[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 43 (Monday, April 20, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3274-S3275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECTING PUBLIC SAFETY BY PREVENTING EXCAVATION DAMAGE
Mr. LOTT. Madam President, recently, the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) held a public meeting in Washington, D.C. to
discuss the findings of a comprehensive study it conducted to assess
the safety initiatives undertaken by industry and government and
private organizations to prevent excavation damage to underground
pipelines. As a result of the study, the NTSB adopted twenty-seven
safety recommendations to reduce the risks posed by excavation damage.
I want to take this opportunity to commend the NTSB for its proactive
stance on this important safety issue.
Excavation damage poses serious safety risks to our Nation's critical
infrastructure. This infrastructure, among other things, transports
natural gas, petroleum, and other chemical products through pipelines
and enables telephone and Internet access through a vast network of
fiber optic cables and communication lines. Damage to this
infrastructure not only exposes people and the environment to safety
risks, but impedes economic development.
The NTSB agrees. In a press release issued on the study, the NTSB
states ``a single pipeline accident has the potential to cause a
catastrophic disaster that can injure hundreds of persons, affect
thousands more, and cost millions of dollars in terms of property
damage, loss of work opportunity, community disruption, ecological
damage, and insurance liability. Excavation and construction activities
are the largest single cause of accidents to pipelines.'' The Safety
Board goes on to say that in ``addition to being expensive and
inconvenient, disruption of the telecommunications network can have
significant safety implication, such as impact on traffic control
systems, health services, and emergency response activities.''
The NTSB further found that ``damage from outside force is the
leading cause of leaks and ruptures to pipeline systems, accounting for
more than 40 percent of the reported failures.'' Excavation damage, the
NTSB determined, ``is also the single largest cause of interruptions to
fiber cable service.''
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, I would like to stand with the
Majority Leader not only in affirming the importance of pipelines to
our national transportation infrastructure, but also as a personal
witness to the damage that a pipeline accident can have on victims of
pipeline eruptions, and particularly to the community.
Four years ago, around midnight, on March 24, 1994, a major natural
gas pipeline ruptured in Edison, New Jersey, a densely populated, urban
environment. This rupture caused a deafening boom, awakening residents
of the Durham Woods apartment complex. Seconds later, a plume of fire
and gas shot hundreds of feet above the ground. Thankfully, the more
than one thousand residents fled their homes, all leaving before the
explosion leveled the Durham Woods apartment complex. I visited the
site after the blast. I saw how the explosion incinerated cars,
playground equipment and trees. Over one hundred people suffered
injuries from the fire. One woman died from a heart attack. It was a
miracle that nobody else died from that disaster. Four years later, the
victims still suffer emotionally and physically. Some are
[[Page S3275]]
still awaiting settlements. They escaped with their lives but their
lives are not the same. A state grand jury determined that the disaster
probably was tied to damage caused earlier by unauthorized excavation
which weakened the pipe, causing it to explode.
Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I remember that disaster to which the
Senator from New Jersey refers. That, along with other devastating
excavation damage acts, such as those in Puerto Rico and Minnesota, led
to the NTSB's decision to issue new strong safety recommendations to
the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), states, and other industry groups
including trade associations.
But today, I want to focus on two recommendations in particular. As a
result of the study I mentioned above, the Safety Board issued a
recommendation strongly urging states to adopt comprehensive one-call
statewide excavation programs. They believe that one-call programs are
proven to prevent damage due to excavation, thereby reducing the
likelihood of pipeline disasters.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, the Safety Board is right. Following
the disaster, the State of New Jersey adopted a comprehensive one-call
program that mandates participation throughout the state. It has been a
resounding success. Every year since its adoption, accidental hits have
decreased. In 1995 --the first year of the program, there were 4,624
hits of underground lines in 1.7 million excavations. In 1996, there
were 3,974 hits in 2.1 million excavations. And last year, there were
3,796 hits in 2.5 million excavations--a success rate of 98.8 percent.
One call programs work. We in New Jersey have seen the devastation
caused by pipeline eruptions. We in New Jersey have seen what a one-
call program can do.
Mr. LOTT. The Safety Board issued another recommendation. It also
determined, as a result of the study, that our nation's railroads
should involve themselves in statewide excavation damage prevention
programs. The recommendations state that the associations should urge
their members ``to fully participate in statewide excavation damage
prevention programs, including one-call notification centers.'' The
recommendations were issued to the Association of American Railroads
(AAR) and the American Short Line Railroad Association.
Why has the Safety Board taken such a position? Perhaps it is because
some railroads apparently oppose participating in excavation damage
prevention programs, including one-call notification centers. Some one-
call notification center participants indicate that the railroads are
often no-shows when it comes to underground damage prevention.
Currently, railroads are required to participate in state one-call
notification systems in ten states. I want to repeat that again, only
ten states. Yet AAR opposed the Lott-Daschle one-call notification bill
which passed by the Senate by unanimous consent last year because we
would not include provisions preempting state laws and exempting
railroads from participation in state one-call notification systems in
the remaining forty states.
I understand the railroad industry is taking the same position in the
House. I am told AAR is vigorously opposing the Lott-Daschle one-call
notification legislation unless the House mandates that railroads are
exempt from state's one-call notification systems. So much for industry
opposition to Federal mandates.
Instead of advancing the cause of safety and underground damage
prevention, AAR is trying to use my bill to reduce safety through a
federal exemption in the states where one-call participation is
required. This stance is exactly opposite from the position being urged
by the Safety Board.
Do the railroads pose a safety risk to underground facilities? Yes,
they do. Ameritech recently released a survey of major
telecommunication facility outages which found that 17 percent of the
major outages in the United States were caused by railroads. This
survey, as well as the NTSB study, demonstrates that there is a clear
benefit to the public if railroads participate in one-call notification
systems.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, I cannot agree more. States need the
full participation of every stakeholder in order for a one-call program
to be successful. A comprehensive national one-call initiative is far
from comprehensive, far from national, if a major industry that has a
significant role in the location of pipelines along their rights of way
chooses to take a walk on an initiative that is important in protecting
our communities and the environment against the damage incurred by
pipeline accidents.
As the Majority Leader noted, the Senate adopted the Lott-Daschle
one-call bill as part of ISTEA reauthorization. This is not without
precedent. The Administration included a one-call provision in its
NEXTEA bill. A one-call bill, sponsored by my colleague from New
Jersey, Congressman Frank Pallone, and Congressman Richard Baker of
Louisiana, is moving through the House of Representatives. The support
lies in the Senate, in the Administration, and in key areas in the
House. All we need is to break that logjam and sign a comprehensive
one-call bill into law. All that is standing in its way is that the
railroads' adamant opposition to the bill--opposition that is
preventing the bill from moving ahead. It would be a shame if we missed
out on this opportunity to pass this safety initiative only because of
the railroad industry.
Mr. LOTT. The Safety Board has long been our Nation's premier safety
agency and the Congress has turned to it on many occasions for its
advice on ways to improve transportation safety. Moreover, Safety Board
recommendations have served as the foundation for many transportation
safety bills and laws.
Rather than launch a campaign for exemptions, the railroad industry
might better serve transportation safety if it works with Congress to
implement the reasonable recommendations of the National Transportation
Safety Board.
Let me stress to my fellow Senators that I remain a big supporter of
the nation's railroads. Railroads are, as they like to say, ``the
engine that drives America.'' I agree railroads are a huge engine, an
important engine in America's economy.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. I too support our nation's railroads. Railroads play
a critical role in my state in particular. Ships arrive in the
intermodal hub that is the Port of New York and New Jersey, unload
containers directly onto railroad cars, and send them into the
heartland of the United States. Railroad lines exist throughout the
state. That is exactly why I care about this issue and urge the
railroads to join us in this effort to enact a comprensive bill into
law.
Madam President, I want to commend the Majority Leader for his
involvement and diligence on this issue. Safety must be paramount. And
that is what this issue is all about.
Mr. LOTT. I hope the railroad industry rethinks its position on one-
call notification legislation. I urge them to join us on the side of
safety.
____________________