|
|||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | HOUSE RESOLUTION
| ||||||
2 | WHEREAS, The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) in its | ||||||
3 | Interim Final Rule for the Use of Horns at Highway-Rail | ||||||
4 | Crossings, using the conclusions of a statistical study by the | ||||||
5 | research corporation Westat, Inc., implies that the collision | ||||||
6 | risk at gated crossings in Northeastern Illinois where the | ||||||
7 | train horn is not routinely sounded is 17.3% higher than gated | ||||||
8 | crossings in the continental United States where the horn is | ||||||
9 | sounded, and due to this factor, municipalities that want to | ||||||
10 | maintain existing quiet crossings will have to invest in | ||||||
11 | expensive supplemental safety measures to lower the risk to | ||||||
12 | make up for the implied 17.3% differential that results from | ||||||
13 | routine horn blowing, meaning that the total cost will likely | ||||||
14 | exceed $10 million to maintain the existing quiet; and
| ||||||
15 | WHEREAS, The FRA admits, however, that the Westat results | ||||||
16 | are not statistically significant at a conventional level (the | ||||||
17 | result of having only a 69% confidence level, or a nearly one | ||||||
18 | in three chance of not being relevant), bearing out the | ||||||
19 | "puzzling Chicago anomaly" described in an FRA study in 2000; | ||||||
20 | and
| ||||||
21 | WHEREAS, A team of statistical experts from TransInfo LLC | ||||||
22 | and the University of Illinois at Chicago, contracted to | ||||||
23 | conduct an analysis of the Westat study, analyzed the Westat | ||||||
24 | risk assessment data and procedures and confirmed that, | ||||||
25 | according to the standard principles used in statistical | ||||||
26 | inference, the FRA/Westat conclusions were not statistically | ||||||
27 | significant, and TransInfo/UIC offered a variation of the | ||||||
28 | Westat model that produced statistically significant results, | ||||||
29 | determining that a more likely estimate of the risk of a | ||||||
30 | collision at an existing quiet crossing in Northeastern | ||||||
31 | Illinois is 26.4% lower, when compared to crossings in the | ||||||
32 | continental United States where the horn is blown; and |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | WHEREAS, The TransInfo/UIC study concluded that "based on | ||||||
2 | the FRA data, there is no reason to believe that in the Chicago | ||||||
3 | Area banning the sounding of horns increases the chance of | ||||||
4 | collisions at gated public highway-rail grade crossings in | ||||||
5 | northeastern Illinois"; and | ||||||
6 | WHEREAS, The FRA's Interim Final Rule will force | ||||||
7 | municipalities to spend millions of dollars on measures at | ||||||
8 | quiet crossings that are sufficiently safe by the FRA's own | ||||||
9 | standard, and this would be a wasteful and ineffective result | ||||||
10 | from a flawed analysis that lacks any statistical validity and | ||||||
11 | would not serve to improve overall railroad crossing safety in | ||||||
12 | Northeastern Illinois; and | ||||||
13 | WHEREAS, The Illinois Commerce Commission worked with the | ||||||
14 | communities and the railroads of Northeastern Illinois in | ||||||
15 | determining where it was appropriate to excuse the routine | ||||||
16 | blowing of the horns, every quiet crossing has been equipped | ||||||
17 | with a minimum level of active safety equipment, every quiet | ||||||
18 | crossing has to maintain an acceptable safety record or ICC | ||||||
19 | will rescind the excusal until appropriate safety measures are | ||||||
20 | put into place, and the ICC, railroads, and communities have | ||||||
21 | invested a significant amount of resources in addressing the | ||||||
22 | highest risk crossings with the appropriate safety measures | ||||||
23 | necessary to reduce the risk of future collisions; and | ||||||
24 | WHEREAS, A focus on education programs such as Operation | ||||||
25 | Lifesaver has supplemented those efforts of the ICC, the | ||||||
26 | communities, and the railroads, and this combination of factors | ||||||
27 | is perhaps the most likely reason behind the FRA's | ||||||
28 | self-described "puzzling Chicago anomaly" and provides a model | ||||||
29 | on which to build a common sense alternative to the FRA's | ||||||
30 | Interim Final Rule; and | ||||||
31 | WHEREAS, The statutory mandate behind the Interim Final | ||||||
32 | Rule provides that the U.S. Secretary of Transportation may |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | except from the horn-sounding requirement "any categories of | ||||||
2 | rail operations or categories of highway-rail grade | ||||||
3 | crossings....that the Secretary determines not to present a | ||||||
4 | significant risk with respect to loss of life or serious | ||||||
5 | personal injury"; and | ||||||
6 | WHEREAS, Northeastern Illinois as a whole appears to | ||||||
7 | present a category of highway-rail grade crossings that must be | ||||||
8 | considered by the regulations as allowed for under the | ||||||
9 | Secretary of Transportation's exception: a region with a | ||||||
10 | significant concentration of existing quiet crossings overseen | ||||||
11 | by a State program where the statistical risk of collisions at | ||||||
12 | crossings where the locomotive horn is not routinely sounded is | ||||||
13 | no greater than if the locomotive horn is routinely sounded, | ||||||
14 | and this categorical exception could apply to other regions | ||||||
15 | that are similarly situated; and | ||||||
16 | WHEREAS, An alternative crossing safety program for | ||||||
17 | Northeastern Illinois
would include the following elements: | ||||||
18 | delegation to an appropriate State of the authority to | ||||||
19 | implement and manage the regional program allowed under the | ||||||
20 | Secretary of Transportation's exception; retention by the FRA | ||||||
21 | of oversight of this program, with the FRA responsible for | ||||||
22 | monitoring the program's effectiveness; retention by the FRA of | ||||||
23 | authority to recommend adjustments if the program is determined | ||||||
24 | to have a detrimental impact on crossing safety; State agency | ||||||
25 | supervision of the creation of any quiet zone; delegation to | ||||||
26 | the appropriate State agency of authority to establish | ||||||
27 | acceptable safety thresholds, designate quiet zone status, and | ||||||
28 | enforce quiet zones, including the authority to enforce | ||||||
29 | railroad compliance with the quiet zone; input from the | ||||||
30 | railroads, affected agencies, public authorities, and | ||||||
31 | municipal officials in determining the establishment of a quiet | ||||||
32 | zone; adequate warning signs at all quet zone crossings; a | ||||||
33 | requirement that all crossings within a quiet zone demonstrate | ||||||
34 | a proven safety record, as defined by an acceptable relevant |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | collision experience, such as the current ICC standard of no | ||||||
2 | more than three relevant collisions over a five year period; | ||||||
3 | limitations on the creation of individual quiet crossings; and | ||||||
4 | a public service campaign to educate motorists and pedestrians | ||||||
5 | as to the consequences of unsafe behavior at railroad crossings | ||||||
6 | and to warn them that trains will not routinely sound horns as | ||||||
7 | they approach crossings; and
| ||||||
8 | WHEREAS, The FRA apparently has already established | ||||||
9 | precedence for allowing the regional exception approach, | ||||||
10 | having provided a separate treatment to the Florida communities | ||||||
11 | impacted by Emergency Order 15, allowing them to establish | ||||||
12 | quiet zones prior to the publication of the Interim Final Rule; | ||||||
13 | therefore be it
| ||||||
14 | RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE | ||||||
15 | NINETY-THIRD GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, that we | ||||||
16 | urge the FRA to apply the Secretary of Transportation's | ||||||
17 | exception to the FRA Interim Final Rule to any region that | ||||||
18 | includes a significant concentration of existing quiet | ||||||
19 | crossings overseen by a State program under which the | ||||||
20 | statistical risk of collisions at crossings where the | ||||||
21 | locomotive horn is not routinely sounded is no greater than if | ||||||
22 | the locomotive horn is routinely sounded; and be it further
| ||||||
23 | RESOLVED, That we urge application of the Secretary of | ||||||
24 | Transportation's exception to the FRA Interim Final Rule to | ||||||
25 | existing quiet crossings in Northeastern Illinois; and be it | ||||||
26 | further | ||||||
27 | RESOLVED, That suitable copies of this resolution be | ||||||
28 | delivered to the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, to the | ||||||
29 | Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, and to | ||||||
30 | each member of the Illinois congressional delegation.
|