Skip to main content
AskDover

Attachment

Committee Minutes. Feb 27, 2007.

Open the PDF

This text was pulled from the PDF automatically and may contain mistakes. The PDF is the official record, so check it before relying on this.

28 pages have little or no readable text here, often scans or drawings. See the PDF for those.

Page 1

ATTACHMENT #1 Regular SA&T meeting of 02/27/2007 Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Briefing February 27, 2007

Page 2

AGENDA • Overview of Norfolk Southern Railway Company • Formation and organization of the subsidiary Delaware Business Unit (DBU) • Railroad safety • Hazardous materials transportation by railroad

Page 7

Since 1980, U.S. Class I railroads have spent $340 billion on track and equipment. Capital Expenditures and Maintenance Expenses, Excluding Depreciation, in Billions of Dollars 10.0 8.0 Equipment 6.0 Track & Structures 4.0 2.0 0.0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: AAR, Analysis of Class I Railroads, 1980 - 2004, based on R-1 Reports submitted by each Class I railroad to the ICC/STB. Equipment: Lines 382+158-151-154-157. Track: Lines 378+149-147. Note: Current year dollars.

Page 8

Since 1991, U.S. Class I railroads have accelerated capital spending on new rail. Billions of Current Dollars 2.0 1.5 Capital Expenditures on Rail 1.0 0.5 Operating Expenses for Rail & Other Track Material 0.0 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 Source: R-1 Reports submitted by each Class I railroad to the ICC/STB, 1987-2004. Schedule 330, line 8, column e; Schedule 410, lines 1, 14, and 15, column h.

Page 9

Delmarva Business Unit • Created in 2006 • NS Eastern North Carolina parallels • Capital budget challenges • Amtrak Northeast Corridor Track Gateway • Improved localized management

Page 10

U.S. Railroad Safety Statistics: Main Themes • Railroads have dramatically improved safety over the last two and a half decades. • Railroads compare favorably with other industries & transportation modes. • The most troubling railroad safety problems arise from factors largely outside railroad control. • Railroads have implemented numerous and effective technological improvements and company-wide safety programs.

Page 11

Derailments per million train-miles have dropped 65% since 1980 and 12% since 1990. 10 8.98 8 6 4 3.52 3.11 2 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: FRA website: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/Prelim/2004/r01.htm & r02.htm (preliminary 2004 data) FRA, Railroad Safety Statistics Annual Report, 1997-2004, Tables 1-1, 5-6. FRA, Accident/Incident Bulletin, 1980-1996, Tables 19, 36. Note: Excludes grade crossing accidents.

Page 12

Train accidents per million train-miles have dropped 62% since 1980 and 8% since 1990. 12 11.43 10 8 6 4.73 4 4.33 2 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: FRA website: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/Prelim/2004/r01.htm (preliminary 2004 data). FRA, Railroad Safety Statistics Annual Report, 1997-2004, Tables 1-1, 1-2. FRA, Accident/Incident Bulletin, 1980-1996, Tables 19, 36. Note: Excludes grade crossing accidents.

Page 13

Human factors-caused accidents per million train-miles have dropped 46% since 1980 and 3% since 1990. 3.5 3.24 3.0 2.5 1.80 2.0 1.74 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: FRA website: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/Prelim/2004/r01.htm & r02.htm (preliminary 2004 data) FRA, Railroad Safety Statistics Annual Report, 1997-2004, Tables 1-1, 5-9. FRA, Accident/Incident Bulletin, 1980-1996, Tables 19, 36. Note: Excludes grade crossing accidents.

Page 14

Accidents with a hazmat release have declined 76% since 1980 and 17% since 1990. Train Accidents with a Hazmat Release 140 119 120 100 80 60 40 29 20 35 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: FRA, RR Safety Statistics Annual Report, 1997-2004, Tables 6-1. FRA, Accident/Incident Bulletin, Table 26. Note: An accident may involve releases from more than one car. AAR Analysis of FRA Train Accident Database through 2004.

Page 15

Railroad Industry Safety Programs: Hazardous Materials • AAR North American Non-Accident Release (NAR) Program • Transportation & Community Awareness & Emergency Response (TRANSCAER) • ACC Responsible Care • Operation Respond • TTCI's Emergency Response Training Center • TTCI's BOE Hazmat Inspections • TTCI's BOE Hazmat Safety Information

Page 16

Hazmat incident release rates have declined 72% since 1980 and 58% since 1990. Incidents per Thousand Hazmat Carloads 1.6 1.52 1.4 1.2 0.99 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.42 0.4 99.96% Incident Free 0.2 0.0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: USDOT, Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Hazardous Materials Incidents by Year & Mode. http://hazmat.dot.gov/files/hazmat/10year/10yearfrm.htm for 1995-2004. Includes releases in train accidents as well as non-accident releases. ICC/STB Waybill Sample. 1995-2004. Carloadings adjusted to counter known hazmat underreportings of hazmat designations.

Page 17

Railroads now have less than 1/4 of the hazmat accidents that trucks have, despite roughly equal hazmat ton-mileage. 400 350 300 250 200 Truck 150 Railroad 100 50 0 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Sources: USDOT, Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Hazardous Materials Incidents by Year & Mode, from http://hazmat.dot.gov/pubs/inc/data/tenyr_accd.pdf. 11/14/2005 In 2003, both the truck and rail modes hauled an estimated 110 billion ton-miles of hazmat.

Page 18

Grade crossing collisions have declined 71% since 1980 and 46% since 1990. 12,000 10,611 10,000 8,000 6,000 5,715 4,000 3,067 2,000 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 Sources: FRA, Railroad Safety Statistics Annual Report, 1997-2004, Table 1-1. FRA Highway/Rail Crossing Accident/Incident & Inventory Bulletin,Table S, FRA website: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/Prelim/2004/r01.htm (preliminary 2004 data) Note: Includes accidents involving pedestrians. Includes accidents at private crossings.

Page 19

In 2004, 94% of rail-related fatalities were grade crossing users and trespassers. Grade Crossing Users: 364 Trespassers: 482 Employees: 25 Passengers: 3 Others: 24 Sources: FRA website: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/Prelim/2004/r03.htm (preliminary 2004 data). FRA, Railroad Safety Statistics Annual Report 2004, Table 1-3.

Page 20

Railroad Security • After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the AAR & its member railroads voluntarily conducted a comprehensive risk assessment and implemented a security action plan with four alert levels. • The Security Plan encompasses over 1,300 critical facilities (tunnels, bridges, yards, dispatch centers, etc.) over a 142,000-mile nationwide rail network. • The plan evolves in response to classified information obtained through DHS and FBI. • DHS has cited this plan as a model for other U.S. industries.

Page 21

Railroad Security: Countermeasures include: • Employee and customer awareness and training: e.g. to thwart terrorist intelligence gathering, facilitate warning & recovery. • Sharing of Intelligence on Threats: – AAR Operations Center (24/7) collects, evaluates, and disseminates information to railroads thru the Railway Alert Network (RAN) – The Surface Transportation Information Sharing & Analysis Center (ST- ISAC) collects, analyzes, and disseminates information on physical and cyber-security threats to providers and users of surface transportation. • Vetting employees & contractors. • Controlling access to critical facilities and shipment info. • Securing communications and data and ensuring message integrity and best IT practices.

Page 22

Security and Hazmats • Municipal legislation on routing • 2006 DOT DHS TIH Security Action Items for Railroads • 2006 TSA and FRA Railroad inspectors for verification of compliance • 2007 DHS TSA notice of action on TIH routes

Page 23

Railroads have lower employee injury rates than do other major industry groups. Lost Workday Injuries & Illnesses per 100 Full Time Employees, 2004 5 4 3 2 1 0 DS G ro ce ry ls Ho te RO Co tor ns S t ru es A M an ctio uf n RA ac Ag ring tu IL Dep ar tm ri c ultu en tS re Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb1487.pdf to re s

Page 25

ATTACHMENT #2 Regular SA&T meeting of 02/27/2007

Page 36

ATTACHMENT #3 Regular SA&T meeting of 02/27/2007 Why Sprinkle townhouses ¾ In line with the Cities proactive approach of fire protection. ¾ Improves the overall image of the city ¾ Fire determination made easier ¾ Meets the Cities mission statement of having a safe City.

Page 37

Benefits to the public ¾5 to 10 percent discount on homeowners insurance. ¾Faster recovery for fire victims. ¾Fewer displaced families and less of a drain on support services. ¾No standby fees for fire protection water. ¾Allows the City to make amends and trade off for new construction

Page 38

Benefits to the public ¾Fire protection remains intact even if the property is sold or the occupant changes ¾Increases the survivability of the occupant. ¾Less potential for the loss of family heirlooms and personal belongings. ¾Protection from fire spread from other units. ¾Assists individuals unable to initiate self preservation in surviving a fire.

Page 39

Benefits to the public ¾Even when you are not at home the Sprinkler System will be. Ready to stop the fire and alert the Fire Department at a moments notice. Yes, there is a cost, but for the peace of mind that the Sprinkler System gives us knowing that our home is protected, it’s more than worth it.

Page 40

Why Sprinkle Townhouses? ¾Good Fire Protection • Early detection and suppression. • Incorporates Technology as part of the Cities Fire protection program. • Less in service time for the Fire Department. • Reduces the hazards to the Firefighters. • Reduces Firefighting costs. • Helps maintain a volunteer Fire Department.

Page 41

Other considerations ¾Sprinkler systems need to be installed during construction. ¾Cost of installation ranges from $2.00 to $2.25 per square foot. ¾ Equal to or less than installing carpet in the same area

Page 42

Less Fire Damage ¾There is far less damage in the homes with sprinklers! – Average fire loss with sprinkler activation, $2,166 – Average fire loss without sprinkler activation, $45,019

Page 43

Communities that currently sprinkle townhouses ¾Newark, Delaware ¾Camden, Delaware ¾Silver Lake Blvd. Dover ¾City of New Castle, Delaware ¾Belfonte, Delaware ¾Beach area.

Page 44

Why do we sprinkler buildings? • To avoid this And this!

Back to this meeting