National Rail Safety Legislation announced

News or chat about railroad info that pertains to the entire United States, another state, or country.
User avatar
LansingRailFan
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 11137
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:21 pm
Location: Lansing
Contact:

National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by LansingRailFan »

“WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group of senators has filed legislation designed to prevent derailments like the Norfolk Southern wreck that released toxic chemicals and upended life in East Palestine, Ohio.

But the Rail Safety Act of 2023 also goes much further by proposing rules that would limit train length and tonnage, mandate a crew size of at least two people, and require railroads to prevent blocked grade crossings.


Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio
“Through this legislation, Congress has a real opportunity to ensure that what happened in East Palestine will never happen again. We owe every American the peace of mind that their community is protected from a catastrophe of this kind,” said Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, one of the bill’s sponsors.

NS train 32N derailed in East Palestine on Feb. 3, just moments after a wayside defect detector warned of a hot axle on the 23rd car in the 149-car train. The National Transportation Safety Board has said the catastrophic failure of a wheel bearing on the hopper car likely caused the derailment, which released hazardous chemicals including vinyl chloride.

The measure, introduced in the Senate today, would broaden safety regulations covering trains carrying hazardous materials. Any train with hazardous materials would have to follow procedures that currently apply only to high-hazard flammable trains, such as speed restrictions through urban areas.

Currently, high-hazard flammable trains are defined as those transporting 20 or more loaded tank cars of a Class 3 flammable liquid in a continuous block, or a train carrying 35 or more loaded tank cars of a Class 3 flammable liquid throughout the consist.

Railroads also would be required to provide state emergency management officials with advance notice of hazardous materials shipments traveling through their states.

The bill also would enhance safety, the senators said, by imposing the first rules governing train length and weight. Instead of specifying limits, the bill would order the transportation secretary to determine appropriate rules.

To reduce the risk of wheel bearing failures, the bill calls for the first regulations governing wayside defect detectors. Chief among them: Requiring railroads to place hotbox detectors every 10 miles on trackage that carries hazardous materials. Detectors are currently spaced around 20 miles apart on most railroads.

The bill also orders the secretary of transportation to develop a minimum amount of time car inspectors must spend checking out each freight car and locomotive before a train’s departure from a yard.

The lawmakers also called for the faster phase-out of older design tank cars. DOT-111 tank cars would no longer be permitted to carry hazardous materials as of May 1, 2025, or four years ahead of the current deadline.

The Rail Safety Act also proposes significantly higher fines for safety rules violations.

Many of the bill’s provisions mirror Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s Feb. 21 call for legislation that would improve rail safety, including increased funding and hazmat training for first responders.

The Association of American Railroads and the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association are reviewing the legislation and were not able to immediately comment on the bill this morning.

The Rail Safety Act is sponsored by Vance and Sens. Sharrod Brown, D-Ohio; Bob Casey and John Fetterman, D-Pa.; Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; and Josh Hawley, R.-Mo.

The East Palestine derailment has become a political football, with Democrats and Republicans accusing each other of not doing enough to regulate rail safety or respond to the disaster.

“It shouldn’t take a massive railroad disaster for elected officials to put partisanship aside and work together for the people we serve — not corporations like Norfolk Southern,” Brown said. “Rail lobbyists have fought for years to protect their profits at the expense of communities like East Palestine and Steubenville and Sandusky. These common-sense bipartisan safety measures will finally hold big railroad companies accountable, make our railroads and the towns along them safer, and prevent future tragedies, so no community has to suffer like East Palestine again.”

To date, Norfolk Southern has provided $11.9 million in direct aid to East Palestine.”

https://www.brown.senate.gov/imo/media/ ... 3_text.pdf

User avatar
David Collins
Youtube Railfan Guru
Posts: 2759
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:46 am
Location: Bloomfield Hills, Mi
Contact:

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by David Collins »

I'm glad to see that there's some bipartisan support for this, not to get political.

I'm really hoping that the fines NS is going to incur fines in the billions, they're worth 55 billion dollars, they can afford it.

User avatar
~Z~
Sofa King Admin
Posts: 12909
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:14 pm
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Contact:

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by ~Z~ »

Sounds like it won't impact many of the shortlines.. at least those that don't transport more than 35 of these hazardous cars on a single train and keep their speeds below 25mph.
Increases the number of defect detectors and makes them mandatory. We'll have to see how the rules on this document get changed as it tries to get passed into effect.
Webmaster
Railroad photos on Railroadfan.com

Chip
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:25 pm
Location: Brownstown, Michigan

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Chip »

~Z~ wrote:
Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:07 pm
Sounds like it won't impact many of the shortlines.. at least those that don't transport more than 35 of these hazardous cars on a single train and keep their speeds below 25mph.
Increases the number of defect detectors and makes them mandatory. We'll have to see how the rules on this document get changed as it tries to get passed into effect.
Most short lines, especially around here, don’t go over 25 anyway.

PatAzo
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:20 pm

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by PatAzo »

Reading their proposed legislation it's well intentioned. There will be a few good things coming from it but they leave the bulk of the sustenance to "the Secretary shall issue regulations" The Secretary, who was already in a position to do this, is to frequently a patronage position staffed by a mediocre politician that can make it through confirmation. It would be impossible for the legislators to hash through every detail so they utilize enabling legislation to let an agency go through the detail and set rules. But put some performance goals to the rule making.
David Collins wrote:
Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:00 pm
I'm glad to see that there's some bipartisan support for this, not to get political.

I'm really hoping that the fines NS is going to incur fines in the billions, they're worth 55 billion dollars, they can afford it.
In 2005 NS had a derailment involving chlorine that killed nine people and sent 500 to the hospital. All in fines and legal costs NS paid out $41M. Of the East Palestine derailment some Wall Street analysts are drawing a parallel to the 2005 legal defense strategy saying "Norfolk Southern stocks won’t be severely impacted following the East Palestine derailment".

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15385
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Saturnalia »

The last time Congress made a knee-jerk reaction to a rail safety event, they created the PTC disaster.

Can't wait to see what unnecessary, unthoughtful garbage they pass this time.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

chapmaja
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by chapmaja »

David Collins wrote:
Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:00 pm
I'm glad to see that there's some bipartisan support for this, not to get political.

I'm really hoping that the fines NS is going to incur fines in the billions, they're worth 55 billion dollars, they can afford it.
I hope this doesn't get passed. The reason is simple. It is a knee jerk reaction to what happened without knowing all of the facts about what happened. What happens when knee jerk reactions happen? Unforeseen consequences. One of the requirements is advanced notice of hazardous shipments through a state or locale. What does this require? What is being defined as a hazardous shipment? Depending on which definition is used, Milk is actually considered a hazarous chemical because it can be a pollutant to waterways. (Ask the farmer who was fined for milking spilling from his farm into a waterway his opinion on this ruling).

Also, who is going to be paying for everything that will be included in these rules and regulations? I'm pretty sure it won't be the shareholders, because each additional cost of transporting goods will move from the railroad to the shipper to the product user to the consumers who use the products made with those chemicals. Guess who that is. It would be everday people purchasing items made from those items. Vinyl Chloride, I don't use that. Except you do. It is in PVC pipes, vehicle upholstry, electrical wire coating, and plastic kitchenware.

There should be no action taken by any legislative body relating to this incident until the facts are all known and the final report is concluded. Then a thoughtful discussion can take place regarding what needs to be done to prevent a situation like this from occurring again.

If the FRA wants to institute rules, I have less of an issue with that, as they have the detailed knowledge of the industry to make rules regarding this industry. Legislative bodies have very little detailed knowledge regarding most things, and some members have very little knowledge about much of anything.

NSSD70ACe
The Conrail Guru
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:34 pm
Location: Bottom of Lake Mead

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by NSSD70ACe »

Saturnalia wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:40 am
The last time Congress made a knee-jerk reaction to a rail safety event, they created the PTC disaster.

Can't wait to see what unnecessary, unthoughtful garbage they pass this time.

spoken like someone who truly doesn’t care how screwed up the railroad is right now.

as a railroad (management) employee, I’ve seen the crap senior management and HQ can pull in the name of “keeping the network fluid”. To that end, I welcome (some of) these regulations. I’m tired of dealing with 16,000 foot coal trains and 10,000 foot manifests. I’m tired of dealing with leaders who think ground based conductors are the future. I’m tired of dealing with junk power that spends two or three months in service before it’s finally taken to a diesel shop, or more likely, completely broken down.

Do I think we need HBDs every ten miles? No, probably not. We have a system that records trending data on bearing health based on HBD records and it seems to work just fine. Having a detector every ten miles on a heavily trafficked section too would really jam up radio traffic between dispatchers, trains, MOW personnel, etc. Could cause more problems than it solves.

Do I think railroads need to tell first responders about every single hazmat load that runs through their area? Certainly wouldn’t hurt, but from a practical perspective I’m not sure how they would do it. Suppose that’s someone else’s problem.

Minimum car time for outbound class 1 inspections? I would think that the FRA should talk to the railroads first to see what programs they have in place and adjust as needed. We have no set car time for our mechanical inspections. The Carmen take the time they need to do a thorough examination of the train and report the BOs they find. Maybe it’s not like that on other Class 1s, but setting a minimum time when the car techs are already empowered to take the necessary action is redundant.

A lot of this seems like it’s been left up to the Secretary of Transportation, who in turn would likely delegate to the FRA Administrator, which is EXACTLY how this should be done. Let the experts handle how to implement these instead of a heavy-handed reaction by people who are not.

For once, bravo Congress. Hope to god this passes and the FRA does some good with it.
:roll:

the contents of the above post are my opinion and mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

User avatar
Schteinkuh
Railcam Terrorizer
Posts: 685
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Schteinkuh »

Saturnalia wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:40 am
The last time Congress made a knee-jerk reaction to a rail safety event, they created the PTC disaster.

Can't wait to see what unnecessary, unthoughtful garbage they pass this time.
The Class I railroads are just asking for reregulation.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.

Chip
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:25 pm
Location: Brownstown, Michigan

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Chip »

NSSD70ACe wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:33 pm

Do I think we need HBDs every ten miles? No, probably not. We have a system that records trending data on bearing health based on HBD records and it seems to work just fine. Having a detector every ten miles on a heavily trafficked section too would really jam up radio traffic between dispatchers, trains, MOW personnel, etc. Could cause more problems than it solves.
that’s a simple fix, even if it’s probably expensive. Install a dedicated radio with its own unique channel specifically for hotbox and defect detector readouts in every locomotive.
Do I think railroads need to tell first responders about every single hazmat load that runs through their area? Certainly wouldn’t hurt, but from a practical perspective I’m not sure how they would do it. Suppose that’s someone else’s problem.
I agree it wouldn’t hurt. I would hope first responders at least have an idea of what some trains might be carrying, at least local freight, based on what industries are in town.

A lot of this seems like it’s been left up to the Secretary of Transportation, who in turn would likely delegate to the FRA Administrator, which is EXACTLY how this should be done. Let the experts handle how to implement these instead of a heavy-handed reaction by people who are not.
this administration has proven to be grossly incompetent in many facets. Until new bodies are in office I wouldn’t hold my breath for any improvement.

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15385
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Saturnalia »

Chip wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:49 pm
NSSD70ACe wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:33 pm
Do I think railroads need to tell first responders about every single hazmat load that runs through their area? Certainly wouldn’t hurt, but from a practical perspective I’m not sure how they would do it. Suppose that’s someone else’s problem.
I agree it wouldn’t hurt. I would hope first responders at least have an idea of what some trains might be carrying, at least local freight, based on what industries are in town.
The biggest problem with this, in my mind, is security. The fewer people who know detailed information about hazmat movements, the better. First responder training could obviously be further improved, as do systems to rapidly connect first responders with the hazmat data they need. But advance warning of movement is just asking for somebody to exploit it. The railroads already have enough problems with their own people leaking manifest data to thieves who raid boxcars and intermodal containers.

On the hotbox talking issue, this isn't a problem so long as the detectors are set to talk-on-defect-only, which is often used in busy territories.

I agree that some additional regulation is probably needed in some areas, but I think it should WAIT for all of the facts to be known via the NTSB, and be done through the regular FRA rulemaking procedures that have been in place and served us well for decades. Knee-jerk regulating by Congress sucks and that's my main concern here. Policy made by subject matter experts will almost always be better than those in elected positions who know nothing about the subject.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

User avatar
Standard Railfan
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Marquette, MI

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Standard Railfan »

There is another facet to providing notice of hazmat shipments.
What will first responders do with the information?
In rural areas with volunteer fire services to who does the notice go?
Will fire services need to add staff to receive and monitor the notices?

PatAzo
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:20 pm

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by PatAzo »

Schteinkuh wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:48 pm
The Class I railroads are just asking for reregulation.
Yes they are. The prudent course of action for the carriers is to get ahead of the curve. If they go status quo we always done it that way, they put themselves at risk of being one high profile derailment away from Uncle Sam stepping in. In example PTC was long on the NTSB wish list. With a couple high profile collisions it was mandated. A simple system could have been implemented for way less money but they let the government drive the boat.

User avatar
redcrumbox
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by redcrumbox »

Saturnalia wrote:
Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:40 am
The last time Congress made a knee-jerk reaction to a rail safety event, they created the PTC disaster.

Can't wait to see what unnecessary, unthoughtful garbage they pass this time.
Image
Old EMD’s are the gift that keeps on giving.

CSXBOY
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:07 pm
Location: Just north of the CSX Detroit sub

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by CSXBOY »

Norfolk southern is already reinstating old trains back. 5 of which are going to be running in the Detroit area. Think the symbols are 158, 159, 132, 333 and 334. Think the massive 3 mile trains are done for

NSSD70ACe
The Conrail Guru
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:34 pm
Location: Bottom of Lake Mead

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by NSSD70ACe »

CSXBOY wrote:
Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:43 pm
Norfolk southern is already reinstating old trains back. 5 of which are going to be running in the Detroit area. Think the symbols are 158, 159, 132, 333 and 334. Think the massive 3 mile trains are done for
For merchandise service maybe. I wouldn’t hold your breath on unit trains. Guarantee the Montana Division and my bosses will be attempting double coal drags as soon as it gets above 40…
:roll:

the contents of the above post are my opinion and mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

User avatar
R Bedell
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Mid Michigan

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by R Bedell »

I'm really hoping that the fines NS is going to incur fines in the billions, they're worth 55 billion dollars, they can afford it.
WOW, again --- :shock:

CSXBOY
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:07 pm
Location: Just north of the CSX Detroit sub

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by CSXBOY »

You are right tbh. But the BNSF and MRL trains in Montana aren't wrecking three times in a month like the merchandise trains on NS. At least BNSF knows how to run a railroad compared to NS

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15385
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by Saturnalia »

CSXBOY wrote:
Mon Mar 13, 2023 12:03 pm
You are right tbh. But the BNSF and MRL trains in Montana aren't wrecking three times in a month like the merchandise trains on NS. At least BNSF knows how to run a railroad compared to NS
Well the Montana Division did put the Empire Builder on the ground a couple years ago so I wouldn’t necessarily offer such a direct comparison.

I love how the foam always trashes whatever company had the most recent derailment rash. In a month or two the target will change. Remember when NS was the darling that ran tea kettles and had special paint on some locomotives? Man, they could do no wrong!!!
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

CSXBOY
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:07 pm
Location: Just north of the CSX Detroit sub

Re: National Rail Safety Legislation announced

Unread post by CSXBOY »

The Montana division tracks aren't the greatest. That's all I will I say about it. After riding the empire builder the past august I felt dizzy getting off the train in glacier national park. It was like riding on I 75 near Monroe nearly. But the difference between BNSF and NS is that BNSF is privately owned. BNSF has done some PSR things that is similar to NS and the others. But Warren Buffett realizes that PSR isn't the way to gain service and improve shipping and etc. Why do you think they've been dominating Union Pacific for years and years in terms of revenue and traffic? Intermodal is higher on BNSF. Coal is higher on BNSF. Grain is higher on BNSF. Like all railroads, BNSF has done some stupid things but it's not at a consistent basis like the others

Post Reply