UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x : PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF: : : No. DCA COLLISION AND DERAILMENT OF : 99-MR-003 AMTRAK 59, THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, : WITH AN EASTBOUND TRACTOR, : Volume III SEMI-TRAILER AT RAILROAD/HIGHWAY : GRADE CROSSING NEAR BOURBONNAIS, : Day III ILLINOIS ON MARCH 15, 1999 : : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x Wednesday, September 15, 1999 The Guildhall The Ambassador West Hotel The Wyndham Grand Hotel Chicago, Illinois The Public Hearing in the above-entitled matter resumed, at the Ambassador West Hotel, The Guildhall, 1300 North State Parkway, Chicago, Illinois, pursuant to notice, at 9:00 a.m., before the Board of Inquiry of the National Transportation Safety Board. APPEARANCES: THE BOARD OF INQUIRY: GEORGE W. BLACK, JR., Chairman National Transportation Safety Board JAMES S. DUNN, Hearing Officer ROBERT C. LAUBY, Director Office of Railroad Safety BARRY SWEEDLER, Director Office of Safety Recommendations and Accomplishments CLAUDE HARRIS, Deputy Director Office of Highway Safety APPEARANCES: (Continued) THE TECHNICAL PANEL: TED TURPIN, Operations Specialist Office of Railroad Safety DR. GERALD D. WEEKS, Chief Human Factors Division Office of Railroad Safety RICHARD DOWNS, Survival Factors Specialist, Office of Railroad Safety RUBEN PAYAN, Signal Specialist Office of Railroad Safety BURT SIMON, Human Performance Specialist Office of Highway Safety BYRD RABY, Heavy Vehicle Specialist, Office of Highway Safety THOMAS JACKY, Event Recorder Specialist Office of Research and Engineering MIRIAM KLOEPPEL, Transportation Research Analyst, Office of Research and Engineering PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER TERRY WILLIAMS ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT Evelyn Hemingway APPEARANCES: (Continued) PARTIES TO THE HEARING: NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK): LEE W. BULLOCK, President, Amtrak Intercity TRAVIS HINTON, Chief Operating Officer, Amtrak Intercity CHRIS BLACK, Director, Public Affairs T. MICHAEL KERRINE, Associate General Counsel, Tort Litigation GEORGE BINNS, General Manager, Standards and Compliance PETER HALL, Director of Safety, Amtrak Intercity MARK MEANA, Director of Safety, Corporate CLAYTON BROWN, Assistant Vice-President, Corporate Operations CANADIAN NATIONAL/ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD: ED HARRIS, Vice-President, Midwest Division JOHN PRENDERGAST, Risk Manager CHARLES WEBSTER, General Counsel, U.S. JOHN SHARKEY, General Manager, Communications and Signals APPEARANCES (Continued) CANADIAN NATIONAL/ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD: (Continued) MYLES TOBIN, Vice-President, U.S. Legal Affairs BOB KEENE Federal Railroad Administration: DAVID BLACKMORE, Deputy Regional Administrator ALLAN HALSTROM, Principal Inspector, Indianapolis JEFF THOMAS, Signal and Train Control Inspector, Chicago ROBERT MYERS, Assistant Grade Crossing and Trespass Manager, Chicago PATTY SMITH, Grade Crossing and Trespass Manager, Chicago FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION: RUDY UMBS, Chief, Safety Design Division ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION: MICHAEL STEAD, Rail Safety Program Administrator JOHN BLAIR, Railroad Safety Specialist STAN MILWESKI, Railroad Safety Specialist DON RICHARDSON, Railroad Safety Specialist, State Coordinator, Illinois Operation Lifesaver BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS: WILLIAM C. WALPERT, Vice-President JOHN P. TOLMAN, Special Representative, International Division LARRY JAMES, Coordinator, Education and Training Department. CARL FIELDS, Safety Task Force TOM O'BRIEN APPEARANCES: (Continued) UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION: THOMAS P. DWYER III, Director MELCO TRANSFER, INC.: MELVIN MARSHALL JUDY MARSHALL BRAD PURCELL, Counsel for Melco Transfer, Inc. C O N T E N T S PAGE Sworn Testimony of Ferdinand P. Serpe 537 Examination by the Technical Panel 537 Examination by the Illinois Commerce Commission 558 Examination by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers 566 Examination by the United Transportation Union 572 Examination by Melco Transfer, Inc. 574 Examination by the Federal Railroad Administration 575 Examination by the Board of Inquiry 576 Sworn Testimony of Bruce George, Ed Malinowicz, and Michael Onder 592 Examination by the Technical Panel 593 Examination by the United Transportation Union 633 Examination by Canadian National/Illinois Central Railroad 634 Examination by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers 636 Examination by the Board of Inquiry 639 Adjournment 669 E X H I B I T S NUMBER IDENTIFIED 2N Diagram - Highway - Rail, Its Interfaces 597 2O Diagram - Leveraging Advanced Traffic Management for HRI Safety 597 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. DUNN: Good morning. It is nine a.m., and the National Transportation Safety Board calls its first witness, Mr. Fred Serpe. SWORN TESTIMONY OF FERDINAND P. SERPE MR. DUNN: Mr. Serpe, for the record would you please state and spell your full name. MR. SERPE: My name is Fred Serpe, S-e-r-p-e. I am the Executive Director of the Illinois Transportation Association. MR. DUNN: What are your duties and responsibilities? MR. SERPE: My role as Executive Director of the Illinois Transportation Association is to develop educational programs and lobby on behalf of the trucking industry in Illinois. MR. DUNN: At this time, I will turn the questioning over to our Technical Panel and Mr. Byrd Raby. EXAMINATION BY THE TECHNICAL PANEL MR. RABY: Mr. Serpe, how does the Illinois Transportation Association, the ITA, relate to the American Trucking Association, the ATA? MR. SERPE: Good morning, Mr. Byrd. The Illinois Transportation Association is the state's trucking association affiliate of its national parent, the American Trucking Associations located in Alexandria, Virginia. There is a state trucking association affiliate in every state. MR. RABY: What is the overall mission of the ATA? MR. SERPE: With your permission, I would like to read a prepared statement relating to the ATA and to the industry and then answer any questions you may have. MR. RABY: Thank you. MR. SERPE: The American Trucking Associations and it 50 state trucking associations affiliates continue to actively support railroad and grade crossing safety issues. The trucking industry has been partnered with the National Safety Council and with Operation Lifesaver for many years and continues to work closely with Operational Lifesaver in developing and disseminating educational awareness materials on highway rail grade crossing safety. This includes a pamphlet, Working Together for Safety, and a two-page truck driver safety alert. Both have been utilized extensively by the trucking industry safety professionals to educate drivers on how to avoid the potential hazards associated with railroad grade crossings as well as how to stay in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. In addition, the trucking industry and its membership are currently working with Operation Lifesaver in revises it video, Physics 101. I have also brought a copy for you today. It also provides the valuable information on rail grade crossing safety, both from the truck driver and locomotive operators perspective. Once completed, this updated video will be widely distributed throughout our industry and with Operation Lifesaver to further educate drivers on the importance of rail grade crossing safety. The American Trucking Associations' staff is also serving in the role of Chairperson to the National Safety Council Division on rail grade crossing safety. This resulted in the inclusion of rail grade crossing safety issues in several states' commercial drivers license manuals. In addition, the ATA also developed a rail grade crossing safety manual that is distributed and used by, of course, all of its state association affiliates. Also, just two weeks ago, the American Trucking Associations developed information on the Federal Highway Administration's new regulation providing for strict driver qualification periods for convictions of grade crossing laws. We communicated the impacts of these new regulations to all the industry and have posted information on the American Trucking Associations' web site. The decline in railroad grade crossing incidents has been impressive. We believe this decline is primarily due to the hard work done by Operation Lifesaver the American Trucking Associations and its affiliates, the National Transportation Safety Board, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, the Federal Highway and Railroad Administrations, and the railroad. However, more needs to be done. The instances of vehicles running into the sides of trains remains a real concern to our trucking industry. In addition, 40 percent of those incidents occurred at active crossings. According to the 1999 final report on freight car reflectorization issued by the Volpe Transportation Center, this report, as did previous ones, concluded the need for increased rail car conspicuity. The 1999 report specifically pointed out the use of retro-reflective materials as a means to increase rail car conspicuity and thus reduce the incidence of vehicles running into trains. Our industry strongly agrees with the Volpe's assessment. In doing its share to prevent highway and rail grade crossing accidents, the trucking industry has become fully reflectorized. Given the shared responsibility of grade crossing safety, railroads, we would hope, should likely the same and also become fully reflectorized. Our industry also supports local control of speed limits to help reduce excessive speeds that many trains travel through our local towns and communities, possibly creating an unsafe situation for motorists and pedestrians. In fact, the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors passed a resolution calling for the elimination of Federal pre-emption of local speed limits. We also support increased use of uniform signage at rail grade crossings as well as improved integrity of locomotive fuel tanks. Most importantly, the industry calls for the installation of cameras at grade crossings. California has seen a 90 percent reduction in violations as a result of those cameras. Finally, we strongly believe that rail grade crossing is a shared responsibility between trucking industry, the motoring public, and the railroads; and all laws and regulations pertaining to rail grade crossings should be equally enforced on the motoring public. MR. RABY: Would you know, in a typical, day how many trucks travel over public crossings? MR. SERPE: I can speak in regards to Illinois. MR. RABY: Okay. MR. SERPE: We, in Illinois, are America's crossroads. We see about a hundred thousand trucks come through Illinois every day. The figures I have gotten from the Illinois Commerce Commission say the percentage of truck traffic over all grade crossings range anywhere from 3 percent to 14 percent; 3 percent being rural, 14 percent being major urban areas. Within that number, it could be anywhere from 3,000 to 14,000 trucks crossing grades every day. MR. RABY: Would you have any numbers as far as how many of these crossings, the truck crossings result in accidents with trains? MR. SERPE: From the years 1993 to 1998, and once again, I am quoting my sources, the Illinois Commerce Commission, for that five year period, there were 1,314 grade crossing accidents in that five year time period. The number of crossing accidents involving trucks were 383, Now what the Commerce Commission doesn't do is break out the difference between small, light, and medium and heavy duty vehicles. So, some of those may have been pick-up trucks. MR. RABY: Would you also have any figures of how many truck occupants died in these accidents? MR. SERPE: No. I was unable to get the fatality rate, but I will find that out and provide that to this court. MR. RABY: Does the ITA or the ATA ever interface with shippers that have large truck traffic and use nearby grade crossings? MR. SERPE: Yes, we do. We interface with almost everyone as a result of highway users or highway traffic. The way we do it through a myriad of meetings and councils and working with the government, with DOT, with the Operation Lifesaver. We have a safety council that meets monthly, and which consists of safety supervisors from every trucking company. That comes together and it meets and talks about various safety issues. Then in turn, it is the trainee/trainer sort of situation that disseminates all that information back to the drivers of the tucking companies. Once again, I speak on behalf of all 50 state trucking associations. Every state trucking association follows the same safety procedure. You have to remember about our industry two things. One is safety is our biggest big concern from a personal level. We, in Illinois, employ 1 out of every 11 workers in this state, and it is the same number nationally. So if you take a work force of 10 percent of the population being 10 percent of the work force in Illinois, and multiplied that times four for a simple family, we are dealing with 40 percent of the vehicles on the road are going to be our families. So if we were speaking strictly selfishly, those are our families on the road, and that is why safety is important to us. If we speak economically, our industry runs on pennies. We only make one to two cents on every dollar that is profit. Consequently, to lose a load is devastating. Any spike in cost causes our industry to go out of business. We saw this a few years ago with a spike in fuel. It drove two hundred companies out of business just in Illinois. So, we have got real reasons to care about safety, not just from a family standpoint, but from an economic standpoint. Those increases in premiums and losing loads just literally put us out off of business. MR. RABY: What special concerns or problems do truck drivers tell you they perceive at highway grade crossings? MR. SERPE: Well, in Illinois, the biggest problem that our drivers have is the lack of signage on the grade crossings themselves. There are nine thousand grade crossings in Illinois, and only half of them have got some sort of warning device at all. The real numbers are 9,019 grade crossings. Grade crossing with gates are 2,296. Grade crossings with lights are 2,500. Some other automated device is 61, and those crossings that only have a passive warning device is over four thousand. So our biggest concern is lights, action, cameras. We need them. MR. RABY: Has the timing of the flashing or warning lights at a grade crossing been perceived as a problem with the truck drivers; in other words, the length of time of the warning? MR. SERPE: In a simple answer, no. In a more detailed answer, we believe there is enough time to adequately warn the truck itself or the vehicle itself once the grade crossing lights are activated and, once again, assuming everything is running properly and efficiently. The time it takes a truck to cross the grade crossing ranges anywhere from 13 to 15 seconds. Generally, that is plenty of time with the adequate warning devices to make sure we are able to stop. The law is very clear in Illinois what we have to do on stopping, and we are very confident in the lights themselves. MR. RABY: What is the ATA's position on the draft Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1999 in regard to truckers? MR. SERPE: We are a thousand percent in favor of the new regulations. We feel that violations of a grade crossing is inherently wrong, and anyone should be penalized to the greatest and fullest extent. ATA was fortunate enough to be a part of the whole planning process of those decisions and made a great deal of recommendations regarding that final decision. We were very placed with the final decision. MR. RABY: Do you feel the present CDL licensing process adequately addresses the hazards and special precautions needed at grade crossings? MR. SERPE: In Illinois, the CDL test itself addresses the procedures at railroad crossings. If I may take a minute and read a paragraph right out of the manual (Reading) All persons taking the driving test required for the commercial driver licenses are required to observe proper procedures that are outlined in the Federal motor carrier safety regulations and the Secretary of State Field Operations Manual at rail grade crossings. The procedure itself requires a vehicle to stop not more than 50 feet and not less that 15 feet from the nearest rail. They are also required to shift into a low gear for crossing the tracks and looking and listening in both directions for trains. In addition, the Class A and B -- those are the commercial driver's licenses themselves -- drivers must lower their window and/or open the door to listen to trains. After this is completed, the driver is to proceed across the track without changing gears and only when it is safe to do so. If the area does not have railroad tracks, then the driver is required to simulate the proper procedure if the crossing does exist. MR. RUBY: That is in the Illinois -- MR. SERPE: That is in the Illinois Secretary of State Commercial Driver's License Manual. Then there is also a corresponding written question on the exam itself for the commercial driver's license. I may also add at this time that the Illinois Secretary of State, Jessie White, has put together numerous task forces. The one I chair, the Safe Trucking Task Force for the Trucking Advisory Board that brings all of the people concerned with safety and all highway users together to discuss all of these methods and procedures and whether everything is fully effective and the means to make it better. MR. RUBY: Is there any new technology that you can see or have seen or are aware of that promises to improve safety grade crossings? MR. SERPE: Our biggest request is cameras. We have seen that the cameras, there is a test site taking place right now in Illinois in Wood Dale over a grade crossing that has cameras set up. There is funding available from the Illinois Commerce Commission to enhance those tests and to provide for more test sites. The biggest thing we would like to see in this industry, once again, is the establishment of some sort of camera system so that liability can be determined immediately, the deterrence that we have seen in California, the 90 percent deterrence rate on violators will be there and what would work. We have also looked at the yellow light system and examined it to see if that would be something that would be viable for our industry. It is the industry's position that there is adequate warning time available with the current system and that money that would be allocated for a yellow light system or an additional signal system should be allocated in a better way from that and using the idea of cameras themselves. The other thing with technology is -- we are talking nuts and bolts here -- there are four thousand crossings that don't have anything, and that is just dangerous. MR. RABY: Thank you very much. I turn the questioning over to Ms. Kloeppel. CHAIRMAN BLACK: What are you talking about when you say yellow light system? MR. SERPE: There has been discussed in our safety groups that a grade crossing system possibly instead of just firing off red lights possibly put in a yellow light like a stop light. CHAIRMAN BLACK: In other words, going to standard traffic signals? MR. SERPE: Yes, more or less. MS. KLOEPPEL: Good morning, Mr. Serpe. MR. SERPE: Yes. MS. KLOEPPEL: Yesterday at this hearing, a witness testified that with the exception of some micro-circuitry to predict train speeds and the addition of event recorders, the basic design of the grade crossing warning devices has remained unchanged since the late 1930s. Can the same be said of trucks and the fleet of trucks on the road? MR. SERPE: Not at all. MS. KLOEPPEL: In what ways have they changed? MR. SERPE: Our vehicles have become far more fuel efficient, far more easy to handle, a far better piece of equipment in stopping, starting, pulling and, once again, size. The industry, although it is not in favor of larger vehicles and more freight, the shipping public has demanded that the industry go to bigger trucks throughout the years. As we see today with the 53 foot trailers that exist on the roadways today, that was strictly because the shipping public wanted the ability to put two pallets next to one another all the way back. So, the idea of bigger and larger trucks is something that has never been requested from the industry, but it is something that has been demanded by our customers and consequently, we have had to respond to that. Today, our equipment is phenomenally better just like our cars are phenomenally better than a 1930 vehicle. MS. KLOEPPEL: Are there characteristics of trucks that make some crossings particularly hazardous to truckers? MR. SERPE: Would you repeat that, please. MS. KLOEPPEL: I was just wanting to know if there are some aspects of the make-up of trucks that make some crossings more dangerous than others for a trucker. MR. SERPE: From the aspect of time, it takes longer to cross a double track than it does a single track. The truck itself, in that position of a grade crossing, there should not be any blinds spots to the vehicle. They should be able to see. They should be able to cross effectively. One thing the industry like to see with the operation of the trucks is, you know, our vehicles are all fully equipped with all sorts of communication devices. If there were a way to communicate that a grade crossing is not operating properly, we would be happy to serve in that capacity just like we do with the state police with a road watch program where, in that capacity, if we see an unsafe situation on our highways, we immediately radio or call or notify the state police. So from the standpoint of a driver crossing a railroad crossing, he can also be the best line of defense. MS. KLOEPPEL: Are there any guidelines or restrictions on truck routing that relate to grade crossings? MR. SERPE: Only from a weight standpoint; if a road itself is a designated route that has 80,000 pound access, which is the maximum that any road will carry in America, except for the special permit situation, no. MS. KLOEPPEL: The Safety Board has investigated more than one accident in which the low-boy trucks got how hung up on crossings. In light of that information, do you feel that it might be wise to try to establish some guidelines to route trucks away from the high profile crossings? MR. SERPE: Yes, just like we route trucks away from the low viaduct crossings now. Unfortunately, there is not always a way to tell where a low viaduct is because of weather situations. There could be ice and snow packed on the road that adds two to three inches to the road, and consequently, it becomes an unsafe situation without anyone knowing it, so, yes, if there is a way to re-route. Once again, we come back to the communication of the driver himself being able to notify someone somewhere that this is a bad spot that needs to be addressed. The best way to do it, once again, is what is happening with our industries today, the rail and trucking and safety industries all working together to solve those problems. MS. KLOEPPEL: If some organization such as yours or even an individual trucking company wanted to determine whether grade crossings along long a proposed route were safe for trucks, is there currently enough information available to do that to make a route? MR. SERPE: If I understand what you are asking is can someone in a nonprofessional capacity analyze and determine something that would be, should be done by an engineer or a technical person, and I don't know about that. MS. KLOEPPEL: I guess my understanding is that, let's say a low bridge is there, there is information available, and the people who are putting together truck routes know the height of bridges along the proposed route, is there similar information for grade crossings? Do you have any way to find out whether there are humped crossings? MR. SERPE: Generally, yes. Once again, speaking for Illinois, the Illinois Department of Transportation has eight hundred numbers and tremendous access for routing purposes, especially for permit purposes, and also provide general information constantly with the ideas of construction and other gridlocks and possible barriers. So, I would say yes, the Illinois Department of Transportation has that information available to any motor carrier if they were to so call. MS. KLOEPPEL: In the case of the accident in Bourbonnais, did the extended load or the weight of the truck present a safety hazard when the truck attempted to traverse the crossing? MR. SERPE: The truck in Bourbonnais was a steel or a flat bed trailer, so its typical lengths are usually between 45 and 40 feet. Consequently, it would have taken it approximately 14 seconds to cross those tracks. MS. KLOEPPEL: I guess in this case, I was just thinking the load was over-sized, extended beyond that. MR. SERPE: How much was it extended to? MS. KLOEPPEL: It was seven feet beyond the back of the truck. MR. SERPE: So, if it was a 40 foot trailer with 7 feet of reboof (phonetic) with 52 feet, so it would have been 14.6 seconds to cross the tracks. MS. KLOEPPEL: Does your organization communicate on a regular basis with the railroads about grade crossing safety issues? MR. SERPE: Constantly. Our organization is very involved with, once again, with the Operation Lifesaver and the total safety relationship of our industries and the Government and the public. So, we are always in touch on all sorts of levels with the railroad industry. Even if any other type of legislation that arises, the industries are always notified and discuss it before anything is passed. A perfect example of that is the Safe Container Act that Illinois just passed recently -- the Governor gave me an inventory to read all of that -- that calls for the liability to exist on the owner of the container itself, that it must be safe before it is placed on a chassis and taken on the road by what we call a "dray man." That is a trucking company that pulls freight out of the rail car containers. That was done with cooperation of the rail industry and steamship lines. MS. KLOEPPEL: Do you, for example, have direct contact with individuals within the railroads that operate in Illinois? MR. SERPE: Sure. We sit on the board and we chair many committees with the board of the Chicago Area Transportation Study called CATS. On that is an intermodal advisory committee and an intermodal board. We are in constant communications with the railroads and sit on that board as well. We enjoy a very fine dialogue with all of the industries. MS. KLOEPPEL: Thank you. I have no further questions. I guess I will turn it over to Mr. Payan if he has something. MR. PAYAN: Good morning. I just have one question. Is your organization aware of the recent activities the railroad industry has taken in posting eight hundred numbers at railroad crossings to facilitate the reporting of problems? MR. SERPE: Yes, we are. We are very much in favor of that activity itself. When that was done, we requested that those numbers be placed prominently, not on the gate itself so when it goes up eight or nine feet it cannot be seen, but that the numbers be used and be aware. We are in the process of notifying our drivers to use those eight hundred numbers because most of our drivers now have phones in their vehicles. MR. PAYAN: How is that information disseminated to truck drivers? MR. SERPE: Once again, through our safety management councils of the associations. So, the American Trucking Associations in Washington has a safety management council, and it disseminates its information to all 50 state trucking associations. Each state trucking association has its own safety management counsel, and that counsel consists of all of the safety directors of every trucking company. Those safety directors are informed of all of the different information, and then they relay it to their truck drivers themselves. MR. PAYAN: Thank you. That is all I have. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The Illinois Commerce Commission? EXAMINATION BY THE ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION MR. STEAD: Good morning, Mr. Serpe. I have a few questions for you. You made the statement earlier about the ITA liking to see cameras placed at crossings. Were you referring to all crossings in the state, all public crossings, or just the ones in urban areas or do you have a particular requirement for that request? MR. SERPE: Please forgive me for answering a question with a question, but I are you asking me this as a utopia or as something realistic that can be done? MR. STEAD: I guess that is what I am asking you. MR. SERPE: If it were a perfect world, we would like to see a camera at an active crossing at all 9,010 crossings in Illinois. Looking at it realistically, who is going to pay for all of that and where it is going to come from? We would like to see an active camera crossing at least in the urban areas and those crossings that can be identified as possibly dangerous or heavily congested. MR. STEAD: Have you discussed this idea with the law enforcement officials around the state? MR. SERPE: This idea was brought up at the Secretary of State, Jessie White's Safe Trucking 2000 Task Force a few months ago, and it was presented to them. It was something that was requested by our industry to be open for discussion and looked at in a very serious way. At that meeting, it was pointed out by Tom Myers (phonetic) from the Illinois Commerce Commission that there is this test in place now. As a matter of fact, the cameras were just activated a few months ago in Wood Dale, Illinois regarding the grade crossing. I have met with several of the vendor companies that provide this type of technology, and I have relayed their information back to the Commerce Commission. The problem that arose was that Illinois has funded or has funding available for three test sites, and the local municipalities that have the sites available in their town want a very extensive site built instead of something that is simple and that could solve the problem. So, what they are asking for is a Rolls Royce instead of a Chevrolet. Our vendors have said very clearly that grade crossing cameras can be installed and activated and used for approximately $50,000 per crossing as opposed to the $300,000 that it is costing at the Wood Dale facility right now or at the other two facilities that have been requested. MR. STEAD: Just as information for you and everybody else here, the other two sites have been awarded, and they are in the process of being installed. So, we are much further along in the way of the process than what you had indicated. MR. SERPE: That is fabulous, and we are, once again, thankful to the Commerce Commission. MR. STEAD: We have a question regarding the number of collisions and injuries and fatalities at crossings. Are you aware that about half of all rail, highway vehicle collisions occur at crossings equipped with automatic flashing light signals and gates? MR. SERPE: Do you have the numbers of the fatalities themselves from the 383 incidents involving trucks? MR. STEAD: Not with me, but we have it in the office. Just by historical data, we know that approximately half of all collisions occurred at crossings, actually beyond 50 percent occur at crossings equipped with automatic warning devices. My question is -- MR. SERPE: By "automatic warning devices," do you mean gates? MR. STEAD: Either automatic flashing light signals or signals and gates. How do you feel the installation of additional flashing light signals and additional gates will improve that situation? MR. SERPE: Once again, you know, we are going to answer this in a realistic answer or utopia, and what is the best thing to do? If we are talking safety, we are talking about the stronger the barricade, possibly the better it is? It is safety. What else is more important than the saving of lives and the saving of our families? MR. STEAD: Along those same lines, has the ITA invested any time or money in studies to determine drivers' conditions in observing warning signs and warning devices at crossings to warn themselves? MR. SERPE: Yes. The American Trucking Associations have done extensive studies on all sorts of driver-related issues, including the uses of grade crossings and driver awareness and driver fatigue. All of that would come into play. There are ways to make things better from our service standpoint to eliminate driver fatigue and a myriad of other ways to make these drivers more aware. One thing we are very proud of is that our industry is a drug-free work place, and we have done the mandatory testing and drug testing and post-accident testing and pre-employment testing for a number of years now, and we are very proud of the numbers that have come through. What we are ashamed of is the pre-employment testing and the potential hirees that we test come out an average of 60 percent test positive for drugs, and those people are never allowed to be in our work place. Of course, that creates another whole issue and another demand that is not for this Board, but it is a matter of finding good, qualified workers that are drug free. MR. STEAD: Do you have any recommendations or suggestions as to how the existing warning signs and warning devices could be improved to better attract the drivers' attention? MR. SERPE: Obviously, more gates would be better. More lights would be better. If the Board so decides the timing should be better or more extensive, that is a possibility. Once again, we have to weigh those requests with the gridlock itself and what kind of a result, what would the ripple effects be in tying up traffic. MR. STEAD: I am referring to the advance warning signs, the signs that are posted along the highway approaches to the crossing. Do your drivers see those warnings? Do they aid them? That is a key element in improving safety at crossings. MR. SERPE: Of course, we have to start somewhere and say someone is alert and someone is doing the job. Assuming that position is taken, then the question goes to how long should it be and what should be there. Yes, the more warning, the more availability a driver can be given, the better it is. Having a crossbuck stuck out in the middle of somewhere may not always be the answer. Obviously grade crossing gates and lights are wonderful things. Do violations occur? Of course, they do. Is it with cars and all vehicles. Yes. Once again, I am anxious to hear the results of the studies of all the other sites with the cameras and how they will actually deter any potential violators. Our position is very clear with the trucking industry. There is nothing more important than safety. A driver follows the law. That is it. We know he is drug free, we know he is alcohol free, and he follows the law. If he does anything less than that, he is no longer employed in our industry. The stronger and the tougher the laws are, the better. We fought hard for the influence, the tolerance, lower tolerance rate for driving under the influence. We fought hard for this commercial drivers license. All of these safety measures that are in place for this industry have been requested by our industry and fought for by our industry. You know, we are knights of the road. We are out there trying and living on those roads, and we are trying to keep safe roadways out there, and we are the ones that have to do it. We cannot rely on the Government telling us what to do. We have to take the responsibility ourselves, and we are proud to do it. MR. STEAD: One final question: Illinois state law currently requires all trucks carrying hazardous materials to stop at all crossings before they proceed over that crossing. MR. SERPE: Uh-huh. MR. STEAD: Would you consider tractor trailer combinations carrying over-length loads to be a hazardous material, that vehicle, and should they be required to follow the same rules? MR. SERPE: That is something that should be addressed at one of the safety hearings gladly, and it is something that should be talked obviously talked and discussed, but I am not going to spout out an answer now. Is it safer? If you show that it is safer, if you bring that to the hearing and show that it is safer, than yes, we should definitely do whatever we can for safety. MR. STEAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BLACK: I assume your support of photo enforcement extends to speeds also. MR. SERPE: Yes. If we are talking about speeds, we also have to look at uniform speed limits. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Let's not get into that right now. I was curious if you do believe in it. I think if you believe in it for railroad crossings, you have to accept it for everything else. Photo enforcement is another issue that I personally think is the hope of the future for doing something because we are never going to have enough police officers to do it. From previous contact I have had with the trucking industry, you support it for some things, but not for other things. MR. SERPE: Mr. Black, let me point out, if I can interrupt you, that in Arizona, there is photo enforcement at road crossings, and they have seen a 60 percent reduction in violations, and yes, we are very much in favor of it. If I can please beg of you for one minute to talk about uniform speed limits because it does -- CHAIRMAN BLACK: No; we are not talking about that at all here. We have a truck hearing, a series of truck hearings that are going on. There is one in Los Angeles. I would invite you to participate in those. Those issues are being handled separately by the Board, and some of us need to get out of here before the hurricane hits us. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers? EXAMINATION BY THE BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS MR. WALPERT: Mr. Serpe I would like to follow up on a line of questioning by the technical panel. In regard to the characteristics of crossings that may be particularly hazardous to trucks, you stated that it would take 14.6 seconds for a truck similar to the truck that was involved in the Bourbonnais accident to cross the crossing at McKnight Road based on its length. Is that correct? MR. SERPE: Yes. MR. WALPERT: I assume that you were speculating on the speed of that truck. MR. SERPE: I am basing it on a 53 foot trailer taking 14.8 seconds to cross. CHAIRMAN BLACK: That is four miles per hour. MR. WALPERT: In that regard, do you think the 26 seconds warning is an adequate amount of time? MR. SERPE: Is adequate or is not adequate? MR. WALPERT: Either way, is it adequate or not. MR. SERPE: If it takes 14.3 seconds, we would assume it should be adequate before the crossings went down. You are saying there are 23 seconds before the gate closed down? MR. WALPERT: Twenty-six seconds. MR. SERPE: Are you talking simple math? Then simple math says yes, it should. MR. WALPERT: I am talking about what you think. MR. SERPE: 27 multiply it and subtract it from 15, yes, you are going to have a 13 second leeway. That is almost enough time to go over it twice. MR. WALPERT: Would a trailer such as the one involved in the Bourbonnais accident need a special permit, to your knowledge, because of its extended load? MR. SERPE: Not generally, no. MR. WALPERT: What are your feelings in regard to a possible requirement that the trucks stop at railroad crossings such as school buses or gasoline trucks? MR. SERPE: In Illinois, and it is not the same in all the states, a truck has to stop at a grade crossing, but if it is an unmarked gate crossing or if the lights are on and there is no train, the truck can proceed. I am not comfortable with that. I believe, once again, from a safety standpoint, we have to examine that issue especially in a rural situation. Where a truck can stop and wait until it is safe, it should. In an urban situation, and I am sure the Commerce Commission could tell you, I doubt there are not very many urban areas, especially in the Chicago area, that don't have adequate gating. So if the gates are down and the lights are on, that truck should stop and not go until those lights go off. That is not the law in Illinois, and that is something Secretary White is looking into to address. In some states, it is the law, and that truck should stop and wait. MR. WALPERT: Changing subjects briefly: In regard to the hours of service for truckers, do you think the present hours of service regulations are adequate? MR. SERPE: I am not using it to set you up, but if we are going to talk about hours of service, I also want to talk about uniform speed limits because it relates to the driver in question in this issue and some of his violations and how they were affected. CHAIRMAN BLACK: We are not going to get into hours of service. I would encourage you to participate in our hearings on truck safety. That is not giving you the fact that the two were related, but we will go into it. I don't necessarily agree with that. MR. SERPE: Mr. Black, as a courtesy, I would be happy to answer the gentleman's question. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Okay. MR. SERPE: Yes, hours of service need to be addressed. The hours of service law on the books is something that is 60 years old. Getting back to are the trucks the same from 1930? No. Are the hours the same from 1930 and the abilities for us to drive and deliver from 1930? No. Hours of service need to be addressed. They need to be examined fully on a scientific basis. Given today's sleep patterns and what works best and getting the driver home at night to sleep in his own bed instead of having to park an hour outside his home and sleep in the truck, we need to handle that. CHAIRMAN BLACK: We need to get back on the subject. It would also be nice if we could enforce the existing hours of service, which we are not doing. MR. SERPE: I have to take umbrage with you on that because the U.S. Department of Transportation and all the departments of transportation are auditing our industry extensively to make sure that the hours of service violations are not violated and that there are adequate log books and records in every company. Those companies that do not have it are fined extensively because of that. So, the DOTs are doing their job. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Next question, please. MR. WALPERT: Next question: In regard to training for truckers, is it your belief that there is an adequate amount of training for truck drivers in how to safely approach crossings and all the regulations and safety precautions that need to be observed at such crossings? MR. SERPE: Yes, I do. I think, once again, in the commercial drivers license manuals and in the classrooms, there is adequate preparation and training. The key question here is: Is it in the CDL manual, and is it a test question? The answer to both of those is yes. Could we do more? We could always do more for safety. Could we add more hours to the actual training of drivers for the classrooms? Sure, but now it becomes economics too. How much can a student afford to pay? MR. WALPERT: You mentioned the CDL. Do you think -- I guess I should say, What is the position of the ATA in regard to going beyond the CDL requirements and maybe having Federal licensing for truck drivers? MR. SERPE: The commercial driver's license itself was considered a Federal act, that a uniform commercial driver's license across the country be set forth, that each state be given some leeway in the testing of the commercial driver's license; but from a national view, the commercial driver's license is already a national uniform test. I remember years ago, you could go into Tennessee with a Volkswagen and walk out with a truck license. You cannot do that any more. If you lose your license in California, that license is gone here in Illinois. There used to be multiplicities of licenses for truck drivers, and we don't have that any more. Every driver has one license, and if he loses it, he is out of the industry. MR. WALPERT: Thank you. That is all I have. CHAIRMAN BLACK: United Transportation Union? EXAMINATION BY THE UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION MR. DWYER: I wonder if you could define for us what constitutes a dangerous railroad crossing. MR. SERPE: No, I really could not define that. I mean I would speaking strictly as a layman and not as a professional engineer. MR. DWYER: You talked about cameras, and I am wondering what the Illinois Transportation Association wants to do about funding, maintaining, and overseeing that system. MR. SERPE: We have ideas on that, and there is money that could be available given the proper opportunities and having the proper numbers in place. Today, we cannot come up with real numbers because, once again, the test sites, the variation of cost per site, is so different. We are anxiously awaiting the results of the tests, and then, we will have a formal presence and a formal idea of where the money is going to come from. MR. DWYER: Let me rephrase my question. Who is going to fund it, who is going to maintain it, and who is going to oversee these cameras? MR. SERPE: Those are all issues that will have to be discussed. In sincerity, I think the question is premature. Those are issues that have to be discussed: Who is going to pay for it? Is it the industry or the Government? All of these things will come into play. MR. DWYER: I guess, based on my experience with the railroad industry, I know they are not going to pay for it. Based on my experience with the trucking industry, I know they are not going to pay for it. I guess what we are looking at here is you are going to ask the Federal Government or the states to fund this program. Is that correct? MR. SERPE: As I said before, all of those issues will have to be discussed, and once we have an ascertainable amount and ways to fund, we will bring those out. I agree with you that nobody is going to want to pay for it. Those are issues that will have to be discussed. MR. DWYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Mr. Marshall with Melco. EXAMINATION BY MELCO TRANSFER, INC. MR. MARSHALL: There is one question nobody has asked through this whole hearing, and you seem to have the ability to answer it. A truck driving 20 miles an hour with 80,000 pounds, what is the stop distance? MR. SERPE: I don't have that exact number. MR. MARSHALL: I was just wanting to know. MR. SERPE: If you want, I will get that for you gladly. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Amtrak? MR. BULLOCK: We have no additional questions. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The CNIC Railroad? MR. ED HARRIS: No questions, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Federal Railroad? EXAMINATION BY THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION MR. BLACKMORE: Can you tell me, Mr. Serpe, if the truck driver or employer was an ITA member? MR. SERPE: His company was not an ITA member. His company, though, has been given numerous amounts of safety materials. MR. BLACKMORE: Do you have any suggestions on how we can reach the small trucking firms across the country to put out crossing safety messages? MR. SERPE: "We" being? MR. BLACKMORE: FRA, Federal Railroad Administration. We work with Operation Lifesaver also nationally, and any suggestions would be -- MR. SERPE: Of course, the databases listed are enormous today. Our Illinois Commerce Commission has a database of 14,000 trucking companies or anywhere from a one truck owner to the UPSs of the world. All of that information is available, and it is all ascertainable, yes, in the direct mail, in direct calling. Working with the trucking associations themselves is the best way to do it. We are constantly sending out information to nonmembers from the aspects of safety. To join our safety council, you do not have to be a member of the association because the interest of safety is so inherent. MR. BLACKMORE: You have come in contact with nonmembers through, like, ICC -- MR. SERPE: Daily. MR. BLACKMORE: No other questions, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Federal Highway? MR. UMBS: No questions. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Mr. Sweedler? EXAMINATION BY THE BOARD OF INQUIRY MR. SWEEDLER: I want to clear up the discussion between the BLE and yourself, Mr. Serpe, on timing. I think there was some misinformation or I don't think we understood exactly what was said. Our understanding is the 26 to 30 second warning is from the time the first lights come on until the time the train arrives. I think you were thinking that, that time would be until the gate started to come down. I just wanted to make sure everybody understood that. When the first lights come on, the gates are to come down in a few seconds, and then the train arrives within 20 to 25 seconds. Under those circumstances, I think Chairman Black mentioned the 14 seconds that you have discussed would be for a truck traveling only four miles per hour. I don't know if that is a typical speed of a truck going over a crossing. I would imagine it would somewhat higher than that, so it might take less time to clear the crossing. Under those circumstances, from the 30 seconds or the 26 seconds is only the time from first warning until the train arrives, not when the gates start coming down. Do you still have the same view or is there a different view? MR. SERPE: No; I may change that view. Those are the questions that would have to be looked at. Yes, I was clearly under the impression there was a 27 second time before the gates come down. MR. SWEEDLER: That is what I thought. I just wanted to clear that up. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Let me intervene here for a minute, Barry. Didn't I hear you say that your training materials suggested a stop and shifting into a lower gear before going over a crossing? MR. SERPE: Yes. CHAIRMAN BLACK: If you started from a standing stop, that number is probably not correct. In other words, you could achieve about four miles per hour at the typical loaded acceleration rate over the distance that it would take to clear a 65 or so foot rig. MR. SWEEDLER: We talked a little bit about stopping at crossings. Do you have a position or how do you feel about the installation of stop signs at crossings that don't have any particular warning devices at this point, no lights, no gates, just crossings with nothing or just the crossbucks? Do you think a stop sign would be a useful sign at that point on those types of crossings? MR. SERPE: What the industry feels is a crossing that has nothing is unsafe. Anything is safer than nothing. The more, the better. When they are safer, so be it. Once again, you are getting into the financing and everything else that is involved, but yes, we would love to see the four thousand grade crossings in Illinois that have nothing have something. MR. SWEEDLER: So a stop sign at least is better than nothing? MR. SERPE: We will take what we can get today. MR. SWEEDLER: Thank you. I have no further questions. MR. CLAUDE HARRIS: Just one question, Mr. Serpe: As a result of this accident, has your organization taken any other initiatives to try to address improving grade crossing safety? MR. SERPE: Our industry has consistently tried to improve grade crossing safety and consistently tried to work with the railroads and the Government and the Department of Transportation in every way to improve grade crossing safety, especially in the Operation Lifesaver. This is nothing new. This didn't result from one bad record, one piece of bad press. Our industry has always cared about grade crossing safety. Donald Herby (phonetic) speaks with our people annually on Operation Lifesaver. It is a great program, and it is something that should be utilized by everybody America to understand the significance and the value of it all. So yes, it has not changed because of the accident. Our continued striving toward safety will always continue. MR. CLAUDE HARRIS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Mr. Dunn? MR. DUNN: I have one order of business if I could get it in here. The court reporter needs to have the business cards of all the party spokespersons. Also, if someone at the table asked a question during this, give your business card to her, someone at your table other than the party spokesperson. If you would, do that for me and her. She is here today, so that is good. So, do that for me; thanks. Are there event recorders on the trucks? MR. SERPE: No. MR. DUNN: They are not required? MR. SERPE: No. MR. DUNN: In 1987, there was a rail accident in Chase, Maryland that I think changed the rail industry forever as far as engineer certification. I have a couple of questions about truck drivers on the same things. An engineer is required to take a yearly test operations test and so on; is this required by truck drivers? MR. SERPE: No. The test is every four years. It is the commercial drivers license exam. MR. DUNN: There is a certification program now where every locomotive engineer every three years has to be recertified. That is going through the medicals, the eye tests, and a ride where he rides with a supervisor so that he knows what he is doing. It doesn't matter how long you have been around. Is that required for truckers at all? MR. SERPE: Basically, yes. The DOT physical form and a complete driver is required by the employers to maintain in their driver file with re-testing. MR. DUNN: Someone rides with the trucker and watches him perform? MR. SERPE: A safety supervisor general does that. That is not required. MR. DUNN: How often is this done? MR. SERPE: Depending on the size of the fleet and the number of safety supervisor that are available, it would depend, it can go anywhere from once to annually. MR. DUNN: Is it required to do it so many times? MR. SERPE: No, not to ride along, no. MR. DUNN: One last thing: If the locomotive engineer mishandles his train in certain ways or is caught speeding over a certain percentage of the authorized speed limit, he can lose right to operate a train for 30 days, and then the second offense can be a year, and the third one is three years, in which you might as well go find another occupation. Is there anything like that for truck drivers? MR. SERPE: Yes. It is actually more extensive. If a driver has three to four violations, depending on the state, in a year, he will lose his license completely. MR. DUNN: Three to four violations? MR. SERPE: Yes. MR. DUNN: What about the first violation? Say I got caught doing 85 miles an hour. Do I just pay a fine, or what happens to me? MR. SERPE: That would be up to the Circuit Court Judge to decide where the violations took place. There is no industry standard on that. MR. DUNN: Could he stop me from driving for 30 days or just fine me? MR. SERPE: Generally, he will just fine you. Once again, your question is if the act is so wantonly negligent, the judge can make other determinations or place the driver on supervision or whatever, but as a general rule, it is three moving violations before the driver faces losing his license. MR. DUNN: Thank you. Those are all the questions I have. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Mr. Lauby? MR. LAUBY: I have a couple of questions, Mr. Serpe. You talked a little bit about the initiatives that the ITA has for their driver to provide information, safety information on grade crossings and how this information is also distributed to nonmembers, other truck drivers. Can you give me an estimate on how prevalent this information is; that is, how effective it is? By that, I am talking about numbers. What percentage of truck drivers are you reaching with this education material? MR. SERPE: I will not only give you an estimate, sir, I will also provide to the Board copies of some of the things. We do posters that we put up in the work place, a recent copy of the truck driver safety booklet. Generally, our filtration rate is extremely successful. It disseminates to the general industry almost a hundred percent because we not only stop at the companies themselves, but we also utilize the truck stops and the National Association of Truck Stop Operators to disseminate the same information. MR. LAUBY: You are saying close to a hundred percent of the truck drivers we might see at any truck stop has been given information on grade crossing safety? MR. SERPE: Every truck driver is given some type of grade crossing safety information. If nothing else, before he took his commercial driver license, he would have studied the exam and found it there, but yes, he has been given additional information. MR. LAUBY: In looking at what I do, my occupation as an accident investigator, in the past year, as far as truck, train crashes, it has not been a good one for the railroad industry or the truck industry. This past year, we have had an accident in Georgia with a vault truck, in Portage, Indiana with a steel truck, in Bourbonnais with another steel carrier, and also Texas with another commercial trucker. In these accidents, 14 people have been killed in the last year. There is a lot more, but these are the ones. These are the big ones that NTSB is covering. I am impressed with the programs that you have told us about and the things that are being done, but my own view is that somehow we need to prevent these types of accidents. My question to you is: What do we need to do different right now to prevent these accidents? MR. SERPE: Right now, we need to disseminate as much information as possible. We need to make sure our drivers are aware of the horrendous situations that occur. In the future, we need to increase technologies on those grade crossings. We need a deterrent. We can tell people until we are blue in the face that it is unsafe to cross that crossing and don't do anything negligently, but if the man stands to lose his license and lose his livelihood, if the driver stands to lose their livelihood and they know they are going to be caught because of cameras or whatever, so be it. The more we can instill the need for safety and the more we can instill, even on a selfish level, we mean to remove these people from the work place, and that we will do that, the better. MR. LAUBY: Just to sum up, you are talking enforcement and stiff laws to go with that. MR. SERPE: Yes, but I am talking about more fine projects like Operation Lifesaver and more of the industries working together like they do now to help and to promote and to include the industries and the drivers themselves. MR. LAUBY: Thank you. That is all I have. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Mr. Dunn asked you is your association for event recorders. Following through on that, is your organization for or against them? MR. SERPE: Our organization is very much in favor of the new technologies that exist today with the use of satellite communication and all sorts of other information services relating to the safe and effective delivery of the freight. If recorders also could add to that, then our industry would be more than happy to be in favor of it. CHAIRMAN BLACK: I think I would encourage you to look at some private companies who run their own fleets who have very high success rates with safety and with equipment utilization and equipment maintenance, costs, fuel costs, and they attribute all of those to event recorders. I think it is significant, like I said to the media several times, in this accident, we have two time lines very well established in this accident. One of them is from the railroad signal equipment because of the event recorder the railroad had on their equipment. By the way, the reason they had that piece of equipment was for maintenance issues so it would allow them to troubleshoot the equipment, but it also turns out to be a very effective tool in accident investigation and probably in defense when it comes to it ultimately to get into that issue. Of course, the locomotive had an event recorder on it. Here, this truck obviously involved in interstate commerce, we don't know anything about it other than eyewitness statements, and we would not be having much of a discussion at this meeting had the trucks had event recorders on them. Some of them already do. There were several companies at our truck hearings where operators, very large operators, some of them are going to. They are going to all sorts of technology on trucks, and they cite some very impressive statistics. I would suggest you might want to contact that guy from U.S. Express. MR. SERPE: I am familiar with him and his company and his -- MR. HARRIS: Max Fuller. MR. SERPE: Max Fuller, and he is extremely pleased with the recorders themselves in his operation and helping him. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Anyway that is something I think would definitely help in the safe and efficient delivery of freight, and I have some difficulty. Now that prices are coming down considerably from what they were a few years ago, I would encourage your organization to look at that. I want to check again here. First of all, do you represent independents also or just large companies? MR. SERPE: Yes. The companies that belong to the Association are the companies that lease to the owner/operators. So, one of our companies may have a fleet of two thousand owner/operators in their company. So yes, we speak on behalf of all of the trucks in Illinois. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Joe Smith, he and the finance company own his truck, and he has no markings on it whatsoever and he hauls strawberries back and forth across Illinois, but is based here from California to New York, he probably would not be in on your flow of information. MR. SERPE: If Joe Smith has no markings, he is in violation of the law. CHAIRMAN BLACK: I am talking about, he doesn't say I used to, he doesn't say -- you know what I mean. MR. SERPE: Yes. Yes, he would have access to some of our information. CHAIRMAN BLACK: How would he get it? In the mail? MR. SERPE: He would either get it in the mail or he would get it through a truck stop as a hand-out or a flier. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The last issue here is go back over, if you would, again what, if you could have controlled a driver approaching -- well, today, probably somewhere down there today, given three or four hundred loads crossing per day, somebody is crossing that crossing at McKnight today -- what would you have the driver who was eastbound toward the railroad tracks toward Route 50 on McKnight Road, what would you have him or her do on their approach to railroad crossing? MR. SERPE: Exactly what the law says to do: If the lights are on lights, stop. CHAIRMAN BLACK: If the lights are on, stop? Would you have them stop anyway and shift to a lower gear before they started crossing? MR. SERPE: Not necessarily; it would depend on the flow of traffic itself. CHAIRMAN BLACK: If the lights were flashing -- MR. SERPE: A red light means stop. That is unequivocal in Illinois. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you very much. Did we raise anything in here that needs follow up by anyone? (No response.) CHAIRMAN BLACK: We appreciate your participation here, and I really wish you would become involved with -- we are going to have a very large truck study. Well, it is on-going now, and truck safety and interstate bus safety is included in the same process. The truck freight traffic that is going up almost daily by several percent, you probably know that better than I do. We have some major, major concerns not only on highway grade crossings. Bob read of the major accidents that we had done involving heavy trucks on railroad grade crossings this year. If he had read off the number of highway accidents that are associated with trucks running into the end of stopped queues of traffic on freeways, that number is probably double that. The issues associated with breaks, and you mentioned hours of service -- and hours of service are something we are interested in this accident -- are becoming more and more critical to, not just to the truck drivers, but also to people who have to operate in same the traffic flow. Most people, most four wheeler drivers as truckers used to call them, do not realize that the truck behind them, under the best of circumstances, can only decelerate at about 60 percent the rate the automobile can. That is with front electronic brakes and everything. That is a fundamental issue of physics with regard to frictional factors, and on wet pavement, it is even worse. So, this is a major issue, and I would you and your organization to look into what we are doing there. Any input you would have, we would very much appreciate it, and thank you very much. MR. SERPE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Obviously, sharing the road is something we do, and we are very much in favor of. We are trying to get it across all the time, and I wish all of you a very safe flight home. (Witness excused.) CHAIRMAN BLACK: We can take a ten minute break. (Recess from 10:15 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.) CHAIRMAN BLACK: Proceed, please. MR. DUNN: The time is 10:40 and the National Transportation Safety Board calls Mr. Michael Onder, Mr. Bruce George, and Mr. Ed Malinowicz. SWORN TESTIMONY OF BRUCE GEORGE, ED MALINOWICZ, AND MICHAEL ONDER MR. DUNN: Mr. Onder, for the record, would you please state and spell your name. MR. ONDER: My name is Michael Onder. The last name spelling is O-n-d-e-r. MR. DUNN: You are employed by? MR. ONDER: U.S. Department of Transportation. MR. DUNN: What are your duties and responsibilities? MR. ONDER: I have responsibility for commercial vehicle operations and the highway rail crossing activities in the ITS Joint Program Office. I will explain as we get deeper into that a little more detail on how my duties are more or less spelled out. MR. DUNN: Mr. George? MR. GEORGE: My name is Bruce George. George is my last name, G-e-o-r-g-e. I am a Division Chief from the Federal Railroad Administration Highway Rail Crossing Safety and Trespass Prevention Division. MR. DUNN: Mr. Malinowicz? MR. MALINOWICZ: My name is Edward G. Malinowicz. The last name is spelled M-a-l-i-n-o-w-i-c-z. My duties are to assist Geofocus Incorporated in the development of railroad applications for their GPS systems and to introduce these applications to our customers in freight, Intercity, and commuter rail operations. MR. DUNN: Thank you very much. I turn the questioning over to the Technical Panel. EXAMINATION BY THE TECHNICAL PANEL MS. KLOEPPEL: Good morning, gentlemen. I guess I will start with Mr. Onder. Could you please define ITS and describe its genesis, how it came about. MR. ONDER: Yes. This might get us into a couple of the acronyms we talked about yesterday, ISTEA and TEA-21. Just for the record, Mr. Dunn, ISTEA is the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, which passed in 1991. TEA-21 was the reauthorization of that, which it stands for the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st century. The key differences between those two Acts I think are the words that the "E" stands for. In the first Act, "E" stood for efficiency. In the second Act, it stands for equity. Equity had a lot to do with how money is distributed to the states. So, that is one of the reasons why it is used in the title for that particular Act. ISTEA came about, like I said, it was passed in 1991, and there was a new provision in that Act that created an ITS Program, Intelligent Transportation Systems Program, which is primarily an R&D program, the nature of research and development. As a result of the passage of that particular Act, the U.S. Department of Transportation invoked the Volpe Center to try to determine how to best manage that program within the Department. They, in turn, came out with a report in 1993 that said a Joint Program Office ought to be created within the Department. It operates similarly to the way a Joint Program Office operates within the Department of Defense. It is multi-modal in nature, so the money comes directly to the Joint Program Office and is distributed to the various modes from there for the various programs that are going to be implemented. One of the first requirements for the ITS program to undertake was to develop an architecture. That architecture primarily focused on activities within the metropolitan areas of the country and the functions associated with and cooperations that are necessary within the major metropolitan areas primarily between public safety officials, traffic engineers, weather operations, the media, and a whole host of other providers of traffic information. Out of this was born primarily the integrated traffic management center that many of us may see. If we don't know about them within our major metropolitan areas, we see indications of them through the changeable message signs we see on the highways as we go throughout the country. So, that is probably one of the most visible indications of that right now. Some of the cameras and everything else that has been talked about here the past couple of days are all sorts of indications of the ITS Program. It probably has as its major focus, and I think one of the sound bytes that can be carried away would be that it integrates information systems. It is designed to do that so that people that may not have been able to talk together very easily in the past can talk together in the future, not only through land lines, but also through wireless communication and other types of communication, satellite as well. So the Joint Program Office is about 17 strong. I would say we have links to all of the various modes within the Department. We are housed within the Federal Highway Administration, but we also have a responsibility and a direct organizational link to the Secretary of the Department. So, we have, you might say, two bosses. We are managed on a monthly basis primarily by what we call a strategic planning group. That is made up of associated administrators in all the modes. Most of our program issues and policies and whatnot are set by a strategic planning group. Then on a less frequent basis, probably a quarterly or a less than quarterly basis, two or three times a year, the senior management council meets with all the modal administrators and other policy issues are decided at that time, including the budget activities for the ITS Program Office. MS. KLOEPPEL: Within the ITS initiative, is there an attempt to address grade crossing safety? MR. ONDER: Yes, there is. In fact, the Federal Railroad Administration took the lead in 1996 to request that our architectural teams which put the together the framework for the major metropolitan activities I mentioned to you in the traffic management centers, travel management and a couple of advanced public transit activities, also commercial vehicle operations, the Federal Railroad Administration petitioned our office to undertake the develop of an architecture for highway rail crossings. I think there is an Exhibit 2N or Exhibit 2O. I am not sure if we could bring that up on to screen. It might give you better pictorial of what that is about. This can get fairly complex, but let me give you kind of an idea just in your minds. I put sort of a separator down here between what we will call the traffic side of this chart and the rail side of this chart. Primarily, what we are talking about here is having intelligent information systems talking to intelligent information systems. That is way the architecture is laid out. All of the information that is going on at a rail crossing, anything about a train or anything about the equipment at the wayside, can be communicated to this intelligent controller. In turn, you could either have this intelligent controller taking care of the gates and barriers. Primarily, what is happening right now is the wayside equipment is taking care of that. The intelligent controller also could have linkages to the traffic signals, variable message signs, surveillance equipment which could be cameras and other types of equipment, and then short range communications for any of the vehicles that may be crossing a highway rail crossing. It also can communicate whatever information is coming through this flow to a traffic management center which, in turn, if we blew this chart up even further, we would see all the linkages that, that traffic management center would have with the community that the traffic management center resides in as well as to other communities along a particular path. So, that is essentially what the architecture was designed, how it is designed. It does not deal with anything on the left side of this particular chart. That is all in the rail environment, and this is all in the traffic environment. So, the architecture has only dealt with those things on the traffic side of this particular chart. That is the way the consensus group that came together made up of the industry and government and local as well as state and Federal Government and the rail industry and the manufacturing industry, they are the consensus developers who decided on how this should all come about. Then, of course, the detailed technical work was done by our architectural teams. MS. KLOEPPEL: Does the JPO, your office, consider it important to develop national standards for the equipment and the communications that would go on within these structures? MR. ONDER: Yes. In fact, that is probably one of the foremost ideas behind building an architecture is so that you could have standards for the various equipment -- it might be hardware or it could be software -- but primarily the equipment that would make the architecture work so it would develop or be a foundation for more competition so that you would have more than one or two sources of, for whatever the equipment is that you are getting. So, stimulation of competition is certainly one of those. The other one has to do with something that is critical as we move through this whole deployment of ITS technology, and that is interoperability. The issue of interoperability is how one piece of equipment may interoperate with another piece of equipment remote from the particular location so that if you have a device in your car, that it works the same at one rail crossing as it works at all rail crossings. MS. KLOEPPEL: Are there standards in place for applications to be used at grade crossings? MR. ONDER: No standards in place yet, but that is something that we are working on. It is a long -- I don't know if you are familiar with the standards process or not, but it is a long and tedious process. It involves a lot of consensus development. There was a workshop just held recently that was specifically on this subject. It was held in July on the development of standards for ITS highway rail crossing activities. MS. KLOEPPEL: Are there specific test projects that the JPO is involved with that address grade crossings applications? MR. ONDER: Yes, there are. In fact, preceding the July workshop, we had a workshop in May specifically associated with some of the projects that are going on throughout the country that have an ITS focus. I might add that some of these projects got underway before there was an architecture, so they may be experimenting with some thinking, but they, I am sure, had some influence on how the architecture was developed; but they may have been experimenting with some thinking before that. I might also like to add that the ITS program has discretionary funds. So, the funds that come to it are primarily able to be utilized through the planning and development process going on throughout the U.S. Department of Transportation and with various stakeholders. So, there is a lot of decision that can go into how that money gets used from a central headquarter's perspective. The monies that have been used for the seven projects I am going to talk to you about this morning have all come from other sources. It is ITS money, but it has come from various sources. It could have come from, for instance, there is a project that is being conducted in Illinois in the Chicago area, and that funding has primarily come the Chicago, Gary, Milwaukee corridor funding, which is ITS money that goes directly to that corridor to decide how the money is to be used. There are some other, Minnesota, for instance, has a Guide Star Program. They get a direct grant from Congress, and it is ITS money, but it also is put to use in a manner that they see their priorities dictate. There are several other projects that I am going to talk to you about that have been direct earmarked. So, the Congress has earmarked these projects directly. So, we have very little say in how a project gets developed or put into place. I just want to put that for the record in advance, and I will tell you after what we are planning to do to help that situation along. Let me just talk about the Illinois project because there was some discussion with the witness preceding us who talked about the camera project with the Illinois Commerce Commission. I have to say that I am not familiar with that project and I am not sure if whether or not that camera project may overlap with some of these projects as well. There are five crossings in the Chicago area that are being outfitted, and primarily, it is with METRA, and I will say also that most of these projects have to do with commuter rail. To my knowledge, there are no freight rail companies that have been involved with any of the projects. The project in Illinois is primarily between Raytheon, Cobra Electronics, like I say, METRA, Milwaukee North Line, and University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. Primarily, what they are trying to do is assess an on-board advisor vehicle warning system. They are using fuzz-buster type technology which, as you may know, is not legal in some states. So, to try to have fuzz-buster technology be prevalent throughout the country might be a little difficult from our perspective, but they have, the installation is nearly complete. By the end of this month, they are supposed to have installation complete at all five crossings. They will have about three hundred vehicles equipped with this type of equipment -- school buses, emergency service vehicles, and taxis. The driver training is expected to be complete in October. Then they are going to test the system for another year. So, by the end of this time or by the end of next October, we should have some information from that particular project that could be helpful. There is a couple of other projects, where in-vehicle warning is primarily the prevalent form of technology. As I mentioned, Minnesota Guide Star did some testing there on five crossings, and they involved 29 school buses. They did not have, the results did not specify any specific positive outcome, I will have to say, on the part of the school bus drivers. Apparently, they did not really use the devices. So, I would say that the findings for that project are incomplete. However, I will say that, and one of things, I think one of the questions to deal with about funding, Minnesota is looking at other kinds of technology to use for warning of an approaching train to be captured by in-board or on-vehicle sensors. So, I can talk about that project a little bit later. Those are primary two in-vehicle warning. There is another project that I am not as familiar with that I think my colleague, Bruce George, is and maybe he may want to talk a little bit about what Missouri is doing. After I finish, you can talk about Missouri. There are two projects that deal with external warning systems, and these are changeable message signs. There are two variations here. One of them has to do with a changeable message sign that is at the crossing. The other one has to do with a changeable message sign that is remote from the crossing, but it is along a major highway route. There has been discussion about re-routing traffic, whether it be truck traffic or other traffic. The Texas project is designed to re-route traffic around or away from certain crossings. Texas has its project integrated with another larger project, which would be the traffic management center approach that is shown up on the screen. What they are trying to do is warn a motorist prior to them making any kind of decision to go on a particular road as to what they may find on that road. In addition to that, they are using Doppler radar to detect the train speed and acoustic sensors to detect train presence. So, there is some effort and a new look of different kinds of ways of detecting both train presence and speed. They also are looking at methods for determining whether or not there is a vehicle that may be trapped at a crossing. They call their system Award. The other site which I think is kind of interesting is a Maryland project. I forgot to mention also Maryland and California have funded their projects out of an IDEA Program. It is a transit IDEA Program that goes through the Transportation Research Board. It doesn't have to be ITS money. In this particular case, it was not ITS money, even though the ITS Program had been supporting the IDEA Program. They have their funding through this transit IDEA Program. The Maryland project is primarily a second train coming. So, they are primarily dealing with the local at-grade trolley car type of environment. However, you have got two tracks, and you have got trolley cars going in either direction, and they have had some problems at several crossings with regard to -- and they know they have risky behavior going on. That was something that they had put cameras at the intersection to determine whether or not there was risky behavior before they selected a site. They did select a site, and they decided to put a changeable message sign at the site which was primarily graphic oriented. Primarily, it was the graphics of two approaching trains coming together. They tested this at that site and found that within 60 days of the test, the risky behavior had dropped 86 percent. So, I found that to be a pretty astounding result for that particular test. That is one of the few tests that does have results at the moment. The California project is just getting underway. In fact, they primarily are doing the same thing, although their focus of attention is on pedestrians. They have a situation where they have a couple of roadways that are intersecting right at the same point where there is a station and a rail crossing. They have commuters that are getting off the light rail system and crossing over the tracks with another train that could be coming. So, they are trying to warn. They have had a lot of problems at that particular intersection. So, they are just getting underway, and they should have something in place later this year to start testing. I think one of the sites that I have not mentioned thus far which is possibly one of the most comprehensive of all tests that are going on is the Long Island Railroad. Essentially, what they are using is an on-board communication system in which the train is actually communicating with the railroad crossing to run the gates and the lights and the bells. So, they are experimenting with that right now. The train will be constantly tracked for both direction and speed, and they are using more than one kind of communication. They are using GPS as well as radio frequency, RFID type technology, and under a spread spectrum of radio communication system. They also have, one of the things that they have is -- just to get a profile here -- two hundred plus trains per day, and traffic volumes are about 13,000 ADT. So, they have had some severe traffic tie-ups when a train comes into a station with a crossing in proximity to the station. The gates have been coming down and causing traffic tie-ups. So rather than have the traffic tie-up on the highway, they decided that they would have the train wait until most of the traffic cleared out. Then again, the train or the train men would communicate to the rail crossing to close the gate so the train could clear the station. So, that is a most interesting project, and they are talking about fully equipping their entire system as well as perhaps the whole New York transit system. Essentially, those are the projects that I know the most about that we talked about at our workshop in Boston in May. Bruce, you may want to talk about the Missouri project. MR. GEORGE: I am here about the Missouri project. It is a warning system that they are trying to set up for passive crossings. They can do it at one crossing to start with. They are going to tap into the railroad's block signal, no special circuitry, just tap and provide a binary signal that there is a train on the block or there is not a train on the block. That will turn on an in-vehicle flashing light in the car that says there is a train in proximity. It doesn't say that it is -- it may have been already been through the crossing. It is in the block. They are equipping a number of vehicles, residents that live near that crossing, and a number of trucks that have business that is in close proximity to the crossing. It is a double track crossing, so it would tie into both tracks and provide separate warning. So, if both -- I think there are LED indicators, and if they are both on, it will tell you there are two trains in the area, one on each track. So, it has the potential of providing a second training warning as well. It has not kicked off yet, but they are actively working on it in Missouri. MS. KLOEPPEL: Thank you. I think after this point, I would like to leap over to Mr. Malinowicz because he has a project that sounds somewhat similar to some of the aspects of the Long Island project. Mr. Malinowicz, could you, first of all, tell us what Tri-rail is. MR. MALINOWICZ: The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority operates a commuter service between Miami and West Palm Beach and South Florida. MS. KLOEPPEL: What is your company's relationship with Tri-rail? MR. MALINOWICZ: We are presently under contract to provide services of our train track monitoring GPS system to enhance the operation and the safety operational data and customer service. MS. KLOEPPEL: What technology is currently in place for grade crossing safety at Tri-rail? MR. MALINOWICZ: Presently on the South Florida rail corridor, which is 72 miles long, we have a combination of anything from medium barrier curbs to four quadrant gates to simple gates with cantilevers, and Florida's only whistle band crossing (phonetic). MS. KLOEPPEL: Is there a proposed grade crossing enhancement project by Tri-rail? MR. MALINOWICZ: Yes. We were requested by the Tri-rail to submit a proposal for our Aware system. It is an advanced warning alert for railroad engineers. That proposal was submitted to Tri-rail and has subsequently been translated into a 30 percent design plan for submittal to FTA (phonetic) for funding. MS. KLOEPPEL: What companies are involved in this? Is it just your company and Tri-rail or are there other organizations involved in this? MR. MALINOWICZ: The entire South Florida rail corridor is involved, and that includes Florida Department of Transportation, CSX Transportation, Amtrak, Tri-rail, as well as the local FRA. MS. KLOEPPEL: Could you give us a little bit of a description what the proposal includes, what kinds of systems you are hoping to install. MR. MALINOWICZ: Yes. MS. KLOEPPEL: Feel free to refer to any diagrams or anything. MR. MALINOWICZ: The proposed system consists of four main components. Presently on the Tri-rail commuter rail system, all of the trains are GPS equipped as part of the train tack system. The four main components are communications and positioning systems on board each train; intelligent video monitoring equipment at each grade crossing; event recording equipment at each grade crossing; and communication and monitoring computers at each crossing. If you refer to the diagram, there are, as I have testified, four main components. Probably, the most important are the eyes of the crossing, and that is this Nestor Incorporated digital video technology that will be placed at the crossing. MS. KLOEPPEL: Could you use the laser pointer there. Could you indicate that, please. MR. MALINOWICZ: As the train approaches the approach circuit to the crossing, the digital video camera will start rolling. It has the ability to project what type of vehicle is coming, to recognize whether it is a cement truck, school bus, a person on a bicycle, or an automobile. The purpose of that is to monitor the vehicle coming to the crossing to see whether it is going to stop or if it stops on the crossing for an extended period of time. The initial testing phase will look at a 15 second period for a vehicle or a person stopped within the confines of the grade crossing. At that point, it would notify the controlling communications computer at the crossing which would send out a spread spectrum radio message to the locomotive engineer who, based on the physical characteristics of the railroad, would handle this train in a safe manner. The next important part is the Harmon Devtronics (phonetic) event recorder, which will be doing a self-check before the train arrives at the crossing, and should there be any exceptions to the performance of the crossing, the engineer will get a message on his mobile information terminal on his console that the crossing has an exception to it, please handle your train in accordance. The purpose of the GPS is to notify the grade crossing you have a train coming, do your self-check on your event recorder. If everything is in normal working order, the engineer will just have a steady green light on his console and he will know that the crossing is functioning. MS. KLOEPPEL: Does the GPS also tell the warning system at the grade crossing to activate or is that handled through the track circuitry? MR. MALINOWICZ: That is still handled through the track circuitry. We are just enhancing the system to make it a little safer. Should a vehicle stop, and again, within the confines a grade crossing for more than 15 seconds, that will be our initial timing that we would use in our testing, an alarm will go off, a digital alarm on the MIT, the local information terminal and the engineer's console will probably say something -- crossing obstructed and a damp road at mile post 15.7. Should that obstruction clear, he would get a clear message. MS. KLOEPPEL: When was this project initiated? I mean when did this whole thing get started? MR. MALINOWICZ: The concept developed out of a meeting between Florida DOT and Nestor Incorporated for the traffic division system last December. At that point, I was invited to attend as Director of Safety for Tri-rail. I saw what they had to offer. I asked them if the system could be modified to send out an alarm should somebody stay in the confines of the grade crossing, and they told me yes, no problem. So, we went to work developing the two technologies to work together, Geofocus Train Track System and Nestor Video. MS. KLOEPPEL: Are the devices being used here or are they being developed or is this equipment that is almost off the shelf? MR. MALINOWICZ: This technology is presently off the shelf. It has never been used in the combination in which we are going to use it, but it is proven technology. MS. KLOEPPEL: Do you have an expected time frame for when you would like to equip the crossings and when you expect things to be fully running? MR. MALINOWICZ: Florida DOT presently has the event recorder program up and running effective September 10th of this year. Nestor is presently entering a contract with Florida DOT for the first four crossings for demonstration purposes, and as far as Geofocus goes, we are expecting a contract with Tri-rail upon receipt of funding from FTA. MS. KLOEPPEL: Is FTA the only source of funding for this project or hoped for source of funding or are there other avenues available? MR. MALINOWICZ: I have believe FTA is the only source we have considered. MS. KLOEPPEL: Could you describe for us any particular difficulties you have had getting everything to work together. I would not just mean equipment. I mean any overall difficulties you have had with the project. MR. MALINOWICZ: There has been no difficulty. In a short few months, we have taken a project from the design concept to a 30 percent design for funding. Geofocus has entered a safety partnership with Florida DOT, Tri-rail and things have been moving along. MS. KLOEPPEL: Thank you. I guess I have a few questions for Mr. George now. Could you describe any FRA programs designed to encourage the testing and implementation of innovative technologies. MR. GEORGE: The programs we participate in are DOT programs I believe. Mr. Onder mentioned the IDEA Program. That is an acronym, IDEA. It stands for Ideas Deserving Exploratory Analysis. It is administered by the Transportation Research Board, but the costs are underwritten by the Federal Railroad Administration, the Federal Highway Administration, NTSA, FTA, and I understand also that the American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials and American Public Transit Administration and the National Academy of Science is also participating. The goal of the IDEA Program is to generate innovative solutions to critical issues in the transportation field. They explore feasibility of unproven technical concepts, of novel applications of existing concepts or advances that have not yet been tried or tested in the transportation field. They focus on high pay-off concepts, product systems, test techniques that will accelerate technologies, methods, or processes for surface transportation. It is open to everybody. Crossings are a specific topic for which ideas are sought. Funding ranges from 25,000 a hundred thousand dollars. It can go up to a quarter of a million, but that requires some matching. They are typically short duration projects, a few months up to a year. The selection of the project is done through peer review. They look for quality and credibility of the concept, the potential pay off, and the ability of the person or team making the proposal. The topics deal with safety, mobility, intermodalism, capacity, collision avoidance, emergency response, hazard recognition, and that sort of thing. Specifically sought are ideas for on-board or wayside monitoring from shared crossings, that crossing is clear, automated event recording, in-vehicle warning systems, low clearance vehicles versus high profile crossings, inspection, detection, that sort of thing. There have been projects -- Mike mentioned that the second train coming project was outgrowth of that. They are looking at LED light mini diodes for signals, for communications. Vehicle profile scanning has been explored. Frankly, I get calls in my office with somebody that has an idea they think is a novel approach, and frequently, I would refer them to this program because it is an opportunity for them to see some Federal funding for a small project with a lot of potential. Another thing that FRA has done is -- twofold reason, and in fact, in the action plan in 1994 for crossing safety, we wanted to do an outreach or to involve the defense industry, and we went out with what is called a broad agency announcement published in the Commerce Business Daily looking for ideas to address these programs. One of the things, the Nestor, which Ed just mentioned, has applied for funding to that. We are currently working on a statement of work with them to refine the computerized video monitoring using their lenses to detect obstacles at crossings, the presence of a train, and the functioning of warning devices. Another project is with Honeywell Incorporated, a radar scan to detect blocked crossings. We are exploring different ideas on that approach. Another project published or initiative jointly supported within the department and the industry, we published earlier this year a request for technical information. The FRA; FHWA; FTA; the Volpe Center; JPL, the Jet Propulsion Labs, contractor to JPO; Ashto (phonetic); ADR; Amtrak; Norfolk Southern; CSX; CNIC; and the test center, the transportation test center were all involved. This was looking for ideas and approaches regarding train and obstacle detection and testing the prototype equipment for obstacle detection. We are looking for alternatives to track circuitry in this regard. We were looking at suppliers or investors. We received 17 proposals. We have selected eight for a presentation in July. The decision was made to go ahead with a demonstrations or testing of all eight of those concepts. That will begin next month. We are looking to have that done by the end of the calendar year at the test center. The kinds of technology involved are seismic, infrared, or lasers, wheel counterers, magnetometers, radar, and video image processing. MS. KLOEPPEL: You said you expected that to be, the testing to begin -- MR. GEORGE: The demonstrations to be done or the testing out at the test center to be complete at the end of this year, the end of the calendar year. MS. KLOEPPEL: How do you plan to measure success of any of them? MR. GEORGE: I am going to leave that to the people who do the testing; I don't know. The next generation projects which are funded through FRA is looking at laser scanning in California for obstacle detection, and the incremental train control system in Michigan is also funded through FRA. That is on the potential high speed line in Detroit to Chicago on that on that portion which is owned by Amtrak. One of the things they are doing there is long -- if you are going to provide warning at a crossing and find out the status of the crossing, you need time to take some action on a high speed train. You have to do that over a long distance, and track circuitry doesn't usually or doesn't conveniently do that. So, they are looking at alternative methods of alerting the crossing that the train is approaching and finding out the status of that crossing. That is being explored under the incremental train control system. The Section 1010 money, now called 1103, which is the high speed corridor programs in the country, that started under ISTEA when we were told to select five corridors nationwide, Congress told us to for high speed rail development. Then we have added, under a hundred TEA-21, we have been told to add six more, three of which were designated by Congress. So, there is a total of eight now, and we are in the process of selecting the other three. There is a lot of innovation being done there. The North Carolina project, for example, is one of those corridors where they are looking at four quadrant gates, long gate arms, articulated gates, channelization, closures of crossings, pedestrian overpasses, and just overall corridor studies. Four quadrant gates in Florida which Ed mentioned, there is a half dozen installations I believe now down there. Locked gates at private crossings which are under control of the dispatcher is something that is being explored in New York. Then there is the Section 1036 Program which was funded under ISTEA originally. That was to demonstrate technology for realizing safer crossings where high speed rail is involved. That funded the four quadrant gate project in Connecticut. It is funding the barrier nets in Illinois. The intent was to do low cost grade separation in Florida, but that never came off. Mike has talked about the ITS. MS. KLOEPPEL: I did want to ask you about a project, the four quadrant gate project that is being conducted in Connecticut. Four quadrant gates are not new, are they? MR. GEORGE: No, not at all. We have had four quadrant gate installations in this country, a couple of them, since the mid 1950s. MS. KLOEPPEL: Can you tell me what it is about this project that made it necessary to test four quadrant gates? MR. GEORGE: First off, they are not -- there is a reticence on the part of the industry and the suppliers to go forward and the state officials to go forward with four quadrant gates. So, we needed a demonstration just generally. Specifically, at the crossing in Connecticut, the School Street Crossing, that is a very complex, very sophisticated installation. Not only do you have four quadrant gates, but you have obstruction or vehicle presence detection in the crossing using loops in the pavement, not one, but six, two on either side of the double track crossing and two between the tracks. The circuitry reaches out so that there is enough time that if the crossing is obstructed when the train is detected on its approach, that the train can make a non-emergency stop before they reach the crossing. That train stop is automatic if the engineer doesn't react to the signal. So, that is something new and very different. It requires that the crossing be closed anywhere from 75 to 80 seconds, which is new. One of the significant findings is that there has not been strong objection to that long period of lockage, but it is not a very, it is not a busy urban street. It is a suburban street with a very modest amount of traffic. MS. KLOEPPEL: When did testing commence on this? MR. GEORGE: July of 1998. MS. KLOEPPEL: Is it complete yet? MR. GEORGE: Yes. It is complete and considered operational. As a matter of fact, Amtrak is planning to install another one of those this year, starting this year; and they are planning to do more six more next year all in Connecticut. MS. KLOEPPEL: What are the characteristics of the Connecticut corridor that make them want to put them there? MR. GEORGE: This is on the corridor that is on the New York to Boston. It is high speed, although these particular sites won't be hosting traffic over, I think 90 miles an hour is the fastest at any of these crossings, but this is on the project where they are trying to, where the Acella (phonetic) train will be operating, and they are try to cut the running time from Boston to New York City significantly. MS. KLOEPPEL: This is trackage that only passenger trains go on or is this also used by freight trains? MR. GEORGE: I believe it is just passenger trains, but I am not certain of that. MS. KLOEPPEL: Would you expect this kind of installation to go on other tracks across the country? MR. GEORGE: That sophisticated an installation, I don't believe is necessary at other crossings with the train stop and vehicle presence detection. You can put in a four quadrant gate installation without having that kind of sophistication as they have done in other locations already. MS. KLOEPPEL: I have no further questions. I guess I will hand it over to Mr. Payan. MR. PAYAN: I have a few questions. Is any work being done on monitoring the health of crossings to ensure they are working properly and possibly being able to notify somebody if an abnormality is detected? MR. GEORGE: We encourage health monitoring. The technology is certainly there. Work is not necessary in terms of developmental work. We are encouraging the railroads to do it. I guess where some demonstrations have been involved recently is in actually the communications site, how does the crossing communicate to a central point that there is a problem with that crossing right now. Alternative communications are being explored, but it can be done today with conventional technology. MR. PAYAN: Mr. Malinowicz testified that most of his equipment was off the shelf. These other projects that you mentioned, is the technology being developed or is this off the shelf technology that is available right now? Whoever feels comfortable can answer that. MR. MALINOWICZ: As I previously testified, the Nestor video system is presently in use in Rhode Island on I-95 for traffic and also in Vienna, Virginia, I believe, as part of their traffic division system. MR. PAYAN: How about the other projects? MR. ONDER: Some of the other projects, even though it is proven technology in other applications, it is not proven technology in rail crossing applications. So, it is new to that. We were talking about magnetometers that are being used to detect the presence of a vehicle at a crossing or we use it to detect a train. Acoustic devices, Doppler radar, all of those are proven technologies in other applications, but looking at using them in a rail highway configuration is new. MR. PAYAN: Thank you. Mr. Raby has some questions. MR. RABY: Mr. Onder, are there any ideas, programs in progress or planned for the human performance phase; for example, driver ed programs or impaired drivers? By impaired, I mean physically like eyesight, motor skills, and hearing. Are any of those type of programs included in the ITS highway system? MR. ONDER: The answer to your question is yes, absolutely. Whether or not it is specifically in the ITS area or not is another question, but human factors are considered to be a real critical area of concern with regard to the devices that we are going to be seeing on our vehicles or are already seeing on our vehicles. They can be very distracting. It could probably work to our disadvantage rather than to our advantage if it is not all done in a proper sequence or if one cancels out the functionality or effectiveness of another. So yes, there is some work going on in that area. You mentioned now with regard to the driver, some of the technology associated with that? MR. RABY: Like drivers ed, you know, it seems like the drivers ed program is not -- MR. ONDER: I am not sure if I am the proper person to answer the question about drivers ed, but I can tell you that from the technology with drivers, there is lot of activity going on in that area right now, especially in the trucking industry. We just had a demo 1999 over in Columbus, Ohio about a month ago, and Freight Liner and Mack, and Volvo all showed several different devices they are using and getting ready to put into the marketplace. Some of those have to do with lane tracking. In lane tracking, the devices not only tell you that you have been leaving your travel-way, but it also is designed to determine where the center of the road is. As you drive down that highway, if you stray from that center line, it keeps scoring. I should say it keeps scoring your straying from the center line. When your score drops to a certain point, you start getting different kinds of feedback. It could be the steering wheel that might start shaking. It could be the seat that starts shaking. You could get rumble strip sounds. So, you get all kinds of different feedback. I think it is Volvo that has designed into their system that if you don't react to any of these -- some of them, believe me, get pretty annoying; I sat in a seat to receive the reaction -- the truck will shut down. MR. RABY: The driver ed, I was thinking entry level. I don't seem to be hearing a lot of attention being given to entry level driving. Certainly, I think the insurance statistics show that youthful drivers make up a large percentage of highway accidents and highway deaths. I was just wondering if all this magic stuff the ITS is looking at and the futuristic stuff, it is as you said, the human performance, the human factors are certainly not going to be any better than the person behind the wheel. It looks like to me that maybe some follow-up or some research should be looked at for entry level driving. Where are we at and what improvements could be made there? MR. ONDER: That is a good point. I think that we have, we probably all suffer from information overload, and we do need to have probably instruction on how to deal with what is that we are going to receiving, especially as we get into more in-vehicle navigation systems, which would be communications devices into and unto themselves. MR. RABY: I have often thought that a lot of basic skills and things could be, long before you get a senior in high school, should be instilled in them. Mr. George, in your research and programs and things that the FRA has looked at, and we are talking grade crossing safety now -- I guess earlier yesterday, you heard the discussions about the constant warning devices detecting train speed, and then you were talking about the on-board recorder on the train, there was a differential in speeds between the two devices -- has it ever been thought about in your research or programs where the train will talk to the constant warning devices by transponder or what have you or some of that technology? MR. GEORGE: I think that, you know, we have the -- that is what is happening in Michigan now on the ITCS Program where the on-board system makes inquiry about whether the crossing is ready for the train's arrival and is functioning properly, and then there is feedback to the train. What is happening in Connecticut is one way. It is from the crossing to the -- well, the train is on approach, and then the crossing advises that if there is a blockage to the path at the crossing. So, that is a step. In some of those new technologies for train presence detection, if they bear out, then that would be the next step, is to look at that kind of communications. MR. RABY: I know the Federal Highway, I think it is on I-75 coming up through Tennessee into Kentucky, is using the transponder system where trucks don't have to stop at weigh stations. The transponder tells the authorities it is properly weighed, if it has the proper fees and licenses and permits and things. They have their rolling weigh scales where they don't have to come to a complete stop. They just slow down and cross over these centers. It would seem like maybe that some of that technology could be where the train speed and its position as far as that goes could be transponder fed into the constant feed warning devices, and it would be cross check and maybe eliminate some of the little, I understand, temperature and different things -- MR. GEORGE: That is what is going to happen in Michigan. They are going to start using that in a shadow mode, leaving the conventional warnings in there while they test it in the very near future. I think that is what Ed is talking about in Florida. MR. RABY: Thank you. That is all I had. MR. ONDER: I also might add that the Long Island Railroad is doing exactly that. So, we should learn a lot out of what they learn. CHAIRMAN BLACK: I think that is called the Advantage 75 System if I am not mistaken. We keep asking you if it can be used for enforcement, but we never get an answer back. MR. ONDER: Can I respond to that? CHAIRMAN BLACK: Sure. MR. ONDER: First of all, some of which you have mentioned is futuristic. All that happens when a truck passes by our reader on a highway that is equipped with a transponder is there is a communication of a code that is on that transponder to the wayside. The wayside then will take that code and match it up to a record in a computer system to determine whether or not there is a reason to stop that truck. There was a couple of schools of thought going on two years ago on whether or not you should put all the information in a transponder or you should use the transponder to be able to communicate with the road side, a significant index that could be used for a further record check. The school of thought that won out was to have the index number transmitted to the road side. To be able to use this particular device for enforcement, the unfortunate part about it is yes, it could be used for enforcement, but it is not getting much play. Right now, it is a volunteer type program on the part of the truckers to adopt it, if it makes business sense for them moving. As you heard the gentleman before us, he mentioned that the key is how does that fit into getting my goods to market. If it doesn't fit in very well there, then it is not something they readily accept. So, we are continuing to move with that. I might also add there is another group along the west coast called Helbaine (phonetic) which is about 16 states that have signed up to this. They are making very good progress on getting transponders on trucks. The truckers are finding that it makes good business sense. They are also enforcing safety through this particular program. They find that periodically they have to get back to a carrier and say that your safety record has dropped below par and we are going to have to take the transponders back from you. It is an incentive for them to get back into the right safety category. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The potential there is to look at hours of service and average speeds and things that might help tremendously in dealing with this onslaught of tucks in the interstate system. The United Transportation Union? I'm sorry. The BLE, I think. I'm sorry. I am wrong? Were you first the last time? I had a system, and I just violated my own system. Do you mind if we yield to UTU? EXAMINATION BY THE UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION MR. DWYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. George, you said there was a reticence on the part of states to install four quadrant gates. Why is that? MR. GEORGE: I think that is a complex issue. I think that often, what is often cited is concern about trapping somebody between the gates. We think that could be handled with the timing of the lowering of the gates where necessary using vehicle presence detection or providing escape lanes. Frankly, we have looked into it and not found an instance of that in Europe or Australia nor in the U.S. where there has been a lot of experience for the use of four quadrant gates. MR. DWYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you, Tom. Mr. Marshall of Melco? MR. MARSHALL: Nothing to say. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Amtrak? MR. BULLOCK: No questions. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The Canadian National/Illinois Central? EXAMINATION BY THE CANADIAN NATIONAL/ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD MR. ED HARRIS: We have a couple of questions, Mr. Malinowicz. On the Tri-rail project, can you tell us what the speed of the trains are? MR. MALINOWICZ: The maximum authorized speed is 79 miles per hour. MR. ED HARRIS: Also, my experience with spread spectrum radio is it is a line of sight type of communication medium. What about the fail safe for this type of operation? MR. MALINOWICZ: By using the spread spectrum, it is designed to go around interference, and the design engineers have told me it has a range of two to ten miles. MR. ED HARRIS: No further questions. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Federal Railroad? MR. BLACKMORE: No questions. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Federal Highway is absent. The ICC? MR. STEAD: I don't really have a question. It is more of a comment. Mr. George mentioned earlier that there is technology available today to do diagnostic checks on wayside signaling equipment. We wanted to mention that the Commission is working with several railroads in the state, including CNIC, to install a wayside monitoring system at all signalized public crossings in the state using open cellular technology that would provide instantaneous notification to all railroad signal operation people if there is a malfunction problem with the wayside signalling equipment at any particular crossing at any location. The CNIC, BNSF and several other railroads have agreed to participate in the initial phase of this project, which we intend to conduct and install this equipment at all public signalized crossings statewide. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers? EXAMINATION BY THE BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS MR. WALPERT: Mr. Malinowicz, I have a couple of questions in regard to the Aware Project. I think you talked about this earlier, but I wanted to make it clear in my own mind. You indicated that the crew, in other words, the engineer and, I assume, the conductor, would be alerted of equipment failures of stationary obstructions as soon as the train establishes contact with the grade crossing. I think you touched on this earlier. How much warning would the engineer have that there was either an obstruction or the warning device was not operating? MR. MALINOWICZ: That would vary in accordance with the time of the incident versus the location of the train. It could be as little as a half mile. It could be as much as five or six miles. It depends on the final design of the program and how we are going to do it. MR. WALPERT: You said that the maximum speed of Tri-rail is 79 miles per hour; correct? MR. MALINOWICZ: Yes. MR. WALPERT: If we had a train approaching at 79 miles an hour to a crossing that had a malfunction and the engineer only received a half mile warning to that, it would be useless, would it not, because it would never be able to stop? MR. MALINOWICZ: Well, the advance crossing check would happen prior to a half mile. It would happen approximately one to two miles away. Presently, our stopping distance full service at 79 miles an hour is approximately 2,800 feet. MR. WALPERT: I assume that is taking into effect the weight of the train and the number of cars on the train. MR. MALINOWICZ: We run a standard three car process. MR. WALPERT: The next question I have in regard to the project, which I find very interesting, is: Can this type of system work in conjunction with other GPS systems? I know several other companies have developed GPS systems such as positive train separation and that sort of thing. Can this be incorporated into that sort of system? MR. MALINOWICZ: Yes. According to our design engineers, we can enhance the other GPS systems such as orbital signs that are presently up in VRE. MR. WALPERT: Thank you, Mr. Malinowicz. That is all I have. Mr. George, I have one question for you. You stated earlier that in regard to new technology, in response to a question asked by the technical panel, that you didn't feel it would be necessary to have a positive stop and vehicle detection on every crossing. Is that correct? MR. GEORGE: That is correct. MR. WALPERT: What about the detection of malfunctioning warning devices at any crossings so the engineer would be informed enough in advance to be able to react to that situation? As you well know, today, with a high speed train, once an engineer determines that the crossing is inoperable for one reason or another, he is already on that crossing, and there is not much he can do. MR. GEORGE: Yes, I like them. In a perfect world, we would have that. Of course, in a perfect world, we would not have a malfunction either. That would require that somebody else ask about the communication from that crossing back to the locomotive engineer about the status of the crossing. I think that is a good idea. He needs it before he hits the track circuitry in most conventional settings, and you are talking about som pretty sophisticated technology, but it is certainly would be doable. MR. WALPERT: Is it realistic? MR. GEORGE: I think long term it is. It is the direction we ought to be going in for automated warning devices. MR. WALPERT: Thank you. That is all I have. CHAIRMAN BLACK: I see Mr. Sweedler has flown South. Claude? EXAMINATION BY THE BOARD OF INQUIRY MR. CLAUDE HARRIS: I have one question for Mr. Onder and Mr. George. Both of you went through a fairly extensive list of ITS technologies that are being evaluated currently. Which, in your opinion, has the most promise to address issues in improving grade crossing safety at active crossings; and also, which, in your opinion, would have the most promise for improving grade crossing safety at passive crossings? MR. ONDER: It may be a little too early to say what has the most promise yet since we are going through a lot of testing with a lot of different devices. One of the things we heard at our workshop in May in Boston was if it takes $150,000 now to equip a crossing to make it active, you probably don't want to be thinking about putting a million dollars into a crossing. It may not be cost effective to do that. What is not cost effective today could be cost effective tomorrow as you get greater usage of whatever the technology is that the unit cost will come down. It looks to me like we are moving in the direction of being able to deduct obstacles which at a grade crossing. There are different technologies that are being used there. There is probably some promise associated with that whether you are using magnetometers that really are probably the most expensive to install or you are just putting loops in the highway which may not be as expensive. So, that is certainly a promising technology. One of the other ones like Mr. George mentioned earlier is technology that may get out beyond the track circuitry or need to be beyond the track circuitry, and that is why the tests that are taking place out at Pueblo right now or during the fall test different technologies. We are working very closely together be Federal Railroad and the other administrations on those tests. So, to try to pre-judge what is the best to go with is probably not real practical right at the moment. On passive crossings, we still think that is probably the best way to go, and of course, once you do something at a passive crossing, I guess you make it active with putting any kind of warning device in there, but if you are not actually going to have anything that you are going to actually install or use anything associated with the tracks, if you are going to set up a track circuit for passive crossings, you are going to invoke a certain amount of dollars to do that. One of the things that I think is being looked at is how communications-based train control from the locomotive can actually communicate to the wayside and have that wayside, in turn, have a directional signal that can communicate with vehicles so that you are not getting extraneous signals that are running and affecting all the vehicles, but only those that you want to communicate to. There are always two different kinds of communication that have been talked about. One is a communication that I am coming to a rail crossing. The other one is that there is actually a train coming. So, there are two things that are being looked at in that regard right now as well. So, I am giving you stuff off the cuff. I don't think we are talking about there being any kind of policy associated with this or any direction, but it does lead me into an answer that I would like, with your permission to mention. One of the things that we were trying to do with the May meeting that we had and also with some work that is going on now with the Volpe Center and with us internally within the Department is try to develop some guidance that can be given out to the communities around the country so they, in turn, can use that guide and say, Here are the lessons that have been learned and here are some things you might be able to do in your community that might work well and here are some of the variations in cost associated with that. That is one of the things we are working on now. MR. CLAUDE HARRIS: Mr. George, do you want to add anything to that Mr. George? MR. GEORGE: I would like to echo some of what Mike said. I think the alternative train detection work that is being done -- of course, this is long term -- and the communications work and what we are seeing in Michigan on the ITCS has a lot of potential later on. That is two-way communications again. So, circuitry and communication is where it is at. I like what we are seeing in the concept at least in Missouri where there is not any special track circuitry being used. It just requires that the particular section of track have block signals for train operations, and the driver gets told there is a train in the area. It remains a passive crossing, and it is a relatively inexpensive approach to things. I think that some of the things we talked about yesterday, that the proposed revisions, changes to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices need to be looked at very carefully when they are published, and this project to develop warrants for all crossings for all levels of warning devices and grade separation has a lot of potential. MR. CLAUDE HARRIS: Thank you. MR. DUNN: I don't have any questions, but I have a comment. I heard a lot of good stuff on new technology that is going on in projects, and I just hope that we move forward and do something different that we see at crossings, whether it be laws, protection, or whatever it is before we have to go out and to do something like this again. Everybody in the room has a responsibility to push things along. Whatever it is, I would appreciate if you all would do that so we don't have to go through this again. A good time line for me would be two and a half years, when I retire, so that I can drive across the United States and see something different. That is my comment. Thank you. MR. GEORGE: Can I respond to that Mr. Dunn? CHAIRMAN BLACK: Very briefly, yes. MR. GEORGE: We say there have been no changes out there, and the aspect the drivers see when they approach a crossing has not changed in years. What drives those devices, the technology internal to them is changing, has changed remarkably in the last several years. I don't want people to think, you know, some of the discussion yesterday said that it is the same warning device that was out there to 40 years ago. Yes, there is a Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that has kept what the drivers see constant because we want to have something the drivers are familiar with and can react to. The train detection technology constant warning time, as constant as it is at least, as opposed to the block circuitry, all of that has changed in recent years. MR. LAUBY: I have a couple of questions, a couple of specific questions for Mr. George. You talked about this Missouri project. MR. GEORGE: Which project? MR. LAUBY: The Missouri project, and this is an in-vehicle -- MR. GEORGE: It is an in-vehicle warning system. MR. LAUBY: This is geared to one particular crossing; is that correct? MR. GEORGE: Yes. They are going to do a demonstration with just one crossing to start with. MR. LAUBY: How is that crossing protected now? MR. GEORGE: Just with the crossbucks. MR. LAUBY: Just with the crossbucks? MR. GEORGE: That is all it is going to have when we have this in place. Other than the fact there will be a transmitter there. MR. LAUBY: I am curious. Has anybody taken a look at the human factors? Will people become dependent upon what is inside the car? You know, if the light doesn't go off inside the car, does that mean they don't have to look both ways? Has anybody looked at that end of it? MR. GEORGE: Yes. You would have to talk to the Missouri project manager. That is an issue. If you put a vehicle warning system in -- that is what happened with the Minnesota Guide Star system. The bus drivers said, We are not going to depend on it. We are still going to look for a train. So, it is a reinforcement, and some of the drivers said that, you know, I would like to have it as a reinforcement or a reminder, but I am still going to look for a train. Those are professionally trained drivers. I don't know. That is an interesting point you raised on the Missouri project. We are monitoring that, and I will talk with Mr. Mooney about that. MR. LAUBY: I know there has been some concerns about BTS (phonetic) also whether those types of control systems, whether that is going to lull the operator into a position where he is going to let the technology take over. On high speed rail corridors, you talked about you have eight high speed rail corridors. You also mentioned the Northeast corridor and the and crossings that are still left on the corridor. I believe Connecticut had something like 11 left. Is that correct? MR. GEORGE: Right. MR. LAUBY: From the Federal Railroad Administration's point of view, on these new high speed rail corridors, are the grade crossings going to be tolerated with high speed service? MR. GEORGE: Are they going to be what? MR. LAUBY: Are grade crossings going to be tolerated with high speed service, or are we looking to eliminate those completely where we are going to have high speed trains? MR. GEORGE: That goes back to Mr. Harris' question. The best thing to do with a crossing is to get rid of it; you know, close it. That has the most potential. With high speed rail operations, we don't want to see any crossings where there are high speed railroads. We have put out guidance that says we don't want crossings where trains will be operating 125 miles an hour or higher. From 110 to 125, we want to see a positive barrier of some sort, something that will stop a vehicle. We have said from 80 to 110, we think there ought to be the highest technology possible at the crossing -- gates, channelization, constant warning time, or four quadrant gates. That is guidance on our part. MR. LAUBY: This is the approach you are taking on the northeast corridor where you expect that to handle the trains that operate at high speed? MR. GEORGE: Yes. If they are going to operate over 110, they have a positive barrier; over 125, no crossings, public rail traffic. MR. LAUBY: My final question, and it is not really a question, Tom Dwyer brought up the question of four quadrant gates and what the concern was. This kind of also reflects what Mr. Dunn said. We have had four quadrant gates in this country since the 1950s. They have been used in Europe and lots of places in different countries. I guess I am a little frustrated also that we are still doing tests of four quadrant gates, and I am not quite sure what we are trying to find out, whether there is an entrapment issue -- if there was, I would think we would know that by now -- or whether it is just a cost issue. In looking at four quadrant gates, at this point, we don't know enough about them now to either recommend them or not recommend them? MR. GEORGE: The Federal Railroad Administration recommends them. We think they should be an option for the traffic engineer to use. It is not a panacea. If you have got a gated installation and you are still have violations, try channelization. If you cannot do that or if that doesn't work either, then go to four quadrant gates. That is an option from our perspective. Federal Highway shares that. People come back to us and say, Well, what are the standards. Well, you know, what do you want for a standard? We cannot make, we are not to regulate or legislate or issue standards telling the traffic engineer how to do his job. There are lots of decisions that need to be made when you put in a four quadrant gate installation, whether you were going to have vehicle presence detection: Whether you are going to have a delay on the exit gate, whether you are going to have an exit gate set-back, whether you are going to have channelization or not. Those are traffic engineering decisions that have to be made on site. MR. LAUBY: I would hope we can get some of these questions ironed out as far as what a four quadrant gate standard should look like or how it should be applied. One frustration I have with this particular hearing is that, again, in Bourbonnais, the reason we are here is that we didn't have latest and greatest technology, and we had a terrible accident there. Basically, I don't hear ideas on what to do differently at Bourbonnais to prevent this. I think four quadrant gates might be something that is doable that could protect that particular crossing. I am a little bit frustrated in that area, and in that town, I think we have to have some answers because what we have, the latest technology we have is not working in all cases. MR. GEORGE: I will make a plug for the Texas Transportation Institute is going to have a conference at the end of October. It is going to be, one of their workshops is going to be on four quadrant gates. I am hope a lot of this discussion -- I am moderating that so I should not worry. We have invited people from the project in Connective and from the projects in Florida and North Carolina, and they have all taken slightly different approaches to doing it. Hopefully, we can put all these issues out for discussion during that workshop. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you, Bob. As usual, we are last, and all the good stuff is gone. I guess one question was left out of this list here. It appears to me that this positive train separation or positive train location system that we have been advocating for railroad collisions for some time is going to generate accurate global differential or precise global positioning location data within a few feet. The way we heard it was that the railroads were sluggish in implementing it because you could not tell, on a double track, you could not tell which track the train was on, and until they achieve a degree of accuracy sufficient to do that, they were not interested in pursuing it. I think that has probably been solved now. Ed, you might be the one who would know about this. It seems to me once you have a transmitted coordinate system for a train, you are probably going to have speed off of it and you are going to have several things off of it that are available on the locomotive. It doesn't take too much rocket science to generate that and transmit that information into a crossing system plus also to a train coming type detection system. Have you guys thought about that? MR. MALINOWICZ: Yes. We have done some preliminary thought process on that idea, the availability to getting to read the code line on the nine hundred Megahertz system that we have down in Florida for our signals. The ability to refine the GPS down to an acceptable level of five feet is on the horizon. Presently, it is 15 feet. We can tell train direction, train speed, and we have a real-time update of five seconds. I believe it is possible in the near future, should we have the advantage or the opportunity to go in and have a railroad open up their code line for us to go in and read, that the GPS could produce a type of cap signal for a positive train separation. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Bruce, are you guys looking at that? MR. GEORGE: Sure. CHAIRMAN BLACK: They are not going to forget about it when you retire, are they? MR. GEORGE: No. CHAIRMAN BLACK: We might have to hold you over for another few years. MR. GEORGE: We have got some good people there pursuing that, really competent. I think we will ensure that kind of approach is included. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The other thing to Mr. Onder, we have heard pretty frequently -- I don't know whether Illinois Central wants to nod their heads yes or no -- but we in local government, back when I was in that, and now we see industry are very concerned about the selling off of frequency spectrum, radio frequency spectrum in these auctions that the FCC is conducting to the private sector, which then becomes not available any longer for some of the sorts of communication that we need for this sort of thing and other intelligent transportation systems. Are you guys concerned about that? MR. ONDER: We are very much. One of the reasons -- we have tried to grab a spectrum at 5.8, 5.9 gigahertz for transportation purposes, and I realize, I think the frequency that is being used for railroad is -- there are different frequencies. I know that railroads are all equipped with transponders, with the passive read-only transponders for primarily equipment purposes, for equipment management. In that, the communication being used there is 915. It is in the 902 to 928 frequency spectrum, but that frequency may not be ours to use in the future. So, we have been looking at other spectrum. Right now, we are looking at 5.8, 5.9 gigahertz. We were hoping the world would be looking at that, but we are finding there is some difficulty, that it doesn't overlap. Some of it doesn't overlap. So, we don't have the worldwide spectrum. We have been working, we had a conference in June last year in Reston to talk about technology harmonization in all modes of transportation, including communications that need to take place overseas for global movement of goods. The Department of Defense and Department of Transportation primarily sponsored that activity. We are going to have another one in 2000. We have made some progress. There is no house. There is no home for a group to get together under. So, we formed a group. The industry primarily wanted to have a neutral territory. So the closest thing we could come to for neutral territory was ITS America. So now, there is an intermodal freight technology working group that is operating under the ITS America banner, and it is that group that is trying to make some progress in this area with regard to radio communication and that issue with regard to the band. CHAIRMAN BLACK: For informational purposes, yesterday, the fire chief who was in here talking about coordination of efforts mentioned he had some difficulties with the radio system there. Basically, it was they could not talk to each other, not to mention the fact that they got saturated; that they didn't have a tactical channel to handle an incident on separate from their dispatch channel. I am familiar with that from my last life. What is alarming, and I talked to him about this after the meeting, is that the eight hundred and nine hundred Megahertz stuff -- the frequencies that were being used were these trunked systems where you could have a county-wide radio system, which we ultimately got and many other agencies now have -- those frequencies, originally, there was a considerable number of those that were available for public safety. That was the FCC by-word for governmental functions. About half of what was originally available has now been auctioned off for cell phones. The government made some money on the deal, but in the process, they eliminated this spectrum. If you are close to a metropolitan area and you want to go on to one of these systems, you have got problems because they are all gone. The Chairman, Jim Hall, has talked about this several times. I know the railroads have had some concerns. We have talked to the AAR, but I think it has a new name. MR. ONDER: The AAR still handles the frequency allocation. CHAIRMAN BLACK: They have frequency blocks, and law enforcement does; aviation does. I was at an aviation seminar, safety seminar from the other ATA, apparently the Air Transport Association, and they have the capability now to up-link digital or Doppler radar data to the cockpit. The problem is they are using 150 Megahertz, 120 Megahertz channels for the ACAR (phonetic) system, and there is not enough band width at that to get the stuff up. Plus, they are running out of frequencies. Then they started looking elsewhere in the frequency spectrum to get this, for a band to get this information up, and they could not get it up. In the Little Rock accident, of which I was a board member there a few weeks ago, was directly an issue of getting the information. The local weather forecaster had information the pilot didn't have. The 11 o'clock news knew more about what was going on than this pilot trying to land an airplane load of people. So, this is a major area. I am glad that you guys are -- do you know Mr. Shackleford (phonetic), who is used to be the President of ITS America? I worked for him for 12 years. He was my county manager. So, I have stirred him up once or twice on this issue also. So, thank you very much. I will share Commander Dunn's concerns with the sluggishness of this system. Bruce and I are good friends. I hope it is true that you are still seeding the same system that you always have out there; and traffic engineers who are in the advertising business, basically, are trying to attract the attention of the motorist and then elicit a certain behavior out of that. If the people who put advertising signs up on the freeway left the same sign up for 50 years, I suspect everybody would get used to it and would not pay much attention to it any more. If you especially make some of the information unreliable in that system because of some of the problems that are inherent to the existing detection systems for railroad tracks, the circuitry, the track circuit equipment, false indications, that makes it even less valuable. What do you think about that, Bruce? MR. GEORGE: I agree with you. The credibility of the devices, you know, when half of our collisions occur at crossings with automated warning devices, it makes you wonder what the issue is. When credibility becomes an issue, you have to ask why. False activation is the classic answer. It is interesting that when we monitor crossings, we frequently find, and ask we found in North Carolina for example, when they started video monitoring, they found there were more false activations than anticipated. We have seen that result elsewhere. They have been able to correct it once they addressed it. CHAIRMAN BLACK: The new equipment you are talking about, the digital equipment like the ICC had basically state of the art equipment here at this location, but it still has some inherent shortcomings. We sat and watched that thing quite a bit while I was visiting. I visited the railroad people out there and the law enforcement people, and I sat and watched the crossing for quite some time. Switching operations don't generate these false calls that come in. No way to avoid it. I understand that, but they come in and every one of those produces a credibility to the system. MR. GEORGE: I hope this new train detection technology that we are working with will be able to address that in the not too distant future. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you. Anyone else, anything required up here in the next few minutes we need to deal with? The ICC? MR. STEAD: We have one comment. MR. BLAIR: John Blair. I would just like to make one comment about the four quadrant gates and where we are at in Illinois. Our primary concern is this: We do not want to design or make a change in the warning system that in any way degrades the degree of safety for the law abiding citizen. If we are going to improve this system, basically, four quadrant gates are for the motorist that drives around the gates. Of course, we want to eliminate that, but in the process, when we are engineering the new warning system, we don't want to include an element that is not there now, which is traffic. CHAIRMAN BLACK: That is called unintended consequences, by the way, in Washington. MR. BLAIR: Because the net result is, besides the human tragedy, we will be back in a situation like this -- why did this innocent person get killed? We have cautiously followed the development of four quadrant gates. To our knowledge, there is only one system with traffic vehicle detection that is based on a fail safe design, and that is the one that was testified to today in Connecticut. Bruce George can comment if there are any others out in the nation. MR. GEORGE: The one in Los Angeles I think is also -- MR. BLAIR: There are two in the country right now that we know of that have traffic vehicle detection, which is a safeguard for the law abiding citizen that finds himself stuck in traffic or in a rural situation where you have got a crossing next to a state highway and there is a stop sign and he is the second car when the gates activate, that the gate doesn't come down in front of him and trap him on the crossing. There are two installations nationwide that have a track, vehicle detection system that is based on a fail safe design. We are very much interested in the development of the system. In fact, we are in the process now of also jumping in to the development of the trapped vehicle detection part of the system. When that is done, then four quadrant gates will be in the toolbox and on line, but at this time, it is not in the toolbox, and that is the reason. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Lauby? MR. LAUBY: What I am demonstrating here is my frustration that it is not in the toolbox. It is in the toolbox in Europe. It was in the toolbox in the 1950s, and some of the frustration I have in looking at new technologies is that there seem to be more reasons not to do it than reasons to do it from everybody that we talked to. I am very concerned about the crossing down in Bourbonnais. I am concerned about the type of traffic we have there, the steel trucks. We know exactly what that can do to a passenger train. This evening, another load of passengers will head South to New Orleans and will go through that crossing. I am very frustrated that we have a lot of good ideas up here, but because they have not been baptized by anybody, they are not able to put in place. I think it is important that something happens down in Bourbonnais to those crossings to improve the situation to respond to the tragedy that we had down there. I think the longer we wait, whether we are waiting to have something else in the toolbox or not, the longer we wait, the greater the risk is to the passengers that use Amtrak or another form of public transit in this country. I know we have to go through your procedures to get there, but at this point, if we get anything out of this particular accident, I would hope that we really shine the spotlight and put the focus on grade crossing safety and do something to move it forward more than just a little step; move it ahead a giant step. That is the reaction I am looking for. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you. It does seem like we have developed in this country an inability to act on anything without studying it to death or without proving that it is absolutely infallible to liability or litigation or whatever else. I think it is pretty much hurting us. It hurts industry because they are afraid to be creative, because they are afraid if they are too creative and lead the way, they will end up being sued over something. Government now seems like it has to have consensus with everyone. We cannot make anybody mad. I am really getting -- this is a personal observation like Bob's -- I am really getting tired of the word partner. It is true we all have partners, and we need to consider that. However, there has to be a managing partner sometimes. Just to bring this home here: At 9:55 p.m. last night at Stuttgart, Arkansas -- Jim, where is Stuttgart? MR. HALL: It is the duck capital of the world, the duck hunting capital of the world. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Thank you, Jim. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. HALL: It is Stuttgart, not Stuttgart. CHAIRMAN BLACK: Sorry; I am from Georgia. Give me a break. -- a Union Pacific freight train struck an auto on a crossing. Flashing lights, gates, and bells were all in working order; unknown injuries or fatalities at this time. At 11:50 p.m. in Sandy City, Utah, a Utah Transit Authority northbound -- this is interesting -- passenger train struck three self-propelled transit vehicles at a grade crossing. This is a grade crossing, I think, of a light rail and heavy rail and protected by gates and lights, I guess for the light rail. The vehicle driver injured; damage to the transit cars; train was not yet in service; undergoing going testing operations; damages, it says here $25 million. That sounds like one heck of an impact to me. Then there is another here about a Union Pacific freight train with one of those long alphanumeric numbers, eastbound, struck a pick-up truck; train speed unknown; track speed 70 miles an hour; flashing lights, gates, and bells; injuries to occupants of the vehicle. It goes on right now while we are talking. We get these things on our pagers pretty often, and then we sit around and talk a lot about this. When you look at hardware in the field, we have got a lot of tests, and it we also, it seems to me, have -- like Bob was talking about his frustration with that crossing down in Bourbonnais, I would say the use of median strips is a very good way to deal with the gate running situation. It has worked in a lot of places, and I guess there are some excuses for not using it. Let me go into the boilerplate here. Anyone else? Have we covered everything, Mr. Dunn? (No response.) CHAIRMAN BLACK: Since there are no other witnesses to be called to testify at this time, this portion of the Safety Board's investigation is concluded. However, I need to emphasis that, in accordance with our procedures, this investigation will remain open for the submission of new and pertinent information by interested persons. If the Safety Board finds that such evidence is relevant, it will be made part of the docket, and where appropriate parties, will be given an opportunity to comment. As parties to this hearing, you will have the opportunity to submit proposed findings of facts, conclusions, and recommendations. Please forward any such submissions to the National Transportation Safety Board -- specifically to the Investigator in Charge, Mr. J.S. Dunn in this case; we have two of them -- within 16 calendar days after the close of this hearing. Also, any parties making such a submission should also send copies of their proposals to each of the other parties. I think you know who each other is. Any such proposals will be made part of the public docket and will receive careful consideration through the Safety Board's analysis of the evidence and during the preparation of the Safety Board's final report. From the evidence collected, the Safety Board will, the Safety Board being the five members, will determine the probable cause of this accident and make any safety recommendations necessary to prevent similar accidents. That is a sunshine meeting, a meeting open to the public. It will be in Washington, D.C. about when, Jim? (Off-mike response.) CHAIRMAN BLACK: The final report will take several months to complete. However, the safety recommendations may be made at any time. On behalf of the National Transportation Safety Board, I want to thank the parties at this proceeding for their cooperation, not only during the proceeding, but also throughout the entire investigation. Also on behalf of the Board of Inquiry and the Technical Panel, I want to express my sincere or our sincere appreciation to all those groups, persons, companies, associations, and agencies that have lent their talent so willingly throughout this hearing. Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank all of the witnesses who have given of their time to come forward and testify during this hearing. I would also like to thank at this time, certainly, the NTSB staff. I won't mention them by name again. Carolyn, you know who you are -- among others, you set this meeting here in the room this time; I don't think you were here the last time in the room -- is our special events person here. To the families for sitting through what must have been a combination of difficult and boring for you at times, and we appreciate your being here and your interest in this. The family people will let you know when the last hearing will be. Certainly, if you have any questions, you know how to contact our Family Affairs people to get to us. I would like to thank everyone for their perseverance in going through this. It went pretty slow every now and then. This is probably -- we had a little discussion a few minutes ago up here -- this is more than likely the worst grade crossing accident from the standpoint of on-board passengers on the train that we could think of. We only have to think back 80 or 90 years about how long there have been railroad grade crossings in existence and cars. I don't remember any, and Mr. Dunn is more older than I am, and he doesn't remember any either, but this is -- and as horrible as it was, it could have been worse. We do have passenger trains, and we are going to have them going faster in the future, and this is a critical area. I appreciate everybody's help. Everybody is interested in doing something about this. With that, this hearing is adjourned. (Whereupon, at 12:26 p.m., the proceedings were concluded.) CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. ____________________________ October 7, 1999 Elizabeth Hudson Telson Executive Reporters, Inc. EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. 301-565-0064