[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 2]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 2045]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        INTRODUCTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD RAIL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. GENE GREEN

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 28, 2003

  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a simple 
piece of legislation making 3 new changes to the way that the Surface 
Transportation Board (STB) reviews rail construction projects, 
particularly when in residential areas.
  I am introducing this legislation following the frustration I have 
experienced dealing with the STB on a matter of great importance to 
thousands of my constituents' quality of life--the potential San 
Jacinto rail line in Southeast Harris County, Texas. The level of 
concern in the community, on many issues, and the outpouring of public 
opposition produced during the STB's formal process has been 
tremendous.
  Residents are concerned with increasing traffic delays and accidents 
in an area already experiencing too many problems with train traffic. 
Citizens are concerned about the safety of their children going to 
school, the potential for dangerous spills and accidents, localized 
noise and air pollution, and several other concerns. Amazingly, in 
their Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the STB concluded that the 
project will have a negligible impact on the surrounding community. I 
have spoken with hundreds of people about this project, and I can say 
that the STB is flat our wrong.
  I do not believe that they ignore the public interest at the STB on 
purpose, but I believe that the agency and its decision-making process 
are biased against the concerns of residents who are facing rail 
construction in their neighborhoods. I am introducing this legislation 
to change the decision-making process so that it is more balanced in 
three ways.
  First, if there is a high level of public opposition, the legislation 
requires that the concerns of residents and local officials be taken 
into greater consideration than in the past, especially when the rail 
construction proposal is in a residential area.
  Secondly, the legislation requires that, before a final 
determination, the STB determine whether a proposal would have a 
disproportionate impact on either minority areas or economically 
disadvantaged areas. If so, the STB would be required to report to the 
public what alternatives to the disproportionate impact proposal were 
considered and why they were not chosen.
  Finally, the legislation would require the STB to investigate the 
providing of false, potentially material information about the project. 
During the investigation, the entire decision process is put on hold, 
and if the STB found that the false information was intentionally 
provided the application is automatically denied.
  I am not introducing a rifle shot bill directed at a project in my 
area, but instead this legislation is broad based and applicable across 
the country. I have learned from my experience that the STB's balance 
needs to be shifted back towards the affected community.

                          ____________________