Over
the past five years, the Angels on Track Foundation has
produced and distributed a number of publications, brochures,
and quarterly newsletters which are posted on its website.
Foundation Trustees have testified before the United States
Congress on the matter of railroad-crossing safety. A major
aspect of these publications and testimony is their balance
in regard to recognizing the causes of railroad-crossing
accidents – that is, that crossing accidents can be
caused by factors within three broad areas: (1) deficient
crossing conditions (2) improper train operations, and (3)
inappropriate motorist behavior (including deficient vehicles).
This balance has been confirmed by the judicial system in
that courts have identified accident causes under each of
these three categories. Furthermore, it is undeniable that
certain responsibilities have to be met by railroads, crossing
authorities, and motorists if safety is to be maximized at
railroad crossings. And yet, such a balanced view is lacking
in the general public, and among most of the so-called “insiders” involved
in providing safety at railroad crossings. This bias is toward
blaming motorists for virtually all railroad-crossing accidents,
even before the accidents occur. Such a pre-judgment is in
itself counter-productive to providing maximum safety at
the more than 235,000 railroad crossings throughout the United
States – the majority that are unprotected in that
they lack automatic gates and lights. An examination of the
country’s major program to educate the public regarding
railroad-crossing safety reveals a major contributor to this
inappropriate bias.
The major educational safety program – Operation
Lifesaver (OL) – has focused solely on motorist responsibilities
and ensuing enforcement of traffic laws at railroad crossings.
Efforts have included the placement of police on trains to
observe motorist behavior, the ticketing of drivers for alleged
violation of State traffic laws, and the encouragement of
judges to strictly enforce crossing laws relating to motorists.
Even more singularly focused, is OL’s involvement in
influencing the investigation of railroad-crossing accidents.
OL has filled a void created by the lack of federal or State
standards for investigating railroad-crossing accidents – a
void that parallels the lack of accident investigation by
both the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal
Railroad Administration – by helping to “educate” first
responders as to what to determine as the probable cause
of such accidents. A case in point is a publication that
OL endorses entitled, “Welcome To GCCI, Grade Crossing
Collision Investigation." In that document, eleven “common
causes of collisions” are listed as follows:
- The motorist sees the train, but misjudges its speed
and distance.
- The motorist races the train to the crossing.
- Failure to look for a second train on another track.
- The motorist is familiar with the crossing, but did not
use caution.
- Failure to obey signs and automatic warning devices.
- Turning in front of a train from a parallel roadway
- Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
- The automobile stalls on a railroad track and the occupants
fail to get the vehicle off.
- Driver inattention.
- Driving too fast for road conditions.
- Faulty mechanical equipment on vehicle.
The publication informs its audience that it is designed
to help with the information being presented and requires
your active participation. Once completed, this book will
be your guide when investigation highway-rail grade crossing
collisions.
It is unfathomable that first responders should be trained
to look for irresponsible motorist behavior at the exclusion
of other potential causes of accidents. Such a single focus
ignores federal and State laws that require railroads to
fulfill safety responsibilities at crossings. For example,
consider the following federal and State laws that if violated,
could cause railroad-crossing accidents:
| 1. Speeding trains: |
Railroad
speed limits are established by the Federal Railroad
Administration based on the classification of track.
The maximum speed of freight trains is often 60 miles-per-hour,
but passenger trains (Amtrak) may travel at up to 80
miles-per-hour. (49CFR213.9) Train speeds are recorded
on locomotive event recorders. |
| 2.
Whistle blowing: |
Based
on federal law, locomotive engineers must blow whistles
in a continuous sequence of two longs, a short, and
a long, starting at 15-20 seconds before the train
approaches the crossing. (49CFR222.21) As with train
speeds, whistle-blowing sequences are recorded on locomotive
event recorders. |
| 3.
Blocked crossing: |
Ohio
law limits trains from blocking crossings to five minutes,
unless the situation is beyond the control of the railroad.
(ORC5589.21) Blocked trains during night hours may
be unseen by approaching motorists. |
4.
Motorist sight
4. obstructions: |
Ohio
law requires railroads to remove obstructive vegetation
for 600 feet up and down the track from the crossing,
along the railroad right-of-way (usually a width of
33-75 feet on each side of the crossing).
(ORC4955.36) The failure of railroads to comply with
this law can result in motorists having blocked vision
of approaching trains. |
| 5.
Activation failure: |
Where
gate mechanisms fail, federal law requires (in many
cases) railroads to provide alternative safety such
as a flagman. (49CFR234.7) Activation failures are
to be reported to the federal government. Gates have
been known to have stayed open when motorist’s
approached the crossing, and conversely, to have remained
down for inappropriate long times, when a train was
not approaching.
Either case presents special hazards to motorists. |
Furthermore, railroads are required by federal and State
law to maintain their crossings to specific standards, and
the crossing itself must meet national engineering standards
set by the federal government and the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
There are a number of inter-related
dangers in OL’s
one-sided approach to stating (in fact, assuming) that motorists
are at fault for virtually all railroad-crossing accidents. First
and foremost, OL’s target audiences probably believe
this inappropriate message. For example, the public at large
believes, without any supporting evidence, that motorists
are the sole cause of railroad-crossing accidents. Discussions
with many citizens reveals this fact and its only after a
discussion that includes the identification of other accident
causes that people seem to “get it.” The very
people that OL is allegedly trying to save seem to have the
idea that they, as self-anointed good drivers are immune
from railroad-crossing accidents. Similarly, when first responders
do not look beyond irresponsible motorist behavior in their
post-accident investigation, they skew accident statistics,
provide unearned protection from liability to railroads,
and deprive victims’ families of appropriate recourse.
In fact, even juries can be tainted by pre-dispositions toward
blaming motorists. In turn, the media seems to be affected
by the bias toward motorist fault, as there are a number
of occasions when initial news’ reports cites – or
at least infers – poor motorist driving as the probable
cause of accidents. Furthermore, an assumption that motorist
behavior causes railroad-crossing accidents, public (federal
and State) funds may be misallocated to what would otherwise
be their proper place under a balanced approach to accident
causes. For example, tens of thousands of additional crossing
gates (by far, the safest protective device) could have been
installed over the past 30 years if at least some tax-payer
money would have been re-directed from OL programs and other
misguided undertakings.
Finally, an over-emphasis on motorist
fault can lead to a lack of enforcement of such federal
and State railroad-crossing laws as identified above. While
the Federal Railroad Administration and Ohio State authorities
(especially the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio and
local jurisdictions) have the authority to enforce the
above laws, there is significant evidence that each of
the five laws cited above have been violated. In fact,
motorist sight obstructions have been formally documented
at a number of unprotected (non-gated) crossings. In the
case of railroad crossings, law enforcement is a two-way
street. Both motorists and railroads are required to comply
with traffic laws.
The bias toward assuming motorist
behavior as the cause of virtually all railroad-crossing
accidents exists without underlying evidence. There is
almost no accident investigation on the part of the federal
government, and when such investigations are made, they
most often come years after the accidents occurred. It
should not be the role of OL – an organization
partially funded by the railroad industry, and largely manned
by railroad and ex-railroad employees – to fill the
void created by public agencies. At a minimum OL should get
out of the business of railroad-crossing accident investigation.
What is also desirable is for the federal and/or State governments
to become more involved in investigating railroad-crossing
accidents -- operating under a set of standards that recognizes
that such accidents may be caused by a variety of factors
ranging from deficient and unprotected crossings, to irresponsible
railroad and/or motorist behavior. No entity has a monopoly
as to the causes of railroad-crossing accidents.
|
