[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 14097-14108]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2002

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now resume consideration of 
H.R. 2299, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2299) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Transportation and

[[Page 14098]]

     related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2002, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Murray/Shelby amendment No. 1025, in the nature of a 
     substitute.
       Murray/Shelby amendment No. 1030 (to amendment No. 1025), 
     to enhance the inspection requirements for Mexican motor 
     carriers seeking to operate in the United States and to 
     require them to display decals.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.


                           Amendment No. 1030

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I believe the pending business is an 
amendment by the Senator from Washington; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the amendment. I will 
not take very much time because I just discussed with the Senator from 
Washington an amendment we would have which we would propose, perhaps, 
as a second-degree amendment to the first-degree amendment of the 
Senator from Washington. But more importantly, we hope perhaps we can 
work out an agreement in the areas in which we are in disagreement.
  Over the weekend, I examined the language in the Transportation 
appropriations bill and our concerns about it. I do not think those 
concerns are unbridgeable. So I would like to speak for just a few 
moments. And hopefully we can discuss this issue and debate it and 
then, if necessary, vote on the Murray amendment. If not, hopefully we 
can work out some agreements which will achieve the goal we all seek.
  The goal we all seek is simple: That Mexican trucks that are allowed 
to come into the United States of America, according to the North 
American Free Trade Agreement--this is in compliance with the North 
American Free Trade Agreement. The United States has already been 
found, by a panel, to be out of compliance with the North American Free 
Trade Agreement because of our failure to allow trucks that originate 
in Mexico to come into the United States. What we need is a way they 
can come into the United States but that the American people and the 
Mexican people will have the total and complete confidence that every 
reasonable safety measure has been employed to prevent needless death 
on the highways of America. That is the goal we all seek.
  As we know, the House has taken action, as part of the 2002 
Department of Transportation appropriations bill, that would absolutely 
prevent the President of the United States from abiding by our NAFTA 
obligations. It stripped the bill of all funding intended to address 
motor carrier safety issues along the southern border.
  Second, it adopted an amendment to prohibit the approval of any 
Mexican carriers to operate in this country. That amendment is a 
blanket prohibition. It is in direct violation of NAFTA, and it is 
wrong. It is discriminatory, and it must not prevail.
  The Senate appropriations subcommittee, under the leadership of the 
Senator from Washington, has taken a different approach and one that I 
think is very supportable in part but perhaps not entirely. The bill 
provides significant funding to enable the Department of Transportation 
to hire and train more safety inspectors and investigators and to build 
more inspection facilities at the southern border. I commend the 
committee for this action.
  I have concerns, however, over a number of requirements included in 
the bill that, if enacted without modification, could effectively 
prevent the opening of the border indefinitely. My concerns are shared 
by other colleagues, and those concerns are shared by the 
administration.
  The administration estimates that the Senate provisions would result 
in a further delay in opening the border for another 2 years or more. 
This would be a direct violation of NAFTA. It effectively provides a 
blanket prohibition against allowing any Mexican motor carrier from 
operating beyond the commercial zones. And this is a view shared by a 
number of us, as well as the President's senior advisers.
  By the way, the present state of play is that if the Mexican 
Government chose to--since the United States has been found to be in 
violation of NAFTA--they could impose billions of dollars of sanctions 
on United States goods. I hasten to add, I have seen no indication that 
the Mexican Government wishes to take such action. Their object is to 
try to get their carriers into the United States of America as agreed 
to under the NAFTA agreement.
  As a leading sponsor of the 1999 legislation creating the Federal 
Motor Carrier Safety Administration, I strongly support proposals to 
advance truck and bus safety. I recognize the Senate provisions are 
largely intended to address safety concerns. Unfortunately, some of the 
provisions' mandates simply are not achievable. The provisions are 
overly rigid and burdensome. The modifications, I believe, could go a 
long way toward promoting motor carrier safety in a nondiscriminatory 
manner.
  At a later time, I will discuss a number of the concerns that I and 
others and the administration have about the bill. I have some very 
specific ideas as to how we can address these concerns. But at the 
moment, since I believe we are in some active discussions, I will not 
take the time of the Senate in going through all these specifics.
  I will again point out that the administration, last Thursday, sent 
over a letter saying that the President had no choice but to veto the 
bill with the present provisions as contained in the Senate 
Transportation appropriations bill. I do not think the President wants 
to veto the Transportation appropriations bill. I do not want the 
President to do that, nor do a majority of the Members of the Senate.
  But let me make it perfectly clear, the House action is totally 
unacceptable. I hope we can work with the Senator from Washington, and 
other interested Senators, particularly, I might say, with those who 
represent border States.
  The majority of this traffic, initially, will be crossing, obviously, 
our southern borders. Already, our Canadian borders are open. Clearly, 
that is not the issue. So those of us--Senator Gramm of Texas and I, 
and my colleague, Senator Kyl--and others who represent border States, 
where the majority of this commercial activity would take place, feel 
very strongly about this issue.
  I might say, also, we are the last ones--the last ones--who would 
countenance a situation to prevail that would place the lives and 
property of our citizens in danger. It is across the southern border 
where most of this activity initially will take place, although I 
believe I will live to see the day when we will see basically open 
transportation between Canada and Mexico.
  As it has been a boon to the economy in Canada, so it can be across 
our southern border.
  I hope we can deal with this issue in the ensuing hours. I understand 
the Senator from Washington may be discussing this issue with the 
Secretary of Transportation. We encourage all Members to get involved 
in this issue. It is a very important one. We are not talking about a 
policy dispute. I emphasize, we are talking about a solemn agreement 
that was entered into between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. 
That agreement called for certain safety conditions--which I believe we 
can satisfy, in the view of most objective observers, satisfy the 
safety issues--to come into compliance with the North American Free 
Trade Agreement and have the same situation prevail on our southern 
border as prevails on our northern border, as the Senator from 
Washington has with Canada on her border.
  The Senator from Texas and I would like to see the same situation 
prevail on our border that prevails on the border of the Senator from 
Washington with Canada.
  I hope we can work it out. We believe this is a very serious and 
important issue because we are talking about treaty violations, 
possible sanctions against the United States of America. I am firmly 
convinced that we can come to a reasonable conclusion and not have to 
have this thing spill over into a very unfortunate situation where the 
President of the United States may have to veto it. I hope to avoid 
that.

[[Page 14099]]

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I see my friend from Texas. I am going to 
offer an amendment so we have something to vote on this afternoon. If 
the Senator from Texas wanted to speak first, how long is he going to 
speak?
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I wasn't planning on speaking more than 5 
or 10 minutes.
  Mr. REID. I think it would be more convenient, because I need to talk 
a little bit longer than that, if I yielded the floor to the Senator 
from Texas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, as usual, our colleague from Nevada is kind 
and courteous and helpful to everybody. I appreciate his letting me 
speak.
  I wanted to come over today to join my friend and colleague, Senator 
McCain from Arizona, to raise a concern about the provision in the 
Transportation appropriations bill that we believe will have the 
practical impact of making it impossible for a long period of time for 
us to conform to the agreement that we made with Mexico in NAFTA.
  Let me make it clear that the Senator from Washington, the 
distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, dramatically improved the 
work done by the House. Even those of us who believe that her amendment 
would be harmful and would abrogate our agreement with Mexico are 
convinced that her work is a dramatic improvement over that of the 
House.
  What we are trying to do is to simply work out an agreement where we 
can meet legitimate safety standards with regard to Mexican trucks, do 
it in a way that allows us to meet the obligations that we have under 
NAFTA, and do it in such a way to try to keep out any provisions that 
may be cloaked in some garb of safety, when in reality they represent 
an effort to prevent the implementation of our agreement.
  I understand Senator McCain has given the distinguished subcommittee 
chairman a copy of the amendment. I don't see any reason that this 
should be or has to be a partisan issue. I am hopeful we can work out 
an agreement.
  Let me explain why it is so important that such an agreement be 
reached and why I feel so strongly about it. We entered into the most 
far-reaching trade agreement of the last 20 years when we signed a free 
trade agreement that encompassed North America--Mexico, Canada, and the 
United States. Part of that free trade agreement had to do with the 
ability of trucks to operate within the free trade area. President 
Clinton was very slow in implementing the agreement, and many people 
believe that politics was behind that slowness in implementation.
  We are now on the verge of seeing the agreement implemented. We are 
hearing great protests about safety. In that debate, a lot of points 
have been made that, when you actually look at the facts, are not borne 
out by the facts.
  Let me give an example. First of all, the good news story with regard 
to Mexican trucks is that a significant amount of inspection is already 
occurring so that when we supplement that to deal with trucks that will 
come to the interior of the country, we have something on which to 
build.
  For example, there are 8 million U.S. registered trucks. Last year, 
there were 2.3 million inspections and so, therefore, about 29 percent 
of all American trucks were inspected. There are 63,000 Mexican trucks 
currently operating in the United States, and 46,000 inspections took 
place last year involving Mexican trucks. Therefore, roughly 73 percent 
of Mexican trucks were inspected last year, over twice the percentage 
of American trucks that were inspected.
  Some people have used the number, in sort of scare tactics, that only 
about 1 percent of Mexican trucks were inspected. In trying to figure 
out where on earth that number could have possibly come from, the best 
I can figure out is that the people who made up that number simply took 
the number of border crossings, 4.6 million, and used that as a measure 
of Mexican trucks.
  The plain truth is, Mexican trucks are now operating within a 20-mile 
limit, 20 miles from the border. They often cross the border many times 
during the day. That is the only place I can figure this number came 
from.
  Let me make it clear that Senator McCain and I are concerned about 
safety. First of all, both of us already have Mexican trucks operating 
in our States. Our States are working now to see that those trucks are 
safe. The commitment of the President to get the Federal Government 
involved in the process is welcomed from our point of view. We believe 
it is important that Mexican trucks be safe, that they have trained 
drivers, that they have good equipment, and that that equipment be well 
maintained.
  We are for safety. We are not for protectionism. We are not for using 
safety concerns as a ruse for not living up to the commitment that we 
made in NAFTA.
  In addition, we are concerned about a process whereby this provision, 
both the House provision and the Senate provision, is occurring on 
appropriations bills, not in the committees that have jurisdiction over 
this area. It is a very dangerous precedent when we are starting to 
amend trade agreements as riders to appropriations bills.
  Having said all that, Senator McCain and I and others have put 
together an amendment that we believe deals with legitimate safety 
concerns. We have put together an amendment where every truck coming 
into the United States from Mexico would be inspected. But it is not an 
amendment that will guarantee that for at least 2 years we will not be 
able to implement the trade agreement. Basically what we are trying to 
do is to implement a workable program where the level of safety 
required at the border, at least initially, with regard to Mexican 
trucks will be far greater than the requirements we currently have for 
Canadian trucks.
  Not every truck coming into the United States from Canada is 
inspected. We proposed that we have an inspection of every Mexican 
truck, that that inspected truck then be licensed with a decal, and 
that it be periodically inspected. I believe the Senator from Arizona 
has given us a workable way of dealing with legitimate safety concerns 
without effectively abrogating our trade agreement with Mexico.
  I know there are strong special interests that don't want to 
implement this agreement. But it is very important for us to remember 
in the Senate that all over the world today other legislative bodies 
are debating whether to live up to agreements they have made with the 
United States of America. Other legislative bodies are meeting at this 
very moment, trying to decide whether to implement an agreement they 
made with the United States that may not at that very moment, or this 
very moment, be politically popular in their country.
  It seems to me that since we are the world's biggest beneficiary of 
trade, we are the world's largest exporter and importer of goods and 
services by a huge margin, it is important we live up to the letter and 
the spirit of our trade agreements so that we can have moral standing 
in dealing with countries that do not live up to their agreements with 
us.
  So, in a time when all over the world similar agreements are being 
debated, it is very important in dealing with our neighbor to the south 
that we live up to the agreement we have made. I do not believe the 
House provision lives up to that agreement. I think there are very real 
problems with the current bill. I think Senator McCain has offered an 
amendment that provides safety but does not create problems that will 
delay implementation beyond legitimate requirements of safety. I hope 
this can be worked out. But the NAFTA agreement is an important 
agreement. It is vital to my State, vital to the country, and I cannot 
imagine, if we can't work this out, that we would want to move forward 
with this bill.
  So I urge my colleagues to look at the language that has been 
proposed. We are not saying this is the only way it has to be done or 
we are not going to

[[Page 14100]]

be satisfied. We have simply raised some concerns with the current 
bill. I am hopeful in working together with the administration that we 
can reach a compromise. It will hardly serve anybody's purpose to pass 
a bill that the President will veto and we will have to start all over 
again.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Murray 
amendment be temporarily set side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                Amendment No. 1037 to Amendment No. 1025

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for himself, Ms. 
     Mikulski, and Mr. Sarbanes, proposes an amendment numbered 
     1037 to amendment No. 1025.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require a study of the hazards and risks to public health 
 and safety, the environment, and the economy of the transportation of 
   hazardous chemicals and radioactive material, the improvements to 
  transportation infrastructure necessary to prevent accidents in the 
transportation of such chemicals and material, and the preparedness of 
 Federal, State, and local emergency response and medical personnel to 
   response to and mitigate accidents in the transportation of such 
                        chemicals and material)

       On page 81, at the end of line 13, insert the following:
       Sec. 350. (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following 
     findings:
       (1) The condition of highway, railway, and waterway 
     infrastructure across the Nation varies widely and is in need 
     of improvement and investment.
       (2) Thousands of tons of hazardous chemicals, and a very 
     small amount of high level radioactive material, is 
     transported along the Nation's highways, railways, and 
     waterways each year.
       (3) The volume of hazardous chemical transport increased by 
     over one-third in the last 25 years and is expected to 
     continue to increase. Some propose significantly increasing 
     radioactive material transport.
       (4) Approximately 261,000 people were evacuated across the 
     Nation because of rail-related accidental releases of 
     hazardous chemicals between 1978 and 1995, and during that 
     period industry reported 8 transportation accidents involving 
     the small volume of high level radioactive waste transported 
     during that period.
       (5) The Federal Railroad Administration has significantly 
     decreased railroad inspections and has allocated few 
     resources since 1993 to assure the structural integrity of 
     railroad bridges. Train derailments have increased by 18 
     percent over roughly the same period.
       (6) The poor condition of highway, railway, and waterway 
     infrastructure, increases in the volume of hazardous chemical 
     transport, and proposed increases in radioactive material 
     transport increase the risk of accidents involving such 
     chemicals and materials.
       (7) Measuring the risks of hazardous chemical or 
     radioactive material accidents and preventing such accidents 
     requires specific information concerning the condition and 
     suitability of specific transportation routes contemplated 
     for such transport to inform and enable investment in related 
     infrastructure.
       (8) Mitigating the impact of hazardous chemical and 
     radioactive material transportation accidents requires 
     skilled, localized, and well-equipped emergency response 
     personnel along all specifically identified transportation 
     routes.
       (9) Accidents involving hazardous chemical or radioactive 
     material transport pose threats to the public health and 
     safety, the environment, and the economy.
       (b) Study.--The Secretary of Transportation shall, in 
     consultation with the Comptroller General of the United 
     States, conduct a study of the hazards and risks to public 
     health and safety, the environment, and the economy 
     associated with the transportation of hazardous chemicals and 
     radioactive material.
       (c) Matters To Be Addressed.--The study under subsection 
     (b) shall address the following matters:
       (1) Whether the Federal Government conducts individualized 
     and detailed evaluations and inspections of the condition and 
     suitability of specific transportation routes for the 
     current, and any anticipated or proposed, transport of 
     hazardous chemicals and radioactive material, including 
     whether resources and information are adequate to conduct 
     such evaluations and inspections.
       (2) The costs and time required to ensure adequate 
     inspection of specific transportation routes and related 
     infrastructure and to complete the infrastructure 
     improvements necessary to ensure the safety of current, and 
     any anticipated or proposed, hazardous chemical and 
     radioactive material transport.
       (3) Whether Federal, State, and local emergency 
     preparedness personnel, emergency response personnel, and 
     medical personnel are adequately trained and equipped to 
     promptly respond to accidents along specific transportation 
     routes for current, anticipated, or proposed hazardous 
     chemical and radioactive material transport.
       (4) The costs and time required to ensure that Federal, 
     State, and local emergency preparedness personnel, emergency 
     response personnel, and medical personnel are adequately 
     trained and equipped to promptly respond to accidents along 
     specific transportation routes for current, anticipated, or 
     proposed hazardous chemical and radioactive material 
     transport.
       (5) The availability of, or requirements to establish, 
     information collection and dissemination systems adequate to 
     provide the public, in an accessible manner, with timely, 
     complete, specific, and accurate information (including 
     databases) concerning actual, proposed, or anticipated 
     shipments by highway, railway, or waterway of hazardous 
     chemicals and radioactive materials, including accidents 
     involving the transportation of such chemicals and materials 
     by those means.
       (d) Deadline for Completion.--The study under subsection 
     (b) shall be completed not later than six months after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (e) Report.--Upon completion of the study under subsection 
     (b), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the 
     study.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I just left a hearing of the Environment and 
Public Works Committee, the Subcommittee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. In fact, the hearing is still going on. Senators 
Voinovich and Inhofe are there completing the hearing.
  At the hearing today, we had four mayors of very important cities in 
America--the mayor of New Orleans, Mayor Marc Morial; the mayor or 
Atlanta, Mayor Campbell; the mayor of Las Vegas, Mayor Goodman; and the 
mayor of the District of Columbia, Mayor Williams. The purpose of the 
hearing is to talk about the decaying infrastructure of our country, 
especially in our urban areas.
  It is tragic--``tragic'' is not too powerful a word to describe what 
they have talked about. We have all kinds of problems. The mayor of the 
District of Columbia--the Federal city--talked about water pipes that 
carry water that are over 100 years old. Some of them are wooden. The 
mayor of Atlanta said they have pipes over 100 years old. He said most 
mayors are term limited, and their desire is: Please, let me make it 
through my term and leave the problem to somebody else. They do not 
have the money to handle the problems facing American cities.
  The tunnel we have all seen so often in the news in the past 5 days 
or 6 days--actually, it was Wednesday at 3 o'clock that the derailment 
took place in the tunnel in Baltimore. That tunnel is a mile and a half 
long. It is 100 years old. So that tunnel was created through that area 
in about 1900. What kind of equipment did they have then? Most of it 
was done by hand; very little machinery was available for digging a 
tunnel around the turn of the century. That tunnel has had almost 
nothing done to it since then. It is the same tunnel.
  This amendment is on behalf of myself, Senator Sarbanes, and Senator 
Mikulski. It is an amendment to protect against the dangers posed by 
the transportation of hazardous substances. The amendment requires the 
Secretary of the Department of Transportation, in consultation with the 
Comptroller General of the United States, to study the risk to the 
public health and safety associated with the transportation of these 
dangerous substances.
  My amendment requires the Department of Transportation and the 
General Accounting Office to study whether our transportation system 
can safely transport these dangerous substances and ask how it might 
improve the safety track record.
  If you read my amendment, you will see a number of interesting 
things. The volume of hazardous chemical transport has increased by 
over one-third in the last 25 years and is expected to continue. 
Approximately 261,000 people

[[Page 14101]]

were evacuated across this Nation because of rail-related accidents 
during the past 20 years--no, that is not in the last 20 years. It is 
from the period of 1978 to 1995--less than 20 years. So 261,000 people 
were evacuated from their homes because of rail-related accidents.
  During that period, the industry reported eight transportation 
accidents involving small volumes of high-level radioactive waste 
transported during that period.
  The Federal Railroad Administration has significantly decreased 
railroad inspections and has allocated few resources since 1993 to 
assure the structural integrity of railroad bridges.
  One of the mayors today testified that 70 percent of the bridges in 
America won't meet basic safety standards--70 percent of the bridges. 
Maybe he is 10 percent wrong. Maybe it is only 60 percent; maybe it is 
80 percent. We know there are bridges in America today where 
schoolbuses stop and let the kids walk across, and the bus will come 
over and pick them up. We have all kinds of trouble with our 
infrastructure in America today. We need to do something about it, and 
that is what this amendment is all about.
  It is saying let's at least have some knowledge of what is out there 
when we are seeing these treks of very hazardous materials. As you 
know, in Baltimore, which we all saw, the substance there was 
hydrochloric acid. Hydrochloric acid is extremely dangerous. One of the 
important things was that it was far enough away from people that it 
wasn't an immediate danger. Had the accident occurred closer to the 
populated area, of course, it would have been.
  I can remember a number of years ago being in Ely, NV, a rural part 
of the State of Nevada. One of the men I went to high school with was a 
police officer there. I always tried to stop him when I came through 
Ely. He has since retired. I was in the police station and a teletype 
came through and he looked at it and said: Why do they even send me 
this stuff? They were telling him there was a transport of hazardous 
materials coming through Ely. His point was: So what. I could not do 
anything about it. The only thing that telling me about it does is 
frighten me. We have no ability to respond to a chemical accident 
spilled in Ely, NV.
  Mr. President, this is an extremely important question: How can the 
Department of Transportation and the General Accounting Office--we know 
how they can and they should--study the ability of personnel to respond 
to transportation accidents involving dangerous substances?
  My friend, the police officer in Ely, NV, did what most police 
officers in rural America would do: They throw the report away. They 
cannot do anything about it. In fact, Rick said he would rather not 
know. All it does is frighten him.
  While emergency response teams might be equipped and available in 
urban areas such as Baltimore--that was interesting. That occurred so 
they had the ability--and we may hear further from Senators Sarbanes 
and Mikulski--that was a great deal of teamwork among county, city, 
State, and Federal officials in one of our metropolitan areas. They did 
pretty well from what I can tell.
  How prepared are the small rural communities in Nevada? How well 
prepared are the small rural communities in Nebraska, the State of 
Washington, all over America? They are not very well prepared.
  What resources do they need to protect against the danger of a 
hazardous accident? I have to say candidly that this is not just a 
rural America problem; it is a major city problem also. But I guess the 
answer to both my questions is, we really do not know. We have no idea. 
That is why this study is important.
  Finally, my amendment instructs DOT and GAO to evaluate the way we 
communicate with the public about accidents involving dangerous 
substances. As chairman of this subcommittee I talked about earlier, I 
am confident we are going to have to develop information, as I told the 
four mayors, and we also had the manager of the port authority there 
and somebody from the General Accounting Office--I told those people 
assembled today that we need to be aware of what is wrong with our 
infrastructure. It is time they were more forceful and told us what is 
wrong with our infrastructure.
  I also told them this is the first of a number of hearings. We have 
to start identifying what is wrong with the infrastructure. Senator 
Voinovich talked about a 1981 study which showed the problems with our 
infrastructure. Shortly after that, there were statements about the 
problems of our decaying infrastructure, but we have done nothing about 
it. Literally, we have done nothing, except as a Federal Government 
giving cities and States more responsibilities, these unfunded mandates 
they talked about today. We give them the responsibility, but we do not 
join with them in true partnership to help pay for these things.
  Some will say these are not national problems; why should the Federal 
Government be involved? They are national problems. Our decaying 
infrastructure is a national problem. Our water systems--the mayor of 
New Orleans indicated that the city of New Orleans is basically in a 
basin and they are pumping every minute of every day to keep the water 
from inundating this beautiful city. They have 100 pumping stations in 
New Orleans. The pumps are 100 years old--100 years old. Those pumps 
were put there at the beginning of the last century. The mayor of 
Atlanta said the life expectancy of modern pumps is about 40 years. 
This is a patchwork network, to say the least, in one of our great 
cities of America, pumping every day, every hour, with pumps 100 years 
old.
  As events in Baltimore over the last few days have shown us, the need 
to have an investigation about whether we can transport these dangerous 
substances is something we certainly need to talk about. I expect my 
colleagues from Maryland will provide accounts of the train derailment 
that crippled Baltimore.
  I have an article from the Baltimore Sun which gives a day-by-day 
blow of how this terrible accident played out in the Baltimore area. It 
is very scary that more people were not hurt and there was not more 
damage done. The damage is significant. I do not know how much it will 
wind up costing.
  I ask unanimous consent that this article from the Baltimore Sun, 
July 21, Saturday, Final Edition, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the Baltimore Sun, July 21, 2001]

                          Chemical Train Fire

                           (By Dan Fesperman)

       The first sign of trouble was an unsettling rumble from 
     beneath the streets, a trembling, grinding sensation that 
     lasted several seconds.
       Dan Stone felt it on the fifth floor of the cast-iron 
     building he owns at 300 W. Pratt St. In a tavern downstairs, 
     manager Christine Groller felt it, too, believing it was an 
     earthquake.
       It wasn't like that for Chad Cadden, but he was in a tunnel 
     some 30 feet underground, the engineer of a thrumming diesel 
     hauling 60 freight cars of paper, chemicals, wood pulp, soy 
     oil, bricks and steel north to New Jersey.
       Cadden felt the train lurch, then a light flashed on the 
     instrument panel--the pneumatic control indicator--signaling 
     that the emergency brakes were on. The train groaned to a 
     halt in the darkness. Something had gone wrong.
       It was 3:07 Wednesday afternoon, and an exhausting drama of 
     fire, flood, worry and disruption had begun to unfold beneath 
     the heart of Baltimore. At its south end, thousands of 
     baseball fans sat unaware, watching the final innings of an 
     Orioles loss. At its north end, more than a mile and half 
     away, the manager of a high-rise apartment building watched a 
     plume of black smoke unfurl past the 11th floor, wondering if 
     her longtime fears were about to be confirmed.
       Soon, both ends of the tunnel would be cloaked by rolling 
     black smoke. Because of it, the fire would yield its secrets 
     stubbornly, and for an entire night there would be just 
     enough mystery to trigger Civil Defense sirens and fears of a 
     toxic disaster, while fire companies fought a two-front war 
     against an enemy they could neither see nor understand.
       But that wasn't all. A water main just above the tunnel 
     would burst three hours after the derailment, gushing so much 
     water

[[Page 14102]]

     that the level of Druid Hill Reservoir would drop 3 feet in 
     four hours.
       Only by sundown of the next day would the consequences seem 
     clearer--a derailed tanker car leaking hydrochloric acid, 
     several downtown buildings flooded by a torrent of 60 million 
     gallons, enough broken telecommunications lines to disrupt e-
     mail around the world, two postponed Orioles baseball games 
     (and another yesterday), and enough downtown gridlock to 
     produce a year's worth of headaches and missed appointments.
       Yet, for all the smoke and bother, not a single life would 
     be lost, pending the unforeseen discovery of anyone who might 
     have hopped aboard an empty boxcar. In this disaster, for 
     once, every member of the cast would come out alive. But not 
     without a few second thoughts about what might have been, had 
     their luck turned for the worse.


                         3:07: The earth moves

       It takes only a crew of two to run a freight train. The 
     engineer mans the controls of the diesel engines while the 
     conductor generally operates the brake, calls out passing 
     signals and maintains the waybill, which carries the 
     information of what's on board.
       Cadden, 27, of Stewartstown, Pa., and conductor Edward 
     Brown, 52, of West Baltimore, had just boarded the train a 
     few minutes earlier, six miles short of the tunnel during a 
     crew change at Curtis Bay. If there was trouble ahead you 
     wouldn't expect to encounter it in the tunnel, as straight a 
     stretch of railway as you'll find on the CSX route through 
     the city.
       A signal just before the tunnel indicated the track ahead 
     was clear, so the train continued. It was 3:04, and the train 
     was lumbering along at just over 20 mph, black exhaust 
     snorting from three engines at the front.
       Looming to the left were the grandstands and warehouse of 
     Camden Yards. The train entered the tunnel, its four 
     headlights on, accelerating on a slight downgrade to about 23 
     mph before beginning the long, slow climb on the gradual rise 
     beneath Howard Street.
       That's when Stone and Groller were at work, in the building 
     just above the tunnel at Howard and Pratt streets. And at 
     3:07, the earth moved.
       ``It seemed to be a grinding noise and a grinding 
     sensation,'' Stone said. ``I've been here for 11 years, and 
     I've never felt anything like it.''
       ``It lasted maybe 10 seconds,'' Groller said. ``I honestly 
     thought it was an earthquake.''
       Cadden and Brown weren't sure what to think, according to 
     federal transportation officials who interviewed them. There 
     was the lurch, then the flashing indicator, then the stopping 
     of the train. Black fumes were everywhere, but that's often 
     the case when three engines are running in a tunnel.
       They tried to radio the CSX dispatcher, but no luck, 
     probably because they were underground. Cadden used his cell 
     phone, reaching the train master. It was 3:15. They were 
     still unaware of the brewing disaster to their rear.
       With the fumes growing worse. they shut down two engines, 
     then uncoupled all three from their cargo. and drove them out 
     the tunnel's north end underneath the high roof of the old 
     Mount Royal Station at the foot of Bolton Hill. Now the radio 
     worked and they reached the dispatcher. It was 3:25.
       By then they'd begun checking the waybill, reviewing what 
     they'd left behind. And that's what troubled them when they 
     began to notice the black smoke pouring out of the tunnel. 
     Something was on fire, and it might be anything from paper to 
     toxic chemicals.


                          4:15: no false alarm

       Seven blocks away, on the other side of Bolton Hill, Capt. 
     James Smith, 34, sat in the firehouse for Engine Co. 13, at 
     405 McMechen St.
       A call came in: smoke pouring from the train tunnel. Ho 
     hum. Probably yet another panicky person who'd seen diesel 
     fumes, a common concurrence. But when the truck pulled 
     beneath the Mount Royal shed at 4:15 p.m., Smith said, the 
     volume of smoke made it clear this was no false alarm.
       ``That,'' Smith said, ``knocked it up a notch.''


                          ``it's the tunnel''

       A block away, Elaine Macklin wondered what all the fuss was 
     about. As resident manager for 21 years of the high-rise 
     Sutton Place Apartments, it's been her job to find out such 
     things, and the sirens were blowing. She, too, was familiar 
     with the frequent false alarms, but she'd read enough 
     newspaper stories about the sort of cargo that came and went 
     on those tracks to wonder if one day a call might be for 
     real.
       ``I just had a feeling,'' said Macklin, 72. Years ago, 
     she'd told her three scoffing children, ``Someday, something 
     will happen in that tunnel.''
       Now, after more than two decades of living and working next 
     door, that day had come. But she didn't know until she rode 
     an elevator to an empty apartment on the 11th floor for a 
     better look. She was joined by her longtime assistant, 
     Patricia Stanitski, who said: ``The school's on fire,'' 
     referring to the old Mount Royal Station, which houses part 
     of the Maryland Institute, College of Art.
       ``No,'' Macklin said, watching the smoke rise part the top 
     floor. ``It's the tunnel.''
       She hoped there was nothing hazardous burning.


                         a foray into darkness

       Chief Terry Ryer wondered the same thing when he heard the 
     call go out to Engine Co. 13.
       Ryer, 49, was listening to the radio at the firehouse in 
     Brooklyn, where he commands the 6th Battalion, with its 
     hazardous materials squad.
       It was a latter part of the call that sent him into action. 
     Not only had a train possibly derailed, but hazardous 
     materials might be involved. Ryer opened his office door and 
     told the firefighters relaxing in the bay to stand ready. 
     Less than a minute later they got the call.
       The son of a city firefighter, Ryer, like his dad, signed 
     on for duty at age 18, so he's been around long enough to 
     know that some fires aren't the sort that should be rushed 
     into, and this sounded like just such a fire.
       Captain Smith was discovering that firsthand. He and three 
     others were the first to enter the tunnel. Within a few feet 
     they were submerged in darkness. Each wore 80 pounds of 
     equipment, picking his way across rail ties, chunky stones 
     and the rails themselves. They talked to each other, 
     touching, anything to keep from separating in the blackness, 
     while wondering what would happen if the fire suddenly 
     intensified. They weren't even sure what was burning.
       A situation like this ran counter to almost all their 
     training, which teaches them to constantly be aware of 
     ``escape routes'' and ``safety zones.''
       ``In a dwelling fire,'' Smith said, ``you're usually never 
     more than 12 feet from a window or some stair, a door, a 
     ladder. This really played with your mind. . . . We were 
     concerned it may have been a caustic (substance).
       They made it a hundred yards, at most, before agreeing to 
     back out. A second attempt also failed.
       By then, news media were gathering at both ends of the 
     tunnel, and the word going out wasn't good. Chemicals, 
     including three types of acid, were on board, and no one knew 
     yet what was in all that black smoke. The Orioles had just 
     canceled the second game of their day-night doubleheader.
       At Sutton Place, Macklin tried to calm the tenants, though 
     most didn't seem too concerned. Then, in walked seven 
     firefighters in full gear, fanning out floor by floor to tell 
     everyone to shut their windows and stay indoors.
       Miles to the southeast, somewhere near the Bay Bridge, 
     Mayor Martin O'Malley was on his way home from the annual J. 
     Millard Tawes Crab and Clambake in Crisfield, talking on the 
     phone with officials who were trying to assess the situation. 
     Police had shut down Howard Street, rerouting traffic, with 
     cars stacked up all over downtown. Civil Defense sirens 
     sounded the alarm, blasting like some warning from the Cold 
     War.
       But what was burning? Nobody had the answer. Nor did anyone 
     know that the city's problems were about to get worse.


                       6:15: Howard Street flood

       It was 6:30 when Dan Stone, who'd felt that first troubling 
     rumble beneath his feet more than three hours earlier, 
     noticed something new happening outside his office at Pratt 
     and Howard Streets.
       Water was coming down Howard Street. Buckets of it. Barrels 
     of it. Rivers of it. Something else had erupted underground, 
     and on meters at city reservoirs the event announced itself 
     like a blip on a seismograph.
       It had happened at 6:15, almost certainly due to the fire. 
     A water main nearly 3\1/2\ feet in diameter burst, blowing 
     open a jagged hole several feet long. Darrell Owens, 41, a 
     supervisor for west-side maintenance with the city's 
     Department of Public Works, was the first to arrive at the 
     scene.
       Owens thought he'd seen it all--burst mains creating huge 
     sinkholes that devoured city blocks; urban streets raging 
     like canyons in a flash flood. But this was a new one--a 
     flood on top of a fire.
       ``It was a swimming pool, two, three and a half feet 
     deep.'' Fire hydrants were submerged. A block away, the 
     torrent swamped the first floor of the Prudential Securities 
     Building.
       Deb and Paul Pelaia, meanwhile, had left Lombard and Howard 
     streets a few minutes earlier.
       As guests from Thomasville, Pa., staying at the Holiday 
     Inn, they were beginning to wonder what they'd gotten into by 
     visiting Baltimore. Deb had come for a three-day nursing 
     conference. Paul came along for a boat cruise and an Orioles 
     game.
       What they got instead was a front-row seat at an urban 
     disaster. The Holiday Inn overlooked the flood, itself 
     perhaps 30 feet above the derailed and burning train. 
     Already, Paul's baseball game had been canceled. The bus that 
     was to take them to the harbor cruise got stuck in traffic. 
     So, they walked to the Inner Harbor, wondering at the smoke 
     pouring from manholes.
       During their cruise on the Bay Lady, word of the flood 
     spread. Someone said they'd heard the Holiday Inn was closed. 
     The boat returned to find the Coast Guard had closed the 
     Inner Harbor, and docked instead at Pier 5. It was 10 p.m., 
     but traffic was still bumper to bumper, and the bus had to 
     drop them off short of the hotel--still open after all--
     because of the river in the street. They returned to their 
     room to find water in the tap

[[Page 14103]]

     running brown, at low pressure. Welcome to Charm City.


                        white smoke raises fears

       At the ends of the tunnels, where news of the water main 
     break was a little slower in arriving, the first effects of 
     the flood were cause for alarm.
       One thing firefighters always pay attention to is the color 
     of the smoke, and suddenly the smoke had gone from black to 
     white. Did it mean something toxic was on fire? The answer 
     was the same as before. No one knew.
       However, readings taken by the Maryland Department of the 
     Environment soon put fears to rest. It was steam, caused by 
     water from the burst main. Fire crews asked Owens to leave 
     the line open. Used to simply shutting things off as soon as 
     possible, he was now faced with an unenviable assignment akin 
     to that of a basketball player asked to guard a high-scoring 
     superstar: You can't stop it, you can only hope to contain 
     it. He said he'd do what he could.


                        third try, first contact

       Within a few hours more, it was time for firefighters to 
     make a third attempt to reach the train from the north end. 
     The south end was out of the question due to flooding. 
     Captain Smith and Chief Ryer were on the team of six men. So 
     was Dan MacFarlane, 32, another member of Smith's Engine Co. 
     13.
       By now, their faces were blackened by soot and they knew 
     what to expect. This time they rode in slowly on a CSX truck 
     equipped with railway wheels. Each man took two oxygen 
     bottles, a 70-minute supply. After a while, the truck stopped 
     and four of the six set out on foot, flashlights pointed at 
     their feet to light the way. Over the radio, someone at the 
     mouth of the tunnel called out the elapsed time every five 
     minutes. It took a half-hour to go 2,200 feet, Ryer said.
       MacFarlane was ready to give up. ``We're going to pull 
     out,'' he radioed. But they took two more steps, and 
     firefighter Pat Hoban, just in front of MacFarlane and Smith, 
     touched the first boxcar. Contact. It wasn't much, but they'd 
     take it. Now the work of removing the train cars could begin.


                        ``Mom, you were right''

       Fourteen floors above, in her apartment at Sutton Place, 
     Elaine Macklin was ready to turn in at midnight after an 
     uneasy night of watching TV news accounts, windows shut 
     tight.
       All of downtown was sealed up. You could leave, but you 
     couldn't come back. Police had closed every major road. 
     Helping lessen the sense of isolation, Macklin had heard by 
     telephone from friends and family, some of whom called after 
     radio and TV stations reported that Sutton Place was being 
     evacuated. Officials were standing by to move residents to 
     cots in the Baltimore Convention Center, but never did.
       The most satisfying call came from her son Victor, 45, a 
     television producer in California. He'd seen the news on CNN. 
     ``He said, `Mom, you were absolutely right. You told us 21 
     years ago something would happen in that tunnel.' ''
       Perhaps by morning, she hoped, everything would be fixed. 
     But she arose Thursday to see white smoke still rising from 
     the tunnel. When she walked close to her living room window, 
     she could smell it.


                          thank mother nature

       A few blocks south, at the Holiday Inn, the Pelaias and 
     other lodgers saw that the impromptu hotel ``swimming pool'' 
     was finally under control. Owens and public works crews had 
     contained it, digging a hole in the street that exposed the 
     ruptured pipe. Water was still dumping into the tunnel.
       Overnight, a new guest had checked into the hotel. It was 
     Dan Stone, who hadn't wanted to desert his building at Pratt 
     and Howard streets. Water in the basement had peaked at 9 
     feet by 11 p.m., when city workers began pumping it out. He 
     hadn't reached the hotel until 4:20 a.m.
       Other workers, meanwhile, were just beginning to head home 
     as the new day's rush hour began, ending shifts that had 
     continued while the rest of the city slept. Ryer got home at 
     6:30 a.m., Smith and MacFarlane around 8. Owens made it by 
     9:30. But for all of the night's heroes, one of the more 
     unsung ones might have been Mother Nature, in the form of a 
     geological stroke of luck.
       Since the first hour of the derailment, hydrochloric acid 
     had been leaking from one of the tanker cars. Yet, there 
     hadn't been a single problem with air or water flowing from 
     the spot. The possible reason, according to state 
     environmental officials, was the limestone bedrock beneath 
     the tunnel. Being an alkali, it reacts with acid sort of like 
     water with fire, neutralizing its caustic nature.


                         day 2: a new strategy

       The fire, while still burning, no longer seemed an imminent 
     threat to blow into an environmental disaster. By late 
     afternoon, a firefighting force that had peaked at 150 was 
     down to 50. Not that their jobs were getting much easier.
       Some boxcars had already been removed from the tunnel. 
     Others would soon follow. But some were still baking at 400 
     degrees, and smoke still poured from the north end. The next 
     day, two men--a state official and a chemical consultant--
     were overcome by smoke.
       But it was on Thursday afternoon that the firefighters 
     hatched a new strategy. Dan Stone got a preview of it from 
     his office, when three firemen asked if there might be an 
     entrance to the tunnel through his building. There wasn't, 
     but they eventually found another: through a manhole, where 
     they poked a hose to douse the fire's midsection. It was also 
     the entry point for hazardous waste crews that pumped 
     hydrochloric acid from the leaking tanker.
       Outnumbering fire crews by then were street crews, digging 
     into the pavement five blocks east of Howard Street to lay 
     new fiber-optic cable. Lines near or through the tunnel had 
     been damaged or destroyed, disrupting e-mail. Internet and 
     phone service from Baltimore to New York to Africa.


                           Sorting out events

       By nightfall Thursday, another force had arrived on the 
     scene. The National Transportation Safety Board plays an 
     important role in sorting out such events, ultimately 
     assigning blame. Yesterday, the NTSB made itself known to the 
     public through board member John Hammerschmidt, whose 
     briefings were minor masterpieces of bureaucratic jargon.
       On for the day's final briefing was CSX President Michael 
     Ward, who grew up not far from Terry Ryer's 6th Battalion 
     fire headquarters in Brooklyn.
       Ward praised the city, praised the mayor and said his 
     company would continue to err on the side of caution. Then 
     came a question. Once this mess was cleaned up, would his 
     company consider installing sprinklers in the tunnel?
       Ward testily called any such question ``premature.''
       ``Hindsight is 20-20,'' offered the Fire Department's Mike 
     Maybin, affirming his department's skills.
       What about foresight? They must have forgotten to ask 
     Elaine Macklin, at Sutton Place, who again went to bed with 
     smoke pouring past her 14th-floor window.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, this article, among other things, details 
how this train derailment threatened to leak hazardous chemicals, such 
as hydrochloric acid, into the main tunnel running under downtown 
Baltimore. They were able to stop that leak. This train derailment 
closed roads, broke fiberoptic communications cables, generated a water 
main break, caused evacuation of residents, and injured workers. While 
it was not one of the more serious things, it indicates how widespread 
this was: They canceled three Baltimore Orioles baseball games. They 
simply could not play with hazardous materials around. People could not 
get to the game. Baltimore was basically shut off.
  To show the cost to the business community, we have only to look at 
what happened to the Baltimore Orioles. Damages associated with just 
the lost baseball revenues are estimated at almost $5 million for the 
Baltimore Orioles.
  Is Baltimore an isolated example? Of course not. Between 1978 and 
1995, as I said, over 260,000 people were evacuated across the Nation 
due to transportation accidents involving trains. There are some 
reasons why. The Federal Railroad Administration increased inspections 
and allocated few resources to ensure bridge safety across the Nation. 
Train derailments during that period increased 18 percent.
  Unfortunately, we do not have good statistics about the prevalence or 
damages associated with accidents such as the one in Baltimore. We do 
know from press reports that transportation-related accidents involving 
dangerous substances occur around the Nation each year. A quick search 
revealed many.
  For example, I found an exploding boxcar in Kansas City sending its 
hazardous contents, potassium nitrate, into a nearby school. I am told 
that is one of the things that was used in the bomb in Kansas City.
  I found other reports in Charleston, SC, of a train derailment that 
spilled 300 gallons of formaldehyde and forced the evacuation of 100 
families and hospitalized 7.
  I know of the train derailment in California where hazardous 
substances were dumped in a river and endangered the life and property 
of millions of people in California.
  While we do not have a complete count of all the accidents, we do 
have data to show transportation of dangerous substances is on the 
rise. With increased transportation comes an increased risk unless we 
step back and evaluate how well our transportation infrastructure is 
handling this dangerous cargo.

[[Page 14104]]

  We need to know whether our emergency response personnel are trained 
and equipped to deal with hazardous accidents, not only in urban 
Baltimore but in rural Nevada. We need to know whether we adequately 
convey information on dangerous accidents to the public in time to 
ensure their safety.
  We do not have reliable estimates of the need to upgrade 
infrastructure in order to handle unique threats posed by accidents 
involving dangerous substances. We will need these estimates to prepare 
a new transportation bill which we are going to begin next year, our 
every-5-year bill. The study required by this amendment offered by this 
Senator and the two Senators from Maryland is an important first step 
in that effort.
  It was coincidental that I had the hearing today--it had been 
scheduled for some time--dealing with our decaying infrastructure. We 
need to do something, and one of the things we can do will be focused 
as a result of this amendment, which will cause the Department of 
Transportation and the General Accounting Office to take a look at how 
safe it is to transport and, if not, what do they recommend to make it 
more safe.
  We are going to try to vote on this at 5:45 p.m. today.
  There is going to be a vote today and we would like to keep it on 
Transportation. When we hear from the minority, we will be in a 
position to offer a unanimous consent in that regard. I hope this 
amendment will be supported. I think it should be an overwhelming 
affirmative vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague, 
the very able Senator from Nevada, Mr. Reid, in cosponsoring this 
amendment to the fiscal year 2002 Transportation appropriations bill 
which calls for a study of the hazards and risks associated with the 
transportation of hazardous chemicals or radioactive material on our 
rail and highway network.
  According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, more than 800,000 
shipments of hazardous materials, or hazmats, occur each day on our 
highways, railroads, and waterways. The total volume of hazardous 
materials such as flammable liquids and corrosive chemicals exceeds 
some 3 billion tons a year. While the vast majority of these shipments 
are transported safely, without any release, the number of hazmat 
incidents reported to the Department of Transportation has nearly 
doubled in the past decade.
  As Senator Reid has already noted, last Wednesday a 60-car freight 
train, including several cars containing hazardous chemicals, derailed 
and caught fire in the Howard Street tunnel right through downtown 
Baltimore. The cause of the derailment and fire are still under 
investigation, but according to news reports, some fire officials 
speculate the fire started in a car carrying tripropylene, a caustic 
and flammable chemical used for making detergents and plastics.
  I take this opportunity to commend the members of the Baltimore City 
Fire Department for their heroic efforts in managing the fire and 
protecting the health and safety of the citizens of our city. For 
nearly 5 days, the city firefighters undertook tremendous risks, 
courageously entering the dark tunnel, vision impaired by smoke, to 
face the fire and the volatile chemicals and hazardous materials that 
burned within. During the height of the incident, over 150 of the 
city's firefighters were on the scene and many more obviously reported 
for duty throughout the course of this incident.
  The fact that injuries were kept to a minimum is a testament to the 
skill and professionalism with which the Baltimore City firefighters 
performed their jobs. I also express my appreciation to the Coast Guard 
Strike Force, the Maryland Department of Environment, and all the other 
members of the team who worked around the clock to protect public 
health and the environment.
  Firefighters' activities were largely completed last night. This 
morning, the last of the 60 railcars was pulled out of the tunnel. The 
tunnel is now free of the train and examination will now take place 
with respect to the structural status of this tunnel.
  As Senator Reid and I discussed last week on the Senate floor, this 
accident underscores the potential dangers to public health and safety, 
the environment and the economy in connection with the transportation 
of hazardous materials, but it also makes clear the need to invest in 
our Nation's infrastructure.
  I very much welcome the amendment of my colleague. I want to 
underscore this is an issue in which he has taken considerable 
interest. In fact, he held a hearing this morning which had been 
scheduled, as I understand it, well before this incident took place. 
Senator Reid and others who have been concerned about the 
infrastructure, and I know it is a concern the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, Senator Byrd, shares with us, have for quite 
some time tried to focus attention on the necessity to improve the 
Nation's infrastructure.
  Later in the consideration of this bill I will join with my 
colleague, Senator Mikulski, in offering an amendment to specifically 
begin to address the aging rail infrastructure in the Baltimore area. 
Our amendment would provide up to $750,000 in Federal matching funds 
for the Department of Transportation, in cooperation with Amtrak, 
Norfolk Southern, CSX, the State of Maryland, and the City of 
Baltimore, to conduct a comprehensive study to assess the existing 
problems in the freight and passenger rail infrastructure in the 
Baltimore region. The study would assess the condition, track, 
limitation, and efficiency of the existing tunnels, bridges, and other 
railroad facilities owned and operated by the railroads. It would also 
examine the benefits and costs of various alternatives, including 
shared usage of track. It would make recommendations regarding 
improvements to the rail infrastructure in the Baltimore region or the 
construction of new facilities to reduce congestion and improve safety 
and efficiency. The availability of the funds would be contingent upon 
CSX, Norfolk Southern and the State of Maryland providing equal amounts 
to conduct the study.
  Next year marks the 175th year of railroad in America commemorating 
the history of railroading that actually began in Baltimore with the 
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. While it is an honor to have this historic 
commemoration, this commemoration also serves to date our railroad 
infrastructure in Maryland as amongst the oldest, of course, in the 
country. Indeed, major rail improvements made in the latter part of the 
19th century, including rail corridors, bridges and tunnels, continue 
even to this day to serve by providing routes for significant inner-
city passenger and freight traffic moving up and down the east coast, 
as well as providing links from the ports to the Midwest and points 
beyond.
  Two major main line corridors traverse Baltimore. Amtrak operates 
more than 100 trains a day through Baltimore, traversing through two 
sets of major tunnels, the Union tunnel and the Baltimore and Potomac 
tunnel, immediately northeast and southwest of Penn Station. These 
tunnels were built in the 1870s when the Pennsylvania Railroad extended 
its reach south to Washington. A second parallel Union tunnel was built 
in the early part of the 20th century. Amtrak's corridor is also used 
by MARC commuter rail trains linking Baltimore and Washington and 
Norfolk and Southern freight trains.
  While a number of improvements have been made to the corridor since 
the 1970s, the basic infrastructure of the route, including the tunnels 
and bridges over the numerous rivers north of Baltimore, is virtually 
the same as that in place some 75 to 100 years ago. CSX, the descendent 
of the original Baltimore and Ohio Railroad also operates its main line 
through Baltimore. The main line serves traffic traveling north and 
south up and down the east coast and traffic which is ultimately headed 
west to the Ohio River Valley. Both movements converge between 
Washington and Baltimore and use the main line through the latter city. 
It is CSX's main line which passes through Baltimore by the 1.7-mile-
long Howard

[[Page 14105]]

Street tunnel where the accident occurred on Wednesday night. Most of 
this was built in the 1890s on a single track. Numerous other short 
tunnels and bridges are also along the route north and east of the 
central city.
  The physical condition of the rail infrastructure and the mix of 
trains that use it cause various problems for the movement of freight 
and passengers. There are inadequate vertical clearances for the 
passage of certain types of freight since high-cube, double-stacked 
container trains. There are numerous chokepoints and there is capacity-
related congestion on the Northeast Corridor and the CSX main line.
  So the purpose of this study, this additional amendment that Senator 
Mikulski and I will offer, is to assess these and other problems in the 
freight and passenger rail infrastructure in the Baltimore region, and 
to identify potential solutions to those problems. We need to get some 
sense of what the possibilities are, what the costs associated with 
them are, and what might be a reasonable course of action in order to 
address this situation. I very much hope when that amendment is offered 
our colleagues will be supportive of it.
  I do want to have printed in the Record at the end of my remarks an 
editorial from the Baltimore Sun about the effort of our firefighters 
and other authorities who responded to this emergency entitled, ``There 
when you need them.'' I ask unanimous consent that be printed in the 
Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I want to conclude by, again, 
underscoring the very important contribution that my colleague from 
Nevada has made in alerting us, not just now but over a sustained 
period of time, to the importance of addressing the much broader issue. 
I, of course, have focused today on this Baltimore tunnel problem, but 
that is only illustrative, as it were, simply an example of the kind of 
situation we are confronting in many, many parts of the country. My 
colleague from Nevada, Senator Reid, has repeatedly stressed the 
importance of addressing this question. His amendment, which I join in 
cosponsoring, to require a study of the hazards and risks to the public 
health and safety, the environment, and the economy flowing from the 
transportation of hazardous chemicals and radioactive materials, and 
the improvements necessary to our infrastructure, I think, is a very 
important contribution. I strongly support it, and I trust when it 
comes to a vote it will receive the overwhelming support of this body.
  I yield the floor.

                               Exhibit 1

                [From the Baltimore Sun, July 20, 2001]

                        There When You Need Them

       Without warning: Emergency responses were generally good, 
     but luck was better, the worst did not happen.
       Baltimore had a close call Wednesday. It could have been so 
     much worse.
       Industrial chemicals that caught fire, or that did not, 
     might have sent toxic fumes into the downtown atmosphere, 
     damaging lungs and skin, invading work places and residences.
       On the whole, the ugly billows from both ends of the tunnel 
     proved to be benign.
       The whole metropolitan population is in debt to the 
     courageous firefighters who entered the tunnel, into the 
     unknown, to deal with a fire they could not locate. Also the 
     police, hazardous materials experts and public works workers 
     who toiled on no notice through the night to cope with the 
     fire, train mishap, water main break and power outage that 
     paralyzed a great city.
       They had other plans for the evening. But this was their 
     job and they did it.
       City, state and federal authorities were right to err on 
     the side of caution in closing roads, waterways, baseball, 
     business and normal life until public safety was secured.
       The one thing that did not work well was the civil defense 
     siren. In nearly a half-century it has been tested but never 
     before used for a real emergency. Those who heard it did not 
     know what it conveyed.
       Were they to duck beneath desks in event of nuclear attack? 
     If not, what was the loud siren saying? For those who were 
     just trying to go home in the evening rush hour, the best 
     response was to carry on doing it, assuming they heard a mere 
     malfunction.
       People have long since learned to turn on radio, television 
     or the Internet--or battery-operated radios in the event of 
     power outage--to learn if something big is happening. The 
     siren probably did not alert anyone who did not already know 
     about it.
       The emergency showed just how interconnected modern society 
     is, how dependent we all are on everyone else functioning 
     normally.
       The disruptions to city life and to East Coast commerce 
     will go on for some time, More lessons will be learned in 
     ensuing days.
       New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington, Norfolk and the 
     rest had better pay attention. Here, but for the grace of 
     God, go they.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cantwell). The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I join with my colleagues, Senator 
Reid and Senator Sarbanes, as an enthusiastic cosponsor of their 
respective amendments that I believe, should they be agreed to, will 
make America safer.
  Last week in Baltimore we had a terrible train wreck in something 
called the Baltimore tunnel. A train overturned. It was a freight 
train. Immediately, we were not sure what was in it; what were the 
consequences of a fire; were we going to have an explosion; and whether 
the smoke billowing out of the tunnel was going to be a toxic plume 
over Baltimore. The civil defense alarm sounded for the first time in 
Baltimore in 50 years. The mayor jumped into action immediately, as did 
our brave firefighters and emergency management people because we had 
to both contain the fire and we had to contain panic.
  I salute the mayor and the Governor for the support he gave the 
mayor, and the brave men and women of our public safety organizations, 
our firefighters, emergency management, public works, and also the 
citizens of Baltimore.
  The railroad worked in a hands-on fashion with our mayor. I am happy 
to report that, as of now, we have pulled the railroad cars out, the 
smoke is clearing, but now the next phase needs to begin. During this 
saga that was unfolding, both in Baltimore and in the national media, 
our first fear was for the firefighters, the first responders, the ones 
who had to go in there and who initially were not sure what they were 
going into. The temperatures were reading 1,500 degrees. You could not 
get in through the smoke. They went down through manholes--let me tell 
you, through a manhole to a 8-foot platform, then down another ladder 
to see what the deal was. Our firefighters had to be tethered so we did 
not lose them in the smoke.
  You know what. They did it. They did it without flinching. They did 
it without hesitation. They did it with skill. They did it with 
integrity and unparalleled courage. We salute them. And also a salute 
to their spouses who were there to support people doing such daring 
deeds.
  Yes, the railroad worked, chem-hazmat worked, but now we have to get 
back to our work so we can protect the first responders, protect 
property, and also protect the nearby neighborhoods.
  This accident, which shut down much of Baltimore and the freight 
movement in the Northeast Corridor, really was a wake-up call to take a 
close look at the practice of transporting hazardous materials through 
roads and tunnels. Because we do use railroads, we do use trucks, we do 
need to be sure that we know what is going through our communities. 
What made our quick response possible was that we had a manifest and we 
knew what was happening.
  We do not know the consequences of these new kinds of materials going 
through together, the synergistic effects. One car had paper, the other 
car had hydrochloric acid, and the other car had other hazardous waste. 
One needs to be fought with water. One could have caused other problems 
if you fought the fire with water. I am not evaluating the best way to 
transport these items, but we have to do our homework so we can protect 
our people. This is why I join with my esteemed colleague, Senator Reid 
of Nevada. He has an amendment that calls upon the Secretary of 
Transportation, in consultation with the Comptroller General, to 
conduct a study evaluating the hazards and risks to public health,

[[Page 14106]]

safety, the environment, and the economy associated with the 
transportation of hazardous chemical and radioactive materials; and to 
take a look at our transportation infrastructure and the improvements 
necessary to prevent accidents involving such chemicals and other 
materials, and to examine the preparedness of Federal, State, and local 
emergency and medical personnel to respond to these accidents.
  Well done, Senator Reid. This is exactly the kind of amendment we 
need. This is exactly the kind of amendment we need so we show we are 
standing sentry over our communities and making sure we have the 
infrastructure necessary to protect our communities.
  That Baltimore tunnel is over 100 years old. It was built when 
railroads were built. The Garret family created the B&O Railroad and it 
went west. It was one of the first railroads to go west. We want those 
railroads to continue to run. The Port of Baltimore will not exist 
without our railroads, so we are not saying don't do it. But when we 
are going to do our transportation, let's do it right.
  The whole idea of examining the preparedness of Federal, State, and 
local emergency and medical personnel is also appropriate. As the 
chairperson of the subcommittee on VA/HUD that funds FEMA, this is also 
how we need to make sure our first responders and our emergency 
management people are ready. We have to have them ready as ``all 
hazards'' personnel. We could have something that was an accident, 
which was a chemical accident, where there are other things where there 
are attacks on the United States. This is where we need to be prepared. 
This is where we need to be prepared.
  We salute this amendment. I hope my colleagues will endorse it.
  Also, my colleague, Senator Sarbanes, has taken the leadership role 
of directing the Secretary of Transportation to study existing rail 
infrastructure in the Baltimore metropolitan area. It directs the 
Secretary to make those recommendations because we are worried about 
our rail infrastructure, including improvements in tunnels, bridges, 
and other rail facilities. We want them to do it in conjunction with 
the FRA, the chair of the Surface Transportation Board, the State of 
Maryland, our railroad folks, CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Amtrak.
  The amendment calls for a study to be used, and it provides that the 
railroads in the State of Maryland also join in this joint partnership. 
I believe they will. These studies need to be done with a sense of 
timeliness and a sense of urgency.
  Thank God we escaped without the loss of life. We thank God that 
there was no major loss of property. Thank God we didn't have to 
evacuate communities. But an incredible economic toll resulted. It was 
not only the Orioles game being canceled, but it was the delay of 
freight which slowed down the corridor with enormous consequences. But 
the consequences would have been even more severe had we not had the 
current infrastructure in place.
  I believe the best way we say thank you to the emergency management 
people, our firefighters, and for the excellent job our people did in 
responding is to have a parade, which I hope Baltimore has--I hope not 
only with banners, which we ought to display with pride, but I also 
think we should say it with deeds. And these two studies are a good way 
to do it.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, before my friend leaves the floor, I want 
to express my appreciation to her, and also the senior Senator from 
Maryland for joining in this amendment.
  The two Senators from Maryland can describe better than anyone here 
the terror of those brave firefighters facing a tunnel a mile and a 
half long, knowing there was a train in there and not knowing what was 
on the train but knowing there was a lot of smoke coming from it.
  This was a real act of courage, as the Senators have indicated. I 
can't imagine the terror that these men and women had in fighting this 
fire. From all of the accounts I have read--I have followed it very 
closely--it appears that it was a picture book attack on a very 
dangerous fire.
  Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, will the Senator yield?
  Mr. REID. Yes.
  Mr. SARBANES. Actually, they knew what was in the train because they 
had the railroad manifest of what was contained in the railroad cars. 
They knew, in fact, there was hazardous material being carried in some 
of the 60 cars that were on that train. Firefighters do a great job day 
in and day out all across the country. We generally sort of simply come 
to accept as a matter of course the tremendous risk they run. A high 
profile incident like this, of course, focuses attention back on it. 
There was tremendous heroism there. But there is also tremendous 
heroism on the part of firefighters taking place every day all across 
America in extremely dangerous circumstances.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I again express my appreciation to the two 
Senators from Maryland who have so aptly kept us on top of what was 
going on there. I also join with them on this amendment.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time 
between now and 5:55 p.m. today be equally divided and controlled in 
the usual form with respect to the amendment now pending; that at 5:55 
p.m. the Senate vote in relation to the amendment, with no amendment in 
order to the amendment prior to the vote, with no intervening action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the time during 
the quorum call I will suggest in just a moment be equally charged 
against both the proponents and the opponents of this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
previously scheduled vote for 5:55 now occur at 5:50 under the same 
conditions as previously ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Reid 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1037. The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.

[[Page 14107]]


  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) and 
the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. 
Domenici) and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Smith) are 
necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from New 
Hampshire (Mr. Smith) would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Carnahan). Are there any other Senators 
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 247 Leg.]

                                YEAS--96

     Akaka
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carnahan
     Carper
     Chafee
     Cleland
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Domenici
     Durbin
     Kennedy
     Smith (NH)
  The amendment (No. 1037) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.


                Amendment No. 1038 to Amendment No. 1025

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the Murray 
amendment be laid aside, and I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment will 
be set aside. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mrs. Murray, for Mr. Sarbanes, 
     for himself and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 
     1038.

  Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To set aside funds for a joint study of rail infrastructure 
                in the vicinity of Baltimore, Maryland)

       At the appropriate place, insert:
       Sec.   . (a) Of the funds appropriated by title I for the 
     Federal Railroad Administration under the heading ``Railroad 
     Research and Development'', up to $750,000 may be expended to 
     pay 25 percent of the total cost of a comprehensive study to 
     assess existing problems in the freight and passenger rail 
     infrastructure in the vicinity of Baltimore, Maryland, that 
     the Secretary of Transportation shall carry out through the 
     Federal Railroad Administration in cooperation with, and with 
     a total amount of equal funding contributed by, Norfolk-
     Southern Corporation, CSX Corporation, and the State of 
     Maryland.
       (b)(1) The study shall include an analysis of the 
     condition, track, and clearance limitations and efficiency of 
     the existing tunnels, bridges, and other railroad facilities 
     owned or operated by CSX Corporation, Amtrak, and Norfolk-
     Southern Corporation in the Baltimore area.
       (2) The study shall examine the benefits and costs of 
     various alternatives for reducing congestion and improving 
     safety and efficiency in the operations on the rail 
     infrastructure in the vicinity of Baltimore, including such 
     alternatives for improving operations as shared usage of 
     track, and such alternatives for improving the rail 
     infrastructure as possible improvements to existing tunnels, 
     bridges, and other railroad facilities, or construction of 
     new facilities.
       (c) Not later than one year after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report on the 
     results of the study to Congress. The report shall include 
     recommendations on the matters described in subsection 
     (b)(2).

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1038.
  The amendment (No. 1038) was agreed to.
  Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 1039

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask the pending amendment be set 
aside, and I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Mr. Thomas. I 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending amendment will be set aside and 
the clerk will report the amendment.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), for Mr. Thomas, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 1039.

  Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 66, line 8, after the word ``bus'', insert the 
     following phrase: ``, as that term is defined in section 301 
     of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 12181)'';
       On page 66, line 9 strike ``; and'' and insert in lieu 
     thereof ``.''; and
       On page 66, beginning with line 10, strike all through page 
     70, line 14.

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to amendment No. 1039.
  The amendment (No. 1039) was agreed to.
  Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I rise to speak on the pending Reid 
amendment regarding a Department of Transportation/General Accounting 
Office study on the hazards and risks to public health and safety, the 
environment, and the economy associated with the transportation of 
hazardous chemicals and radioactive material.
  In light of the recent events in Baltimore, it is entirely 
understandable that Senators from Maryland would join the Senator from 
Nevada in offering this amendment. Many of our urban areas suffer from 
inadequate and perhaps unsafe transportation infrastructure. However, I 
hasten to point out that if this derailment had happened to a train 
carrying spent nuclear fuel or other radioactive material, none of the 
havoc we saw in Baltimore would have occurred. The Orioles would not 
have had to cancel games and there would have been no threat to the 
general public health and safety. That's because the casks used to 
transport such material are subjected to rigorous safety standards by 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and are tested is such a manner to 
ensure that a train derailment and any number of other accidents that 
could befall the casks would neither damage the casks or allow the 
release of any radioactive material.
  As many of you well know, transportation is one of the key issues 
that arises in the discussions we have had here on the Senate floor 
when we debate the matter of how to deal with the disposal of our spent 
nuclear fuel. But I need to remind everyone that we already transport 
such material--and have been doing so for over 30 years. There have 
been close to 3,000 shipments in this country and no fatality, injury 
or environmental damage has ever occurred because of radioactive cargo. 
That is not to say there have

[[Page 14108]]

not been accidents. There have--but the casks have performed as 
designed. They haven't broken open. They have not leaked. We have done 
a hood job transporting spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste and we 
will continue to do so. Great precautions are taken to avoid accidents 
and when and if Yucca Mountain is declared suitable as a repository for 
fuel, additional transportation safety provisions under the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act will kick in to ensure that the additional 
transportation of spent fuel will continue in a safe manner.
  But we don't have to wait for Yucca to open to have safety measures 
in place--we already have them. Shipments are happening now and are 
safe. A nuclear fuel container consists of literally tons of shielding 
inside a thick steel cylinder. Any container design must be licensed by 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission before the container is used for 
shipment. The NRC will not certify the container until it undergoes a 
series of rigorous tests demonstrating that it is invulnerable to 
impact, flames, submersion and puncture.
  In addition to the safety of the casks, spent nuclear fuel may be 
shipped only along specified highway routes. Shippers submit routes to 
the NRC for approval ahead of time. The NRC checks that a route 
conforms to U.S. Department of Transportation regulations, requiring 
the most direct interstate route, and avoiding large cities when a 
bypass or beltway is available. NRC officials drive the route ahead of 
time if it has not been previously approved before or used within the 
past few years. They will check for law enforcement and emergency 
response capability as well as secure facilities for emergency stops. 
DOT regulations also require that the shipper notify the governor of 
each State on the route seven days be fore the trip.
  Specialized trucking companies handle spent nuclear fuel shipments in 
the United States. These experienced, specially licensed companies haul 
all kinds of hazardous materials more than 50 million miles annually. 
Vehicles are state of the art, equipped with computers that provide an 
instantaneous update on the truck's location and convey messages 
between driver and dispatcher through a satellite communications 
network. Drivers receive extensive training and must be certified.
  The DOT and NRC establish emergency preparedness requirements for 
radioactive materials. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the 
DOE provide emergency response training for state and local law 
enforcement officials, fire fighters, and rescue squads, covering 
preparedness planning and accident handling. In addition, DOE 
radiological assistance teams provide expertise and equipment, 
including mobile laboratories, to every region of the country. Also, 
according to a voluntary mutual assistance agreement, utilities respond 
to incidents in their area until emergency personnel from the shipper 
and shipping utility arrive.
  I have no objection to the overall purpose of the amendment however, 
in having a study done on infrastructure and training. My colleagues 
should be aware that we already do that continuously for nuclear fuel 
and high-level radioactive waste.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 1037

                       MICHIGAN CORRIDOR PROJECTS

  Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I rise to engage in a colloquy with 
the distinguished senior Senator from Michigan and the distinguished 
chairwoman of the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee. As the 
chairwoman knows, over the past few years, the State of Michigan has 
competed for funds under the Coordinated Border and Corridor Program of 
the Transportation Equity Act (TEA 21). However, because of increased 
earmarking, discretionary funds have been greatly diminished. This 
year, both House and Senate did not contain any discretionary funds, 
eliminating an important discretionary funding source for the State of 
Michigan.
  I would ask the distinguished chairwoman to give consideration to a 
particularly important project on our U.S.-Canadian border in Michigan. 
The Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project which will provide direct 
interstate access to the Ambassador Bridge and improve overall traffic 
flow to and from our U.S.-Canadian border, needs $10 million this year 
to keep the project on schedule. To date, there has been a total of 
$30.2 million in federal funds either spent or committed with a state 
match of $7 million. Any consideration that the distinguished 
chairwoman can provide is much appreciated.
  Mr. LEVIN. I join the distinguished Senator from Michigan in asking 
the distinguished chairwoman to give this important project 
consideration in conference. The Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, MI is a 
critical project for the State's trade infrastructure. It is one of the 
three busiest border crossings in North America, and more trade moves 
over this bridge than the country exports to Japan. It is crucial that 
we keep traffic moving safely and efficiently at this crossing. The 
Ambassador Bridge Gateway project will provide direct interstate access 
to the bridge, and improve overall traffic flow to and from the 
Ambassador Bridge. This project also has a wide range of support from 
the state, local government, metropolitan planning and the business 
community.
  Ms. MURRAY. I thank the distinguished Senators from Michigan, and I 
will be happy to work with them in conference on this important 
corridor project.

                          ____________________