[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 143 (Wednesday, October 22, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10947-S10948]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ONE-CALL NOTIFICATION
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I would like to clarify the intent of a
portion of the Commerce Committee's ISTEA amendment that deals with
State one-call (``call-before-you-dig'') programs. I'm interested in
this language as it relates to the treatment of railroads. I understand
that the provisions proposed to be added to the ISTEA legislation are
the same as the provisions of S. 1115, the ``Comprehensive One-Call
Notification Act of 1997.''
The Leader, together with the Minority Leader, introduced this bill
as S. 1115 in July, and the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation already held a hearing on this bill in September.
Mr. LOTT. Senator Ford is correct. Thank you for focusing attention
on this important safety aspect of the amendment. Our country
increasingly depends on a reliable, safe, dependable underground
infrastructure of pipelines and communications networks. To protect
these facilities against damage from excavation activities, States have
developed one-call programs. These programs notify facility owners of
imminent excavation in the vicinity of those facilities. The owners can
then mark the location of those facilities, protecting both the
facilities and the excavator. My legislative goal is to augment and
improve the effectiveness of these State programs.
Mr. FORD. Does the legislation impose mandates on States and require
them to change their programs?
Mr. LOTT. The answer is an emphatic ``no.'' The legislation does not
impose any federal mandate on the States to modify their existing one-
call programs. The bill does not dictate the content of these programs
from Washington. Period. The legislation does, however, encourage
States to improve their programs, and it makes funding available for
that purpose.
To be eligible for the funding, the State programs must meet certain
minimum standards, but even those standards are performance-based, not
prescriptive.
Frankly, legislation that contained a federal mandate for a one-call
system was tried a few years ago, and it failed. There were endless
fights over how the bill should be written precisely due to the fact
that there are indeed 50 differing perceptions. Valid perceptions and
experiences which match up to the many programs already in existence.
This year, this mistake was avoided with this legislative approach--no
mandates. And I am pleased to say that is why it enjoys broad support
on both sides of the aisle.
In fact, at the conclusion of my remarks, I will ask unanimous
consent to have printed in the Record a letter from Secretary of
Transportation Slater, dated October 16, recognizing the importance of
including one-call legislation as part of the reauthorization of the
ISTEA legislation.
Mr. FORD. Among the minimum standards required for a program to be
eligible for federal assistance is the requirement for ``appropriate
participation by all excavators.'' However, the bill does not define
these terms. Isn't that going to lead to a variety of inconsistent
outcomes?
Mr. LOTT. What I have found is that there is not one single one-call
definition that applies equally to all 50 States. The various State
laws on the books have certain elements in common, but there are just
as many differences, and those differences often are appropriate.
Montana will not need the same law as Mississippi. For that reason, the
bill allows States flexibility by not mandating a single definition
written in Washington.
[[Page S10948]]
Mr. FORD. While there is not a definition of ``excavation'' in the
bill, some definitions in other bills on this subject would have
covered routine railroad maintenance. I am concerned that railroads
might be required to participate in a program that places an undue
burden on activities that pose little threats to underground
facilities. How would the bill before us affect this matter?
Mr. LOTT. Again, I say to Senator Ford, the bill does not require
States to change their existing programs. So it would not change the
way railroads are treated under any existing State laws. I understand
about 30 States laws now cover at least some railroad activities while
about 10 specifically exempt railroads from coverage. The bill will not
change the exemption in these States. Will not. The fact that 30 States
have chosen to include railroads within their programs suggests that at
least in these instances, State legislatures determined that some
potential threat to underground facilities from railroad activity does
exist. Again, this bill in and of itself will not require a change in
how the railroad activity is treated. Will not.
However, I want to reiterate that what is appropriate for one State
may not be appropriate for another. To receive Federal assistance under
the bill, a State must only demonstrate that its program covers those
excavators whose action poses a significant risk to underground
facilities.
The State's decisions will not be measured and second-guessed against
a national standard.
Mr. FORD. Railroads also raised the issue of whether it is
appropriate to require them to participate in one-call systems as
``underground operators'' because railroads own their right-of-ways and
know the location of their own facilities within those right-of-ways.
Mr. LOTT. Again, if States do not now require railroads to
participate as operators of underground facilities, then there still is
no provision in the bill that would change that status. Remember, no
mandates. Most State programs do not require participation by persons
whose underground facilities lie within their own property like a gas
station. The bill in no way discourages States from continuing such
common sense exclusions.
Mr. FORD. The railroads also urged Congress to provide for immediate
response in the case of derailments and natural disasters. Does the
bill address this issue?
Mr. LOTT. Again, this bill neither specifies or directs the details
of a State program nor does it override existing State programs. All of
the State programs of which I am aware allow for an immediate response
in the event of an emergency. And this bill does not change this
situation.
Mr. FORD. Finally, the railroad industry expressed concern that the
bill could possibly interfere with the right-of-way agreements
companies have negotiated between themselves. Can this concern be
addressed?
Mr. LOTT. I want to personally assure Senator Ford that this bill
does not override private contracts, just as it does not override
existing State programs. If expert opinions believe doubt is created
than I will offer an amendment to remove this consequence.
Mr. FORD. I thank the Leader for his clarifications regarding this
legislation.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from
Secretary Slater be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
The Secretary of Transportation,
Washington, DC, October 16, 1997.
Hon. Trent Lott,
Majority Leader,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Lott: Thank you for your continued support in
developing legislation to enhance protection of America's
underground utilities.
As you know, safety is the Department of Transportation's
highest priority. Prevention of damage to underground
facilities, including pipelines and telecommunications
cables, is a key departmental safety initiative. That is why
we included one-call legislation as part of the
Administration's proposal to reauthorize the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA).
Your continued leadership on one-call issues is critical to
enacting legislation during this Congress. I am pleased that
our respective bills share the same fundamental principles:
that all underground facility operators must participate in
one-call systems and that, with very limited exceptions, all
excavators must call before they dig. I look forward to
working with you to enact this important legislation.
Please do not hesitate to contact me or Mr. Steven O.
Palmer, Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs, at 202-
366-4573, if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Rodney E. Slater.
____________________