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