety factors, starting here with the railroad and
transportation. And thank you for your time.
Mr. Gonzalez. Sam Parks.
Mr. Parks. My name is Sam Parks. I'm a commercial airline
pilot, about to be forced into mandatory retirement in another
year and a half. If you all want to do something about that,
but that's another story.
Ms. Brown. I signed onto that bill to extend it.
Mr. Parks. I beg your pardon?
Ms. Brown. I signed onto the bill to extend it from what,
62 to 65 years.
Mr. Parks. Bless your heart. I'll give you a hug later.
Ms. Brown. All right.
Mr. Parks. I took an active interest in the railroads after
18 years of driving around a block crossing out in southwest
Bexar County. On a website called ``My Rulebook.com,'' I
downloaded their GCOR, General Code of Operating Rules. I also
found out what state laws were applicable to blocked crossings,
and after some $2,000 in fines, we finally got their attention.
I also got tired of calling an 800 number, where I was
talking to Kansas or Omaha, or someplace, and not a specific
individual. In the last six months, I ran across an individual
that's present here today named Travis Behnke, and that
gentleman can make things happen, and I appreciate that.
There's a lack of professionalism in the part of the
operating crews. The conductor is in charge of the train, but
the engineer is operating. The conductor is the youngest member
of the crew, and there's an intimidation factor there. When the
conductor says we shouldn't be doing this, and he says oh, no,
we're going to do that anyway. And it's like a captain and a
first officer relationship, where the first officer is in
charge of the train, but the captain is operating it.
I also have a problem with this dark territory. It's
inexcusable to me that on the shift technology today with GPS
tracking, that trains cannot be tracked exactly like all
airborne aircraft over the air space today. Eighteen wheelers,
companies track eighteen wheelers to the very mile as to what
their location is.
Laptop computers on each train with broad band or wireless
access, the engineers could have a screen to give them
situational awareness in their cab, much like we have on an
airliner, which call it Terminal Collision Avoidance System,
where we see every other airplane that's around us. We have a
Situational Awareness. These engineers and operators of these
trains have no idea where they are unless they knock down a
switch.
I mean, it's like the railroad is being dragged kicking and
screaming into the 21st century. It's like they're still
operating with two dixie cups and a string for a telephone.
Mr. Gonzalez. Sam, I've got to go ahead and call you on the
time.
Mr. Parks. All right.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much. I think you've brought
out some very interesting facts. Charlotte Cable.
Ms. Cable. Thank you so much for having us today. And you
have come to the home state of Jessie Jones, whose visionary
rail policies helped bring the U.S. out of the Great
Depression. So our rail system is still the backbone of U.S.
transport, and growing commuter systems.
We do not want to regulate the rails out of business. There
is a limit, however, which taxpayers will begin questioning,
and then resisting federal funding for rail projects. After the
films of the January 7th Louisville disaster, those tolerance
limits have been raised.
We do not envy your challenge to properly regulate the
self-sustaining, safe U.S. rail system, but we must ask you to
please do so to protect your constituents living in cities,
counties, and states without the local authority to regulate
that system that is both a great benefit, and great hazard to
our welfare.
So thank you for bringing this to San Antonio to hear our
thoughts, and welcome to San Antonio.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Ms. Cable. Nettie
Hinton.
Ms. Hinton. I'm Nettie Hinton, and I live at 509 Burlison
Street, and that's the east downtown neighborhood, which is a
historic district in San Antonio, Dignowity Hills. We are home
to what had been the historic roundhouse, the first train
station. We have now the intermodal yard, the east yards where
a UP employee has died in the yards because of a safety mishap.
We also are the home of the engineer repair facility for Union
Pacific.
We were there before the railroads came, because they came
in 1877, and we were founded long before that as a community.
We have lived since that time with health and safety issues
from the railroad, including the rail cars blocking three major
arterials in our community, Pine Street, Hackberry Street, and
LeMar Street, as they're waiting to get into the yards.
We understood that that meant that police, fire, and EMS
would not be able to have access to our community, nor to the
Bowden Elementary School, and the Ella Austin Community Center,
because of the location of the railroad. But we are now living
with an additional fear factor, and it comes because we know
that the benzene, and the chlorine, and the acids are passing
through our community. And we know of the deaths that have
resulted because of the derailments. And we are asking that you
do something about those toxic materials running through that
main line. They have to be relocated.
We are going to host, hopefully, Texas A&M playing Ohio
State on March 24th at the regionals at the Alamo Dome. I would
hate for a tragedy to occur during March Madness, or, for that
matter, during the month of April when our families are on
Broadway watching the Battle of Flowers and Fiesta Flambeau,
but that's exactly what can happen in my community in San
Antonio because of the main line. Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Ms. Hinton. I yield back
to the Chairwoman.
Ms. Brown. I want to thank you. I want to thank all of the
witnesses for your testimony, and we will take it back, and
take it under advisement. Thank you, Congressman, for inviting
us to come here, and unless there's further business, this
subcommittee will stand adjourned. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 1:40 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]