UTU News Digest - Monday, March 29, 1999

UTU Daily News Digest

Information of interest to operating railroad and transportation employees

Monday, March 29, 1999

WASHINGTON: Two rail unions hit competition bill

WASHINGTON -- Two rail unions have aligned themselves with rail carriers and suppliers that urged the Senate not to enact a shipper-backed bill introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the Journal of Commerce reported.

The United Transportation Union and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers co-signed a letter with the Association of American Railroads and the American Short Line & Regional Railroad Association in opposition to the West Virginia senator's proposals to boost rail competition.

Their letter said Mr. Rockefeller's bill "would severely reregulate the freight rail industry and cost union members thousands of jobs, purportedly in the name of competition and lower rates."

The bill introduced by Mr. Rockefeller and three co-signers is intended to increase competition for rail shippers, including agricultural customers and facilities in terminal areas. More than a dozen trade associations that represent rail shippers have endorsed the Rockefeller bill. Backers of the legislation say it would eliminate barriers to competition, assure reasonable rates where competition does not exist today and remove regulatory barriers to rate relief.

James Brunkenhoefer, national legislative director for the UTU, said a loss of jobs resulting from Mr. Rockefeller's bill would have a negative impact on the union.

Leroy Jones, the BLE's Washington representative, said his union was concerned about safety issues and the potential for lower-paid workers to take over his members' jobs.

Both union officials stressed that siding with railroads against Mr. Rockefeller's bill would not halt their efforts to assure that carriers cannot override negotiated labor agreements in future rail mergers.

"We are going to deal with this issue (contract overrides) in some way," Mr. Brunkenhoefer pledged.

The letter also said the bill "would significantly reduce the freight railroads' revenues while adding a new layer of government bureaucracy."

ILLINOIS: Trucker may still lose his license

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. -- The Illinois Secretary of State's office says the trucker involved in the deadly Amtrak crash in Bourbonnais may still lose his license.

State officials ruled Thursday that John Stokes, who investigators say may have been trying to go around a railroad crossing when his steel-hauling rig was struck by the passenger train, should regain full driving privileges.

The Chicago Sun-Times says officials have since discovered that Stokes received a speeding ticket in Kankakee County last year. That ticket, combined with a 1998 Indiana speeding conviction, could cause him to lose his trucking license under federal law.

Federal law permits states to suspend truckers' licenses for two months if they are convicted twice in a 12-month period of speeding 15 miles per hour over the speed limit.

In January, Stokes' license was suspended for two months after he was convicted of three moving violations within a year. He was given a probationary permit to drive after completing a four-hour road safety class.

Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White had said Thursday that there was nothing in state or federal law that allowed him to keep Stokes off the road. Stokes, 58, of Manteno, Ill., has told investigators he was already on the tracks when the gates began lowering, and claims he never saw the train.

Illinois state laws currently don't require counties to report driving violations to White's office if a judge authorizes supervision. Kankakee County court officials told the Sun-Times that Stokes had at least two other court supervisions. In 1988, he received a yearlong supervision after being ticketed for reckless driving in Manteno. He was initially charged with drunken driving in the case.

In 1993, Stokes was placed on a six-month supervision for driving 46 mph in a 35-mph speed zone in rural Kankakee County. The Sun-Times says White's office was unaware of the Kankakee County cases until learning of them through the media Friday.

WASHINGTON: House GOP wants to study train safety

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. -- Illinois House Republicans say a recent Amtrak passenger train derailment near Bourbonnais justifies a government task force on railroad safety.

State Reps. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro, Anne Zickus, R-Palos Hills, Tim Schmitz, R-Antioch, Ron Wait, R-Belvidere, and Bill O'Connor, R- Riverside, said they will support a resolution in the Illinois House.

It would allow legislators, gubernatorial aides, Illinois Department of Transportation staffers and railroad and trucking industry workers to review actions taken against people who disobey railroad safety rules.

"We don't want to have any knee-jerk reactions here, like taking away licenses," said Schmitz. "We want to get all the players at the table and talk about it."

Legislation passed in the Illinois House yesterday proposes to increase the penalty for actions from 2-3 years for driving around a railroad gate.

UTAH: In train vs. car, car loses; Conductor blames motorists' stupidity

SALT LAKE CITY -- Union Pacific conductor Patrick McGarvey was involved in his first train-car fatality in the early '80s. "I still can see those faces." Shock. Terror. Panic. "They stay with you forever," he says.

A woman was driving; her husband, her son and a neighbor's boy in the car. She thought she could make it across the tracks before the train got there. She was wrong. The car was hit, flipped around, her husband thrown out . . . and killed.

"All that, so she could save a few minutes' time. There was nothing we could have done," says McGarvey. "But it haunts you. Sometimes, you just have to wonder what goes through people's minds."

Unfortunately, he says, they see people doing stupid things like that all the time.

In 1997, 27 train-car collisions in Utah resulted in three fatalities and eight serious injuries; in 1998, 17 train-car collisions led to three fatalities. So far in 1999, there have been four collisions but no fatalities.

Every year in this country, more people are killed in highway-rail crashes than in commercial airline crashes. In 1997, 3,865 collisions resulted in 461 fatalities. The recent train-truck crash in Illinois is only the latest example of a tragedy that did not need to happen, says Jerry Hardesty, manager of public safety for Union Pacific's Western Region.

Last Friday, Union Pacific and city and county law enforcement officers sponsored a ride-along to help raise public awareness of laws and problems at railroad crossings. For the most part motorists were well behaved, but several citations were issued to drivers who drove around gates or crossed the tracks after warning signals flashed.

Driver inattention and impatience are the most common factors contributing to collisions between motor vehicles and trains at highway crossings, notes Hardesty.

A highway-rail grade crossing presents a unique traffic environment for motorists. Many drivers don't cross tracks often enough to be familiar with the warning devices designed for their safety. Others simply ignore all warning signs because they are in a hurry and would rather play "beat the train" than wait.

Most people don't realize that there are only 12 seconds after lights start flashing before gates come down — and not much more before the train gets there.

The law is clear on what is required of motorists: If you see flashing lights at a crossing, you are required to stop. If the gate is down, you are not allowed to go around it. If there isn't a gate or warning lights, at what is called a crossbuck (a white, reflectorized X-shaped sign), that is to be treated as a yield sign; you proceed only if the track is clear.

Laws deal with pedestrians, too. Railroad property is private property, and no trespassing is allowed. You cannot walk along the tracks, play on bridges, bungee jump from trestles or do any of the other stupid things people do.

A lot of people don't realize how a train operates or how long it takes to slow down, says engineer Jim Swanbeck. The fact of life, he says, pausing to let it sink in, is: "We. Can't. Stop."

Do the math: a 150-car freight train traveling at 30 miles-per-hour will need 3,500 feet or two-thirds of a mile to stop. At 50 mph, it will need 1 1/2 miles to stop.

At best, if he sees a car breaching the crossing, an engineer can reduce speed by maybe a mile an hour before reaching the crossing — not enough to make any difference.

And do this math as well, Swanbeck says: A car or truck at best weighs 1 1/2 tons. A freight train can weigh as much as 15,000-20,000 tons. Guess which one doesn't have much of a chance in a collision. "We don't even have to be going fast for there to be a lot of damage. You have a lot of mass ramming into something small."

The longest train Swanbeck has driven was about a 1-3/4 miles long. Even one that size, going 10 mph would mean "10 minutes max" that anyone would have to wait at a crossing. Most waits are less than that. "What it comes down to," Swanbeck says, "is messing up your life for 10 minutes.

"When I see mothers with a van full of kids try to go around our gates — and you see it all the time — it disgusts me. It makes me mad. To me, it says they don't care about themselves or anybody else. If you're that concerned, leave earlier or take a different route," he pleads. "Don't risk your life to save a couple of minutes out of your day."

NEBRASKA: New bullet train crossing Nebraska under tow

NORTH PLATTE, Neb. -- The first of Amtrak's new high-speed trains made its Nebraska debut at a much slower speed than what has been billed by its makers.

The train, which will be part of Amtrak's planned Acela Express route along the Atlantic coast, was pulled across the state Tuesday by a Union Pacific locomotive.

The train is the first of 20 new high-speed passenger trains to be manufactured for Amtrak. It was being hauled to a test track in Pueblo, Colo., for extensive testing, said Derrick James, government affairs officer with Amtrak InterCity in Chicago.

Amtrak last week unveiled its new line of bullet trains that will go into service later this year between Boston, New York and Washington.

The electric-powered trains, which are being built in Barre, Vt., and Plattsburgh, N.Y., will operate at speeds up to 150 mph, nearly twice the current average speed of 80 mph.

The trains will cut the current four-hour, 30-minute trip between Boston and New York to about three hours.

"We think high-speed rail transportation as being a key to the resurgence of passenger train travel," James said. "Amtrak hopes it will create a ripple effect that America will see as successful." The trains will not be gliding through Nebraska anytime soon, James said. Since the high-speed units are operated by electricity, the rails through the state would have to be converted to handle the trains.

An Amtrak route runs through Omaha, Lincoln, Hastings, Holdrege and McCook.

"Its not likely that McCook will see high-speed rail service, but that route feeds people into our system and it can help solidify the viability of the rest of the system," James said.

The Federal Railroad Administration is working with a manufacturer to develop a high-speed diesel locomotive that could operate at up to 110 mph on most existing tracks, James said.

The state Legislature's Transportation Committee is considering a bill (LB829) by Omaha Sen. Shelley Kiel that would be the first step toward establishing a high-speed rail line between Lincoln and Omaha.

NEBRASKA: Union Pacific might take last trip to Marysville, Kan.

LINCOLN, Neb. -- The Union Pacific Railroad is positioning itself for a final one-way trip between Lincoln and Marysville, Kan.

For more than a century, trains have whistled down the 60-mile stretch of track between the two communities, Ed Trandahl, Omaha-based railroad spokesman, said last week. But declining freight business and the track's deteriorating condition may derail its future.

Trandahl said the track would be classified as Category One in a new map of UP operations to be filed by April 1 with the federal Surface Transportation Board. The result: The rail line could be phased out and abandoned within three years.

If that happens, there are at least two possibilities. A short-line operation could buy the section known as "the Beatrice branch." Or the abandoned rail bed, which begins about 7.5 miles south of Lincoln, could become part of city's trails network.

Other affected Nebraska communities include Princeton, Cortland, Pickrell, Holmesville, Blue Springs and Barneston. At this point, virtually all freight business is grain from Beatrice's Southeast Nebraska Co-op.

Steve Emmettt-Mattox, of the Rails to Trails Conservancy in Washington, is advising area trail enthusiasts to keep their eyes and ears open. "Now is the time for those communities to start thinking about a trail."

But Monty Johnson, Beatrice elevator manager, isn't ready to give up just yet on one of his main grain-shipping options. "Once again we have a situation where everything is taken for granted by both elevators and farmers -- that it's always been here and it will always be here," he said. "And unfortunately, because it's been taken for granted, that's why we're where we're at today." Now, he said, "We need to get some parties, meaning both surrounding elevators and surrounding farmers, to cooperate immediately so we can put enough volume on the line so we can keep it open."

The potential loss of UP southbound trains has some local importance as a check on competing rates offered by the Burlington Northern & Sante Fe, according to Andy Kuhn of Lincoln's Farmland Grain. But in the larger picture, the BNSF is a main line, the UP is a branch line, and most UP shipments from Lincoln go north to Valley to connect with the main east-west UP line to Omaha.

Lincoln's Dick Schmeling, with the advocacy group ProRail Nebraska, said the Lincoln to Marysville track is not in as bad shape as the railroad claims. "The line was extensively upgraded in the late '40s to early 1950s." But Schmeling acknowledged a trend where major rail carriers concentrate on major routes and on the coal business in Wyoming and Montana. "The reason they don't run on that line is because they consciously and purposely decided not to." Trandahl disagreed. He said most of the track is so bad the top speed is 20 mph. "We don't have enough capital resources so that we can put a railroad in there just so it looks pretty, because there's nothing on it." Advised of Schmeling's track assessment, Trandahl said: "It's a free country. Let him buy it."

NEBRASKA: Critics boo plan to close rail crossings

YORK, Neb. -- Nearly 150 farmers, business people and other residents attending a public hearing on a proposal to close 11 railroad crossings in the heart of York County sent a clear message: Keep the crossings open.

The proposal was submitted last month to the York County Board of Commissioners by the Nebraska Department of Roads, which by state law is charged with ensuring public safety at railroad crossings. The tracks belong to Burlington-Northern Santa Fe Railway, which helped develop the proposal.

Eleven crossings would be closed and flashing lights and gates would be placed at six others. A 12th crossing also would be closed, but it is under Seward County jurisdiction.

State and railroad officials said they want to close the crossings because many of them will become more dangerous when a second track is soon added.

During last Thursday night's public hearing before the county board, county residents said many of the crossings provide the only access during winter to and from their homes. Other county roads, they said, often were blocked with snow.

Closed rail crossings could cut off access by fire and rescue units, several residents said. Others cited inconvenience and safety hazards the closings could create for farmers.

"I don't think closing the crossings will improve safety for rural residents because it will put a lot more machinery on (state) Highway 34," said Jerry Stahr, who farms near one of the crossings. "I don't know why the burden of safety has to be on the people of York County." The commissioners said they will make a preliminary decision about which, if any, crossings to close at their next regular meeting on April 6. They will send their recommendations to the state Department of Roads for a response. The board of commissioners will make final decisions on the matter by the beginning of May.

Ray Makovicka of York, who farms south of High Plains, shared Stahr's concern.

"We are getting bigger and bigger equipment in farming," Makovicka said. "If the crossings are blocked, we will have bigger problems and more accidents on Highway 34. There will be 25- or 30-foot pieces of equipment going down the highway." Business owners located near the railroad also argued against the proposed closures, which they said would hurt their businesses.

Allen Stuhr, fire chief of the Waco fire department, said the proposed closings at Waco would leave the state Highway 93 crossing as the only access route to Waco. He said that could pose serious problems because the fire department is located south of the railroad tracks and most of the town is north of the tracks.

Mark Grosshans, fire chief at the York Fire Department, spoke on behalf of rural fire departments in the county. He said closing crossings would create problems for emergency units trying to reach rural residents.