Testimony of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Railroads

March 29, 2001

Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, my name is Rick Inclima. I have 16 years experience as a track foreman in Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and am currently the Director of Education and Safety for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes (BMWE). BMWE represents approximately 50,000 rail workers who build, construct, inspect, and maintain the railroad tracks, bridges, and related infrastructure on the majority of railroads in both the United States and Canada. Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege and honor to appear before you today on behalf of the BMWE, and I thank you for holding this hearing and allowing us to appear before the Subcommittee. The subject of today's hearing is the important issue of track safety and its relation to the safety of our nation's railroads. BMWE submitted detailed comments to the Federal Railroad Administration on February 23, 2001 regarding the Administration's pending effort to reauthorize the rail safety program and we look forward to working with you and the Administration on this important safety legislation.

The tragedy in Iowa involving an Amtrak passenger train two weeks ago underscores the importance of track safety and the need to take pro-active steps to prevent a repeat of that tragic accident. We join you, Mr. Chairman, in expressing our deepest condolences to the families of those passengers killed and injured in Nodaway, Iowa and assure you that BMWE will do everything in our power to assure that such a tragedy does not occur again.

Mr. Chairman, while the cause of the Iowa accident is still under investigation it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on a cause. Therefore, I will not comment specifically on the Iowa accident, however, I will attempt to provide you with a broad perspective concerning the current state of the railroad infrastructure and some suggestions for improving track safety on our nation's railroads.

First, I would like to discuss the issue of manpower in the maintenance of way craft. Over the past several decades, there has been a precipitous drop in the number of maintenance of way workers nationwide. While some of this manpower decline can be attributed to technological advances in track maintenance equipment and work processes, we strongly believe the industry has cut their track maintenance forces too deep and there are not enough track maintenance personnel to stay ahead of declining track conditions. This belief was confirmed by FRA in its manpower audit of CSX Railroad published in 1999. As a result of that audit, FRA concluded that the railroad was short approximately 600-700 track maintenance workers across the CSX rail system. It is BMWE's belief that the same conclusions would be derived from audits conducted on virtually every other Class I carrier, and the manpower shortages in maintenance of way are a nationwide safety problem.

Let me share with you, Mr. Chairman, some preliminary data I have compiled from BMWE's membership records. We will look at average BMWE employment levels for U.S. railroads in 5 year increments based upon dues payments by active members for years 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2000. These averages already take into consideration the seasonality of maintenance of way work and other fluctuations in employment levels including business cycles. In 1985, BMWE had an average of 56,147 members employed in the maintenance of way department and receiving pay from the railroad industry. In 1990, the average membership employed in the maintenance of way craft nationwide dropped to 41, 417. In 1995 the average number declined further to 39,180 maintenance of way workers, and in year 2000 the average employment numbers decreased to 33,680 nationwide. These numbers represent approximately a 40.01% decrease in maintenance of way membership and staffing levels on our nation's railroads over the past 15 years alone. Clearly, this type of precipitous decline in track maintenance personnel has a direct and substantial effect on track safety and the overall condition of the nation's railroad infrastructure.

It is simply not realistic, Mr. Chairman, to believe these massive, overextending employment reductions in track maintenance forces do not have a direct effect on track safety. While, in general terms, the roadbed does not deteriorate overnight, we do believe that we are beginning to see adverse affects of deferred track maintenance and are concerned that, until we reverse this dangerous trend and put more maintenance personnel out on the right-of-way, things will continue to deteriorate exponentially. While we do not want to see further roadbed deterioration, and the industry does not want to see further roadbed deterioration, I'm afraid that an escalating decline is inevitable if we do not take decisive action now.

Let's look at several Class I railroads utilizing once again BMWE's membership records. At CSX Railroad, the average monthly membership in 1999 was 4,847, in year 2000 the average monthly membership was 4794, a 1.9% one year decline. On Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, the average monthly membership for 1999 was 8,509, in year 2000 the average monthly membership was 8,037, a 5.5% one year decline. On Norfolk Southern Railroad, the average monthly membership for 1999 was 5,170, in year 2000 the average monthly membership was 4,651, a 10.3% one year decline. The Norfolk Southern numbers are even more troubling when one considers that in June 1999, NS took over approximately 50% of former Conrail trackage.

Other indicators of declining trends in track safety can be culled from Federal Railroad Administration data. In 1999, total train accidents numbered 2,768, in year 2000 total train accidents rose to 2,891, an increase of 123 reportable train accidents over the previous year. Even when normalized per the number of accidents per million train miles, the overall railroad accident rate increased to 3.77 in 1998, 3.89 in 1999, and 4.01 in 2000. This is the first consecutive 3 year increase in train accident rates in over a decade. It is also important to note that these statistics only include those train accidents which meet FRA's reporting threshold of $6,600.00 in damages to rolling stock, track and related structures. Accidents which do not meet the $6,600.00 threshold are not included in FRA train accident statistics.

We can also look to FRA data for an indication regarding trends in track caused derailments. In comparing FRA accident data from 1998 with 1999, Burlington Northern Santa- Fe Railroad experienced an overall 10.5 percentage change increase in train accidents and a 28.3 percentage change increase in accidents attributed to track related causes. Comparing the same period (1998 vs 1999), Norfolk Southern Railroad experienced an overall 59.7 percentage change increase in overall train accidents and an astonishing 67.6 percentage change increase in accidents attributed to track related causes. Union Pacific Railroad had an overall 1.1 percentage change decrease in train accidents from 1999, but had a 9.2 percentage change increase in accidents attributed to track related causes. CSX Railroad had an overall 36.4 percentage change increase in train accidents and a 27.2 percentage change increase in accidents attributed to track related causes. Clearly, these alarming statistics prove beyond any doubt that the train accident rates and track caused accident rates are moving in the wrong direction and changes have to be implemented now to prevent greater deterioration of the roadbed and rail safety in the near-term future.

The fix to this escalating infrastructure problem is within reach. Simply increase maintenance of way staffing levels to facilitate proactive track maintenance and repair, improve employee training, develop more thorough track inspection and defect repair procedures, and improve conditions under which track inspections are conducted. These are the steps necessary to reverse the dangerous trend of deteriorating track conditions, escalating train accident rates, and track related railroad accidents.

In reviewing FRA statistics, one must also look with some suspicion upon train accident causes attributed to "human factors." BMWE believes that the Congress and the Federal Railroad Administration must look at the root cause of accidents incorrectly attributed to "human factors." The number of train accidents attributed to "human factors" has increased from 971 accidents in 1998 to 1,088 accidents in 2000. However, we believe that in many cases human factor accidents are actually attributable to other causes, or combination of causes. Such other causes include operational and rules compliance problems, manpower shortages, lack of supervision and oversight, employee training deficiencies, and equipment defects. While accidents or incidents may be conveniently attributed by the carrier to so-called human factors, the cause and prevention of these accidents and incidents are often more accurately based in operational and rules compliance deficiencies, equipment malfunctions, training deficiencies, and manpower shortages.

Modification of track inspection processes and procedures is also necessary to improve track safety. The amount of territory a track inspector is responsible to inspect on a weekly basis is overwhelmingly too large. FRA confirmed this in its audit report entitled "CSX Track Audit 2000." A pertinent excerpt from that report states, in part:

"Recently, CSX management has reduced the number of track inspector positions at a vast majority of their divisions and system wide. At the same time, CSXT has increased the track inspectors' territories at numerous locations. During listening sessions conducted with BMWE employees and first line supervisors, both voiced their concerns relative to the size of the inspection territories and the work requirements placed on the inspectors."

Inspectors are required by Federal Law to inspect track at certain frequencies, however, Federal Law does not place any meaningful limits on the length of an inspector's territory or the speed over which the territory may be inspected. This problem has been exacerbated in recent years by manpower shortages which place a heavier burden on the track inspector. In years past, track inspectors often had local maintenance crews available to correct track deficiencies as they were found and reported by the inspector. Today, however, the cut-backs in manpower have left many inspectors with no maintenance crews to facilitate repairs of identified track defects. In these situations, the track inspector is required to stop his inspection to effectuate the repair himself. This practice severely limits the time an inspector has to dedicate to the performance of actual track inspection, and he or she often has no other recourse except to make up that time by finishing the inspection of the territory at a speed which is not conducive to quality inspections. Thus, we believe that the industry must restore the ranks of local track maintenance forces to facilitate the timely repair of track defects and provide greater attention to problem areas before they become defects which can adversely affect railroad safety and the safe passage of trains.

Another area that we believe needs attention is the Federal Railroad Administration and its ability to provide regulatory oversight, inspection, and enforcement of federal safety laws. Traffic density on our nation's railroads has grown over the last decade. However, there has not been a corresponding increase in the number of FRA inspectors assigned to oversee the industry. FRA is currently understaffed and, despite its best efforts, is hard-pressed to conduct enough compliance inspections to reasonably assure safety compliance. FRA's personnel shortages are further exacerbated by the manpower requirements of FRA's Safety Assurance and Compliance Program (SACP) and Rail Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) initiatives. BMWE strongly supports these program initiatives and believes they have resulted in improved safety and better regulations. However, we also believe it is necessary to increase FRA funding in order to increase the number of FRA field inspectors and support personnel necessary to oversee the safety of the industry and, by association, the safety of the public at-large. Simply stated, Mr. Chairman, increased carloads and traffic density on our nation's railroads necessitates a corresponding expansion of FRA operations. Due to sheer traffic volume and broadened agency responsibilities, it is our opinion that FRA is simply unable to conduct the number of inspections and oversight reviews necessary to reasonably ensure rail safety and regulatory compliance. Therefore, we respectfully request the Subcommittee and the Congress to review staffing levels at FRA and provide increases where necessary for the agency to fulfill its critical mission.

We would be remiss if we did not raise one final issue with regard to infrastructure investment and railroad competition with other modes of transportation. Without question, both the railroad industry and railroad labor share the common goal of operating a safe, efficient, environmentally friendly, and profitable enterprise. However, it must be recognized that the railroad industry is at a severe competitive disadvantage when it comes to infrastructure investment. It is the opinion of BMWE that such competitive disadvantage affects the industry's ability to make the requisite level of capital investment necessary to support the railroad infrastructure and improve safety. Railroads are the only major form of transportation that is not heavily subsidized by government infrastructure investment. Airlines enjoy vast government investment in airport construction and operations. Likewise, the trucking industry profits greatly from government support of road and highway construction and maintenance. Therefore, it may be time to reconsider the exclusion of railroads from some form of subsidized infrastructure investment. We believe our nation should fully explore the pros and cons of providing government supported subsidies for railroad infrastructure investment as a means of enhancing railroad safety, improving rail passenger service, restoring competition to the transportation marketplace, reducing airport congestion, and relieving gridlock on our nation's highways. And of course, Mr. Chairman, the highly skilled and uniquely qualified men and women of the BMWE are the people who should perform this specialized infrastructure rehabilitation work as we have with distinction since 1886. Mr. Chairman, the railroad infrastructure is a valuable asset to this great nation of ours and it should be treated as such for the good of our country and its transportation needs.

This concludes my testimony, Mr. Chairman, and on behalf of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes I take this opportunity to thank you and the entire Subcommittee for providing us this opportunity to appear before you today. I will be happy to answer any question you or members of the Subcommittee may have. Thank you.

Respectfully,

Director of Safety, BMWE