Public Transportation- House

We we would ask you wait in the hall and then if you need to test fire commander speak for against the bill will allow you to do that So first on the agenda we have a Senate bill two forty six. Senator Blake Johnson for those of you that don't know in the House side he is the chairman of transportation on the Senate side so senator You may proceed. Thank you chairman members the Senate bill two forty six is is a effort to help mitigate of problems between statutes that we we did and and two thousand nineteen this at two for two for sixteen of two thousand nineteen leverages additional annual registration fees on hybrid and electric vehicles certain members of the arm First forces and veterans are are issued special license plate and and under under another statute these fees are waived and at four sixteen did not address whether those individuals are exempt from paying those annual registration fees on hybrid electric vehicle so this was a D. F. and a bill and and I would welcome you have already come up to the table if we are at with the committee and and help explain what they've done. Lucentis yourself. Thank you Mr chairman of the committee thank you senator Johnson at least Austin Smith I'm the single council going take your mask off so we have to hear you yes Sir. Thank you Mr chair Alicia Austin Smith I'm the senior counsel for the department of finance and administration. Okay of your questions Senator. Are you will more presentation no she I mean she can explain you know what the FDA is went through and and this in this issue so okay thanks very. Thank you Mr chair thank you senator Johnson this the bill that was passed in twenty nineteen. Levied these additional fees on hybrid and electric vehicles the bill did not provide for any exemptions it in in that low currently there is an exemption for members of the armed forces and veterans to receive their license plate and registration free free of charge when but but the levy on electric and hybrid vehicles did not specifically provide for those individuals to have an exemption from those fees when we look back at the legislative history we determined that it was the general assembly's intent to exempt these individuals these veterans these members that that at the armed forces friend specific fees of this nature so and we did make an administrative determination that that there was a conflict in the two laws and but that the General Assembly is intent was for these individuals to not pay these fees so we're asking as part of this is part of DFA legislation we're asking that this be applied retroactively so those individuals who were charged a fee if you determine that they should not have been charged the fee that and they would receive a refund for that space. And I would be happy to answer any questions. Senator you're if questions. Yes Sir any questions committee. President right you're recognized question thank you Mr chairman it what what's the history on this when did we set up this mechanism where these attacks are not subject to fees. I think that was in seventeen fifteen or seventeen I can remember. That sounds correct twenty seventeen thank you seventeen whenever that was the. The representative feeling you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman You said this was a bill that we passed it was a was an essay act that was passed by the boulders. Now this is part of the those that tax the package where you know it held for the for the highways the album what one one that initiated act that was passed no hi this is this is the input legislation and and nineteen. That became ACT four sixteen. A okay feeling are you asking when we when we exempted the veterans are or when this bill passed for this bill I thought it was initiated act that that tax to put on to private and that recall. I believe it was just act and for sixteen of twenty nineteen not an initiated act there may have been separate initiated act that provided funding for that highways but this this would been separate from that the mobile that will serve the we did do one of this act okay all right all right yeah that was for that that was for the have seen the right stage and that's where it was okay we'll I was on that was tied in to the okay all right thank you Mr chairman. President Taylor. If passed hemi of approximately how many refunds would be issued. Thank you representative there are those members for you. We identified approximately two thousand seven hundred and fifty vehicle owners that did pay that additional fee and and would likely receive a refund. If this bill was passed. Representative was there are you through represented representative Christian here for the chance to any other questions from committee representative Ryan recognized for a question yes Sir thank you Mr chairman. Senator Blake. On this particular bill. How much was the fee that was applied to all callers will it it was split into two different bills the hybrid fee is a hundred dollars and the electric car fee is two hundred dollars okay sure so it just depends on which one of those vehicles are owned by these individuals what what how that refunded but follow for follow. but this fee that we're talking about are people are veterans that are trying to get automobile tags they're having to pay that fee as of now we're trying to get rid of it all. Okay thank you Mr chairman. Any other questions from committee. Senator you April yes Sir I appreciate a good vote. Anyone to speak for against the bill. Seeing none what's will of committee. Represent where you're recognized. I have a motion do pass in discussing the committee. All in favor say aye. He opposed same accent hearing none congratulates your bill passes. Thank you senator you I thank you also have Senate bill two twenty five you want to run that if if it be okay if the F. and I can stay here because they by the on the impact statement they might want to speak on that. You guys have have a copy of this these efficiencies. The the Those efficiencies came out of the from our state our state fuel taxes which is twenty four and a half cents and you can compare apples to apples in that regular hybrid vehicle that whenever we did this the this this bill creates three tiers whenever we did this there were limited or no plug in hybrid. And to do a plug in hybrid efficiency it would have to be the subject of our individual comparisons this is this is the this is not subjectivist objective and you can do this comparison inefficiency and that's where you're losing losing that the tax revenue and in if you can see there that's it fifteen thousand mile average and and in its proximity that your fifty dollar the and that's why what I went with the fifty dollar fee on on a regular habit and and this is and the plug in hybrid I left at a hundred dollars because that would have to be done subjectively and as at the individual level to to see how that person drove if if you drive a drive an electric hi a plug in hybrid locally then it stays in electric mode but if you drive it over a number miles like if you're going thirty miles or whatever it'll go into the internal combustion engine so it depends on the individual how how that's done so that's why I made this three tiered and that in the in the impact statement you know first I went with fifty dollars for all hybrids until I did the study and found that plug in hybrid were you can't do the objective comparison so that's why I left it at the hundred dollar level but the impact statement come back the same on both of them so in the hybrid range you know it just depends on what level they have and and that and I think in the future that that will be the how how those things rather than all electric you'll have a back up motor so you don't have to. You don't have to rely on that electric over over a long long travel so the but if the FNA wants to speak to how they how they got the impact statement you welcome that Smith you're recognized. Thank you Eliasson's met with the FAA. The first fiscal impact statement that we released did not have the reduced be on the traditional hybrids. So we issued a a new fiscal impact statement Senator Johnson is correct that we were not able to reduce the revenue impact even even with the change to the plug in hybrid vehicles because we are not able to determine which vehicles are regular hybrid vehicles and which vehicles are plug in hybrid vehicles that information is not embedded in the in the vin numbers that information is not included on the certificate of origin so at administratively what we would probably do is prepare forms for individuals when they register in these vehicles to let DFA know whether they were at a regular hybrid vehicle or plug in hybrid vehicle but for purposes of the impact statement we had to assume that all hybrid vehicles would be subject to the reduced fifty dollar fee but you will see we do have one amendment the M. for FY twenty twenty two that number references only six months of collections reduce collections now that we have the effective date so for and at five twenty twenty two that would be up to a five hundred fifty thousand dollar reduction and to the State Highway and Transportation Department find and then for twenty twenty three up to one point one million dollar reduction and and we're happy to answer any questions on the revenue impact. Members if if I may continue. German great this is a those impacts will be taken in general revenues it won't just be out of the highway funds whenever it is what whatever's collected you know like in gaming revenue that was part of this part of this act that whatever's not made up in gaming revenue which we don't have one of those gaming revenue so so you're not you're you're having to take some general revenue right now because of that and that's why but this act out further in the end of January first twenty two so they can have time to to figure out a system and change their systems so so so you can differentiate between those two hybrids and hopefully they'll be something happened with that other gaming so we don't have to take that out just to gaming revenue I don't want to impact negatively our highways because we act we worked really hard for it to get those highways and get those funds but it is a matter of fairness and you know we're want to capture those funds but not over what you know is needed to capture those those funds out of the out of the order of a hybrid vehicles and stuff so I'd appreciate a good vote and. Questions questions committee represent ray you're recognized for a question. Okay Senator I'm sorry I probably haven't had enough caffeine yet this morning but you can fuse me a little bit when you start talking about the gaming revenue and and general revenue because this the statement said the from the FNA says that this is money that's going to be diverted from our dot and and you it is a Jew is a general revenue or is it what actual revenue to R. dot as part of those as part of this act you know if whatever the gaming revenue to didn't come in the was was taken from general revenues so am I am I wrong in that if you want to talk to that. I believe the senators analysis is correct on this issue and we we can certainly look into the issue of if if these funds are not provided to the highway and Transportation Department Fund if they would be made up for general revenue in and get that answer to you. We'll okay follow the follow up good okay we'll. Would it be possible to get that answer before we vote on the bill. We can get that answer for you today but not at the table. It's a little confusing I mean the even for me and not the Senate so I understand what. One question is under I know I know that gaming revenue is made up by general revenue what whatever you know into the highway department but I'm not for sure whether that was in that act that that if if we don't meet the the projections on this hundred dollar two hundred dollar whether that was carried out in general revenue also but I know it was in the gaming side. Because there is a target target to go towards highways and and this whole in that hole act. Any other questions from committee members. We have. Of. Forty one two cents your you I appreciate a good vote I thank you I mean it's it's it's it's a merit matter of fairness and and that I've I've tried to to work with all the parties to to try to limit the the effect on on the general revenues and it still gives the unfairness and and the traditional hybrid and it and also in the plug in hybrid you know it makes that category and I would appreciate a good vote. Okay of anyone here to speak against the bill. He wanted to speak for the bill. Seeing none senator if you have any more comments the FNA you getting comments from different AG Womack we do not register offered are you in favor the bill or you guess bill we're only here to speak against the bill for the purposes of the revenue impact okay thank. Of. Represent requisite to like to ask another question now okay did senator Johnson this is art I have a position on this bill. Not that I know of okay thank you. Any other questions committee and I think I've asked if anyone here to speak for against so what's will of committee. Fee of representative Brian you're recognized. Have a. I would do pass from representative right indiscretion. The generator recognized. Yeah I I I don't know where the rest committees but I I'm not comfortable voting to pass the bill out of committee until I understand the revenue impact a little bit better but that I guess for everybody else's then that's what the committee will do but. That's where I am if if it be okay with the committee can can definitely get what you get with you afterwards and and we'll make sure on that before it gets to the floor and you have that consideration. Well. I'm not sure that I mean letting the bill out of committee is a big step up since it's already passed through the Senate so there's only two more steps I would just like I'm not opposed in in theory to what the bill is trying to do I'm for that but I just want to understand that a little bit better so that's. That's that's where I'm at at this moment. Any other any other questions represent right you're recognized yes Sir up Senator Blake I think the biggest thing that paperwork on were wondering about is the revenue that we've spoken about is is general revenue and then we'll get to game me and and then we got the role but where does this revenue bill it does not go to general revenue goes the highway both the house. Representative Brett you're recognized. Hello. You can withdraw your motion. We have how about how about this we we let definitely check and see if we get an answer and put it back on at the end if I if it be are out of the members. But that that's. What what what is going to pull the bill down right now and then the. If the. Okay. Johnson I think I think in the interest of everybody in the end and let's get the right answer let's put it down and if you wanna come back with the even today it will what what we'll see if I can if I get an answer for forty adjourned I appreciate if they can't do you want do you want to come back down the stars that will come will come back on on that and but if you try to do you want to try to do today possible if not you will put you on the schedule for Thursday and we don't get cancer bridge H. okay members thanks for your time. You will have to share. From a bill hang on just a minute committee. Looking for the one or more. For rescue of representative Watson the chair at this point. Okay committee we have a. Senate bill four oh six. In order for six a. We have record representative Holcomb. Sir you go speak on this bill yes represent you're recognized Sir thank you Sir. Representative Mike Holcomb district ten this is really just a bill to clear up some language if you have the bill in front of you we were there was we will and paid online twenty nine it's an act to amend the law concerning state highway commissioners employees oath of office and for other purposes if you look online twenty nine of we we strike out entire undivided to ten in the reason for that was is there was some confusion whether the those are the highway commission could have another job or not so it actually it actually just clarifies that and used to and just says attention and due diligence to make sure they are take your their duties as a Highway Commission and that's really it in and that you will be glad to answer any questions if you have the. Now if you get if I can answer some more the highway department may so. That that's it Mr chairman any questions by the committee any questions. Representative fielding you have a question okay. A more discussion on this This bill. It was off audience who like to speak for against the bill. We do have a motion represent available. I have a motion to do pass. Committee members all in favor say aye those opposed Like sign. Motion carries it Karygiannis thank you major Mr thank you represent. Next on the agenda representa Miller house bill fifteen twenty four Rep similar you're you ready to present the bill. The approach table you're recognized. The. The. Thank you. Thank you Mr chairman and committee for giving me this opportunity of this bill is relatively simple. I know there's gonna be some discussion about it but what the bill does is require that class one trains. Which are big the biggest trains we have the role for our state law many of them two miles long. Are are even longer. At we're going to put it in the law that they have to have a two man crew no less than two men are two people operating that train. I'm not a. I'm I'm some yellow made I'm. Kind of a. Hard core conservative guy the this statement is going to be made here in a minute this is a union bill a union jobs bill. That I've I don't give a rip about the unions I do care about public safety. And I think all of our communities across the state are doing everything that they can. To improve emergency response times. that can be difficult when you have a two mile long train. Blocking railroad crossings. And you know if you've only got one person out there trying to come to train to let folks through or has to walk a mile after two miles to the back of the train to fix up and walk all the way back you've got I ambulance and needs to get through or go around this can be very costly. And I think it's just a public safety issue there are a lot of states that are doing this already matter of fact. Many of our many of our railroad companies. I already have it as their policy. Because they they they agree it's needed You know. I look at it like I said I don't care about anything the public safety and efficiency there's a lot of reasons not just the not just the blocking of the crossings but also when you got to folks on a two mile long potential ball. Depending on what kind of materials they're carrying thank you for each other way. I can do different things you know I mean it's it's it's good everybody understands that anyhow I've got also I believe of. Representative from from the railroad group here to speak on behalf of the bill I'll a with your permission Mister chair I'd like him to come up try and give us more information to be happy to take any questions Kirven committee specific. In any state may induce yourself any statement you had make going. My name's Wayne Denson. I represent the brotherhood locomotive engineers and trainmen Arkansas. It's Gerald's sale represents smart transportation division we represent trackers also helps the. Okay first I want to thank you Mr chairman and I also like to thank god the committee as a whole for the public service that they provide and also for allowed to speak on this issue today like many of you have a profession separate to this position I'm acting in today. I've been a railroad conductor for over seventeen years now and due to this duality I'm uniquely qualified to testify as to the portents this bill our members work on call twenty four seven three hundred sixty five days a year in unless for blocking crossing we usually remain an afterthought we maintain this afterthought status because our two person crews perpetuate level professionalism that's second to none. I can attest that there's seldom a trip for a conductor or an engineer such as Mr Danson we're we don't remind each other of a safety sensitive issue whether it's a crew out working are crossing protection or a slow order anything that that we might come across the railroad also requires that we have job briefings before work to talk about these issues anytime we encounter anything they require that we both have a job repeating to cover this whatever issue comes up if we don't do that. The pharmacy and representative here was kind enough to mention this only will affect class one railroads class one railroads in the state of Arkansas already have two makers. Also you know they'll say this is a jobs issue this is not a job if you will create one job we wanted to make sure that would affect your lines more make sure would affect small businesses the three class one carriers in the state of Arkansas made over eleven billion dollars profit last year with two people on the trying out what the point of this is. Is that should Wall Street decide on a whim to move to a one man crew demand this of the class one carriers the people are so add this extra protected level in what will happen is if the carriers will come in today and and I'm I'm looking for to have this discussion but you know they'll bring up an issue whether it's a technology technologies to change they would be able to make those changes to one person well answer that simple of the technology changes and move forward all we have to do is come right back to this body you're the best to decide whether say for your constituents and if it's stuck your constituents and they can make those changes. So just look forward to hearing from you one point always want to bring up I think it's pretty important to I don't think there's anyone in this room that we get on airline. With out to people and actually federally mandated to people stay in the pocket at all times the average airline only holds a hundred thirty eight passengers so we value those hundred thirty eight passes that to make sure that we maintain to people in the cockpit. But we're traveling through our communities hundreds and thousands of people every day on dangers loads with the potential to derail potential to walk first responders and so on. So we could affect a higher number than what that one thirty eight so I would hope we can look at it the same way that we look at airlines and extend the same level protections are constituents or to your constituents of the state of Arkansas as we would to the people that are fine but that would for any questions you might have. Anymore comments before we take questions of the yeah I mean I'm not I'm not a very well verses what you're already is but you know we just want to maintain the same thing that we have now I mean this isn't any kind of jobs issue this is a this is just maintain safety and yeah we thank the citizens here in Arkansas deserve to be safe. And you know that's that's about it but yeah we're we're we're here this is kind of how we sit in the KO so you know we have a job reasons accountability of each other as well as were in the cab so that's why we're both here. President Miller anything else for third question I would just I mean I look forward any questions but I would also just remind everyone I didn't bring this bill. To create a job to save a job to do anything I did it because I strongly feel like it's a public safety issue and I've gotten to know while these guys were my very best friends is a conductor on the railroad I've heard story after story after story of of things that have happened out there and it's kind of it's kind of funny the the folks who've come talk to me opposing this bill I've never been in the role of never been on the railroad in the engine doing the job and and so I will listen to the folks who actually boots on the ground doing the work and and so that's why I'm here. Place of all look for any questions thank you first on the list we are represented Tosh. For question. That is I've got it thank you thank you Mr. A couple of questions if the chair will allow first of all I think it would help the committee and I know it would help me us yes but the best way for me to say that is a you mentioned the C. one is so approximately two laws and I understand that's the terminology used for you all which we may not completely understand here on the committee but. Or give me a break down if you can do it briefly main if C. one your classification of the city everyone is two miles long and funder stand you correctly in your testimony you're saying that that's the only thing you're requirement to man. Of commitment to is it if if that's is that correct. No Sir class one just a. Actually class one is there's a class one or class two and class three rail and that depends on how many miles they operate on it doesn't really depend on the length of the train and we're getting to a length of the train is just to give an example just a baseline example some trying to longer some trying to shorter but if you go to a one man crew the way things are currently As Mr Miller brought up representative Miller here you know any instance where we're going to have to go back and kind of crossing to allow first responders through. If there's one person on the train the way we would have to approach that regardless of length and this is just one example regardless of like this we would have to tie down the train release the brakes make sure the train doesn't roll away then go back to make the cut which is virtually impossible with one person because how can you release the brakes from the ground to make sure it's not moving so whether the trains ten cars are two miles long as it's not gonna be possible to make that cut okay Mister followed. Okay it is a policy of. With the training of personnel is you do you have a policy of how long you can. Blocher Blocher crossing on me that is or something hello we don't have a state law to my knowledge Of State and years ago there was one but I'm not sure that it's still in the bay so of actually there is a state law in effect the the the state law that's in fact it's just basically to be one is really unenforceable the way it's written that's the reason why this is I'm sorry I can't hear you sorry the state law is is basically unenforceable the way it's written that's reason it's not brought up very often it's a no obligation nineteen ninety four but As skews me what was the rest your question there as far as walking across if we have any limitations what happens when one or over crossings is I'm not allowed to go back and kind of crossing in less I received permission from Omaha we radio all mall they have to give the conductor myself permission to go back and go through the process of cutting the crossing I can't make that decision on my own. Per your next on the list. Thank you Mr chairman I have a number of questions but I'll break it up the so your teamsters guy right of. And you're representing the cruise well mostly conductors and smart transportation is okay so I guess my first question is is is typically managed by the Federal Railroad the fed's. laws concerning the with the two men yes what railroads in general sure I can answer the question at the FRA does does mandate several laws concerning us same as if a with it with the airlines but anywhere where there's not any law written up. The states have the exclusive rights to route laws that will be more restrictive not less restrictive safety wise than anything the federal government does should the federal government decide to do something more strict it would just supersede what happens on the state level okay follow up missed German follows. so I consider myself but aviation safety expert Potiphar number your service in the in the airforce for forty five years and typically when we look at we have claims of safety issues we have metrics to to back that up so my question is what are the metrics. One and and number two how how how many times that you in no up that a train that they had to stop the training get out break it up let first responders through do you do you have the number of occasions that that's happened in the State of Arkansas I'm not talking about nation what I'm talking state of Arkansas we we don't have that number with this name but I can provide that that's very important question Sir answer to happen because I don't think it happens that often well I mean I've personally been involved in to fidelity's where we had to cut a crossing and allow and was through and we would not have had a conductor there's no telling how long it would be at two suicide I was only trying last night so I am an operating engineer at I don't I don't wanna get just stuck on the crossing for first responders that is an important issue but also we act as first responders should we have a derailment specially for hauling anything dangerous to the community and we also the other point is as. We function as a crew to make sure that we maintain the hours we work yeah we know we work a twelve hour shift plus okay the stock that we can make sure we're Westleigh can alert and in operate safely okay thank you Mr chairman I have a couple of the questions after. We're with a school here we will go in there to take those thank you Mr so In the in aviation world I remember the day when we had to have the fed said you had up for people in the cockpit. In because of technology in the aviation industry and everything that reduced down to three. And then it reduced down to two even international most of the guys sleeping because their plane fly by itself so the I'm sure there's technology in the railroad industry. That compensates yeah we we fly autonomous aircraft all over you know with drones and all that with actually large drones so what what is your argument for sure up for people for the industry I guess that that says that the you really have to have those two up there. Sure let's taking away. The fact that your teamsters guy in Europe sure is going to do not what like them like they're like no no I'm I'm I'm sorry but it does because this happens all the time with the FAA in federal you know when they come to testify in front of a federal committee and everything and you have the union and you have the airline owners and pilots association they come testify there is a safety issue it's a safety issue and it's not always a safety issue a lot of times it's you know because the benefits to you know their their membership sure sure I can answer questions easily the pre nineteen eighty five Transat five crew members on there are sure you all remember these B. committees we did away the caboose because of technology we we agreed that the it wasn't something that we needed to function with with five of six people are trying we went down to two people trying now as far as technology is concerned Trying carriers of a been trying to log drug along kicking screaming something we've we propose and work with the Congress to implements PTC's positive train control now they'll act like its autopilot like you've mentioned on a on a plane the technology's not anywhere close to what the airlines have as far as that technology it it just simply doesn't work the same and as of two thousand eight this is technology that that they brought to. Everyone's attention late sixties they fought against until then two thousand eight nineteen nineties we ask for a fight against it two thousand eight is federally mandated that we would develop this technology and we think it's a great safety enhancer but the problem is is the rebels continually file for an extension where they don't have to implement this technology. One final question was German cricketer. If you make a quick I've got several people and so if if you want to get this equipment okay thank you Mr saw a in Arkansas let's say you have one one crew operator in this state Tennessee requires to are you gonna stop that train in Arkansas and put another crew member on or before it goes into Tennessee I would answer that if if they're gonna fall to if they're gonna fall Tennessee all they would have to I would say it's no different than trucking industry laws were whites differences in height differences in actual differences the change status thank you thank you Mr. Okay next the homeless representative rank you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman My question is. Why is the collective bargaining process not being used to. Derive an agreement here it seems like. We're being a we're being asked to inject ourselves into the middle of an issue that. Probably should be collectively bargain between the union and the railroads well the problem is that I want to work on the collective Arkansas we keep things completely differently just work strictly on safety issues legislative issues but collective bargaining side we do have crew conscious it remains at that we grew to nineteen eighty five one like I've talked about and those of those do add protection this is just a safety issue for us it's just a level of protection and I try to leave any of the current concert is any of the agreement issues to those guys that's more within their will house and what we do nine states have already passed this so I mean. It's a it's a common sense bill and the. The. Right I would I would answer that. Sorry. I would say this also and I would like to remind Committee all these gentlemen are here and and they do they are supportive of this bill they write this bill native have this bill drafted they didn't fall this bill I did I'm not a teamsters guy I'm not a union guy I don't work for the railroad. I'm a state representative from avis breaks. And I feel like this is common sense that it needs to be done as far as your collective bargaining and I understand your question honestly right now I don't know it seems like there's already an agreement because mostly carriers. To my knowledge all have this is a policy I don't understand the argument you know I'm and so that seems like we all are in agreement except for I just don't want to be law they want to be there policy as a lawmaker I feel like it should be law As a because it does affect our our the safety of our state. Do you have a question well I'll let it but I do I do but I'm away I'm okay of the blast okay next on the list representative Christiansen you're recognized thank you Mr chairman. Warren Gerald we've discussed this in the past over how we personally feel about Cruz and things but my question is is there a president emergency right now for you are feeling pressured that the real roads are likely to pull a conductor offer your train crew and and the technology that's in place right now B. B. utilized to be that second man in the cab so my question is whether nine states have have passed this or not as to whether we're the right form that we're good with that we're going to hear this I understand what representative Miller saying he makes excellent points but he too is questioning in saying this is already policy on the carriers and nine states have passed it and that's based on what they see with the ninth circuit court of appeals overturning some of the FRA position so I'm I'm I'm wondering if there is an emergency feeling that you need to get this passed into law to prevent the carrier from doing something and they're by circumventing the collective bargaining process where we going with this. Sure the. One simple answer is every time the accrue boards a train we have the merge the feeling because every time we we border trying to take safety serious but the other thing is that I'll bring up is I believe the real carriers representation here in their opposition to this should answer your question for you if if they had no plans on attempting to move to one person crew regardless of of what that best interest for the state safety they would be here opposing this bill. If they are the following. If they are. As they are right now in opposition to this do they have a plan in place or have you been told of a plan in place where there would be support vehicles and other things that could come do the very things that you're talking about you're not discuss two men and a cab of but that's beside the point we're talking about an issue where we're asking states to regulate interstate commerce nine circuit court appeal notwithstanding. We're also muddying the water here in this discussion this morning between train links and criticize and those are two different issues. Actually the only time trying like this come up is just a couple times this is reference so if that if that's the case I apologize for that. what was your other question. We're we're going back to the emergency do you from do you feel that there is. A policy that is imminent. You're trying to circumvent any other any other collective bargaining or issues with the real world well I can take summers Mr Carson last night I was on the train with the rocket propelled grenades so that some emergency repair in Arkansas I don't know what is. We got to maintain the safety level here are so. You have no idea what we're all. Represent Christian I would also answer questions we. We've we as a legislature. Run bills vote on bills passed bills everyday were in session not I mean sometimes based on emergency. sometimes not sometimes because we feel like it's good common sense policy that's my position on this if there is an emergency I don't know if obviously. In our country in our society we're gaining new technology every day. and and there's no doubt that the railroads are doing the same thing and I am told the opposition to this bill you know twenty years from now. That's the figure they gave not me. When they're ready to go autonomous with their trains and they're saying that will represent Miller your bill. Is going to prevent us from doing research and and all the stuff and and and and gaining new technology and you're going to prevent us from going all Thomas in the state of Arkansas. And my response is this body convenes every two years. And you know twenty years from now when they're ready to do that. I'll come down if I'm still alive okay advocate for for changing this law they will be needed at that point that's what we that's what we convene every two years as of right now and until that time happens. I feel like it's a safety issue it's a common sense issue of and that's what that's what I'm here. Your committee given the lead way today on usually on not to question but since we this is going to be a pretty big topic I manually Bledsoe representation go ahead with the thank you Mr chairman. Josh I understand that represent Miller that I do understand what you're saying is is a former investigator and Transportation myself I still would like to know from from Wayne and Gerald if there is something coming down the pike that either union Pacific or other class one carriers have stated that they intend within a certain amount of time to eliminate the conductor in the cab and if that's why this legislation coming forward. Well we can all we can to testify to you because class one cares no we don't run their plans by us just to let you know but to intestacy NO you have CEOs from a U. P. and other carriers that have come out and stated as much that they're planning to move to one man for. I understand and follow all healed. The. Telephone industry do the same thing United auto workers face it when the automated assembly lines and added robotic welders every industry has been facing this even the cell phones that we use today we don't have to go through an operator it's a natural evolution of what we're doing and technology I do see this. And and represent I understand your safety concerns were handling the safety at the moment. I still feel that that were being asked to do collective bargaining in the wrong form that's what we have collective bargaining between the carriers on the brotherhood's and failing that we have the national labor relations board not asking state legislators to use their time and money to to do that I'm I'm I'm in sympathy with what you're saying I think it's the wrong for. Okay next on the list representative Bryant you're recognized. Sir thank you Mister chair is two quick questions because I appreciate that you're not trying you to put aside for United this issue and forty when you go search the topic that's about all you find this is a is a labor relations dispute but with that with the note that the FRA's not excepted service so they're not pro union or anti union they don't have unlike the Federal Aviation Administration that has that the way in their decisions why do you suppose that they made the decision that there's no need for criticized regulations because there's no data to show to people making any safer. Well I don't know why they're for a that that's been a standard forever in this last a furry Director I had no study no nothing he just felt that it was. The regular he would pull I guess he was against regulation and. So that's kinda where we are the pre the previous administration had studied this and basically the study was taken and put on the backburner put on hold and that's already did challenge some of the state laws underneath the last director in the U. S. District Court I've already lost and the not court stated that we do have the ride on the state level states rights in the interest of safety to regulate anything that the federal government doesn't regulate and my thoughts on what the federal government is in this is been quoted numerous times from the FRA and from the Department transportation that they feel are smaller sites on the smaller level state level committee level that it's better address because you we have a better idea of what the infrastructure can hold here just for instance you know if a run across the high plains desert out west. It may make sense to do some things that it doesn't make sense to to do in downtown little rock okay. And then my my final question would be is in your opening statement yeah made it a point to. To make you feel like most companies that operate on the rails safety is paramount you don't have your toolbox talks you know potential job losses that means said why would you believe management would not continue their two person rule in the state of Arkansas I think it's a simple answer what time is not a management decision and I know that sounds funny to say because managers gonna come down to it but we operate in the real world and I know you guys are aware of this is it's going to be a shareholder decision and what they end up looking at a lot of times it's the bottom line and when it comes to the bottom line they're going to they're going to force management to make the decisions that they think will better balance their their dividends. Representative Brooks you're next on the list for question. Thank you Mr chairman to just real quick brief ones C. mentioned nine states currently have legislation dealing with this of the forty one other states how many of them are are currently mandating or how many than currently or operating a cruise with just one person. on class one carriers zero at this stage. Clinton all the questions carriers in nine states operating on a two person crews Vaught Mr follows in how often in the end and you're with you're recognized alright yes okay how often have the request here in the state of Arkansas that you run with less than two the currently they haven't what this long what what we're shooting for here is to prevent that should come up okay so did it if I understand based on some of the questions is not necessarily an issue currently. what we did is issue currently just because we see that's where the actors are moving to the stated is such a and like I said before as you'll see in their opposition here today that there is. Can prove that their wanting to move toward this direction thank you. Watson your next service. You're good okay. President of rye you're recognized for a question yes thank you thank you Mr chairman. I was first thing I want to ask you is what percentage of trains here in the state. use only one person. It would be possible for us to answer that and right here we don't have information with some of the short lines class ones classes are not questions class class to class three roads they do operate we do some changeovers with them and they'll operate with the. With one person but currently at the time a hundred percent of class one railroads which is what we're asking for operate with two people so okay Bonser. Of a okay Oklahoma. Texas. Louisiana Tennessee Mississippi Missouri and what are the. What are the laws there in those states concerning this situation. Okay Oklahoma is running a bill currently as we speak it just passed unanimously through their Transportation Committee as of last week a Louisiana is running one currently as well and so is Missouri now as far as east of the Mississippi not able to answer that question right now do you know there's twenty six other states are proposing saying legislation throughout the United States okay follows away for one more okay. The guys state chamber of commerce now they're gonna really be important within this situation of. We're because is going to all of our towns. How do they stand with this situation state chamber hasn't reached out to us so I'm not sure where they stand on this Then you mention we we travel through all your town city and I would say that's exactly the point of this legislation is that we want to maintain the safety level as we travel through all your doubts. Thank you issue president Reagan he recognized for a question. I'm actually got withdraw question is. Okay. The representative berry your phone get this. No. Okay thank you Mr so your analogy of a rocket build propelled grenades that that really doesn't mean anything to me because we we carry hazardous waste and bombs and explosives all up and down the interstate everyday of the week with one driver in the capsule that's more trying to you know use that for a safety you know for your calls for safety which I don't agree with but I and I I agree with the representative Brooks asked the question I don't think why he has a lot along rails but the so we'll see of the forty states the rest of the states is only nine states but basically what you're saying it's got in common sense because they've got this law and I would say that only want that common sense they were they were the first states to approach that but there's only nine states right there there's not state's ever practice and procedure in what you've mentioned on the truck I would mention that we do carry a lot larger lows and that. The firm you're recognized for a question. Thank you Sir chair that earlier he would reference like the length of the train in the time it takes for one conductor like traveling to go handle something so am I right in understanding that one of the I guess strongest arguments for safer would be the ability for two people to thanks but often I kennel that distance sooner sure that would be better sure that's that's one of this one arguments is any time that we have a derailment any time that we have a lot crossing that that does make it really possible for us to make those moves were impossible I think representative Christiansen mention. I guess maybe the carriers talk damage about having someone traveling out but the problem is if you had someone travel out to try to take that position is a lot of areas we run into the you couldn't travel to that area we run along the river with the mountains on one side in Arkansas River on the other side and we've all seen the the union Pacific trucks are being tracked that have Quitman on where they can run down the rails of the reason those existence because the only way to get into those areas is the other I'll follow follow this might be the our because you're you're in the transfer are you in the transition okay so earlier you said you know we sit in the cab side by side so my question is if like how does it make it safer F. two football starting from the same start point if the travel the length of the train along and all the so I stay inside the cab I am the operator of the train and then the conductor assisted any duties needed of slow orders warnings that might come up on anybody pulled on the crossing that you know he he has about over there they can stop trying also if if we have any breakdowns as a conductor I hit the ground running if we hit somebody I hit the ground running if we have a derailment let's say were hauling something that's has meant as soon as that that train derails I have to get off the train. Hi Taylor where the derailment takes place take extra paperwork with me that way should we have first responders are able to show up I can hand the paperwork over to them or report what is exactly on the train the way they can better respond but doing so I have to radio ahead to my engineer on the head in that way he can reported Delmon on to the first responders thank you yes. Connectionless represent Christiansen you have a question I have one question thank you Mr chairman. Hello gentlemen the question the impression is is that the state should reach out to you and that's why they're running these and all these other states so did the state to reach out to you or is this an organized push to solicit representatives to affect criticized on the state level rather than on the federal collective bargaining. Actually our office wouldn't have anything to do with collective bargaining we haven't brought up collective bargaining here today because of snow or asking for now my office is a legislative office and we do have legislative office in the city and they do attempt to enact any type of safety legislation on the federal level the same as we do on the state level in do we communicate of course we communicate follow out why would we can. It. Follow up if that's correct and I'm using the term incorrectly on the collective bargaining the the general question is though is this an organized push on the part. Of the railroad engineers and conductors to well get this into legislation across the board through twenty six states and then others rather than try to address it from the top down on the federal level. As I introduce myself but you know I'll let everyone know here that I'm the state legislative director have no power over any other state have no power over any national client I take no part in a national plan other than pushing for national legislation anything that happens on the state level of concern Wayne myself coordinate because we have similar interest but other than that no there's no huge coordinated national push that I'm a part of because I have no bearing on those decisions. A representative present also I would I would commit to that Gerald R. Lanier one of these guys came to me. About this bill this is not where this came from okay I have like I said I want my very best friends is a conductor and I've gotten to know several of the guys engineers conductors ones that operate the trains and it's been a discussion amongst us for probably about three years now. And I said you know what I have no problem read in the bill of. To do that I don't even know Gerald. Our our wine so that's where that came from I'm not a part of anything as far as what they are I I've not talked to any other states I'm a I'm a lowly Arkansas representative and so that's where the stem from. Your fund managers that's not that's not the issue so the gentleman with you but again there is a push and wine and I have discussed this for and and and it has been stated there twenty six states running the same thing essentially simultaneously so that tells me that this larger than just one state issue because they work for a union that has a larger issue causes have been everywhere sure I mean obviously there's there's the numbers just the clarity I was trying to right there's there's role roads all over the place I think you know the the folks operate members concerned and those nearby so. You know I'm not going to die there's a place we deal with that all the time. with a lot of the bill. If the one issue that would be a and the. Okay committee member representative Springer you're recognized. Thank you Mister chair I would just like to have this Thank you Mr I was just up to have this moved along because some of the same people of repeating the same things that I think is we need to move along and hear the other side so we can decide what needs to take place without proper motion. The motion to move along. What what's what's the most eligible. We have. Okay of. Anything else president Miller for we for you move on. Okay of we have to speak against the bill are you will go through your testimony okay we had to speak against the bill Blass the. Of Paul Benham is that correct. Paul would you approach the. Table that then fire seventy makes the. Thank you Mr chairman members committee I'm Paul Denham Hammer. All right of VOL been on the Friday law firm representing the Arkansas railroad association. And I'm speaking against the house bill fifteen twenty fourth the Arkansas River Road association consists of a three class one railroads operating in Arkansas Paul would you put my additional closer please yes Sir you should be kind of selfie today this chair or. All right is this better much better thank you all righty of class one railroads in Arkansas union Pacific BNSF and Kansas city southern. A legislative criticized mandates such as house bill fifteen twenty four simply lacks justification disregards the freight industry strong safety record. It impedes the industry's ability to compete and innovate and interferes with decades of history of collective bargaining. It's also simply is on authorized by federal law. And therefore be invalid invalid if adopted. Congress has it has vested the railroad Febrero demonstration with authority to establish national standards in every area of real road safety. Congress directed that laws regulations and orders related to road safety. Nationally uniform. To the extent practicable it's also enacted legislation stating that the surface transportation board. Jurisdiction over transportation by rail carriers is exclusive. When federal agents. When federal agencies regulate in an area. Related railroad safety and operations states were not permitted to use their police power to enact any other regulation we've talked about the ninth circuit decision I think it's very important to read that decision carefully because it's based on the failure to follow the federal administrative procedures act in does not. Address any substantive issue of preemption or control. Nine states may have adopted legislation similar to this but there challenges being made on the preemption issue and other substantive issues and both remain unresolved. Railroad operators must continue to have the ability to innovate in the future and remain safe and efficient including allowing operations of fewer than two people there are no imminent efforts that I am aware of. To move to one man crew. But as noted innovation and technology to curse and win the balance between innovation and efficient operations and safety warrant moving to a smaller group. That will happen just like it is referred to as going from a five man crew down to a two man crew today. Single crew of single person crucial widely used on rail operations throughout the world. In a committee shortline in some passenger lines in the United States the safety record of those will road is comparable to person operations. It may be tempting to assume that two man crews to be safer than a one man crew but a careful analysis of store causes for safety improvements show that tractor and equipment expenditures are much more important to safety in the size of. There's no data showing any correlation between criticized and safety improvements. Trying criticized. Has a store could be a matter of collective bargaining in accordance with the railroad labor act safety and technology improvements that are the primary catalyst for negotiations relating crew sacks as a result of these improvements rail labor and for rail management have agreed to by the collective bargaining process. To route to reductions in the crew size as we said from five now to to these reductions were achieved without compromise to safety as witnessed by the client in rail employee injuries train accidents in grade crossing collision rates as railroad crew sass has fallen rail safety has improved. Safety concerns are often cited as the justification one of the most egregious and dangerous misconceptions is the idea of an additional crew members will be beneficial following a rail accident that argument is simply misplaced and without support. Conductors have no special training they're not required to be CPR certified. It's more likely that emergency responders will arrive at the scene of the incident for the conductor can walk back the two mile link the trying plus the one mile it probably takes for the train stopped. When the responders have they have the training and they have the equipment to assist. Our system calling for national safety protocols are well established and widely understood. Are at the core of a safe and efficient response the reality is that national trading operating protocols instruct train crews to do three things following an accident secure the trying secure the area and evacuate if necessary they're not firefighters they are not experts in hazardous materials they are not first responders or matrix. Yes railroads emphasize safety best their number one priority we are continuously looking for innovative ways to enhance the safety of their employees communities and customers they invest significant amounts of resources and training research and development and public education all with the goal of increasing and improving rail safety the example that was mentioned earlier the positive train control railroads have invested over ten billion dollars in implementing that technology. Extensions yes extensions were needed because of the extensive rail operations across the country it was simply too difficult if not impossible to meet the original time deadline to install positive train control but is now in place it is now operational. Is that allows for enhanced communication functions that allow the locomotives to be shut down in the event of operator man man made failure bottom line the dispatcher has the ability to show the locomotive down if an engineer this is a signal or if the oncoming trains are on the same track you just not intended to act as radar or to provide a autonomous operation. The whole process mandated house bill fifteen twenty Force ill advised particularly at a time when the US department of transportation is championing increased automation of our national highways. Such rules preventing the railroad industry from efficiently and effectively deploying similar technologies make no sense again there is no imminent decision being made or offered to install that autonomous operation all the line by a licensed it does happen instance classification yards in in other areas. In the light of the Interstate nature of rail transportation federal railroad administration's road regulated national safety the lack of data demonstrating multiple person crews are safer than single person crews and potential negative impact from man day increase as legislation on superior technological improvements and the historical role of collective bargaining addressing the issue of crew size state should not attempt to legislate in this area House Bill fifteen twenty four impermissibly infringes on a subject that has been deemed to be preempted by federal law. For these reasons Arkansas railroads association respectfully urges the committee to reject house bill fifteen twenty four in its attempt mandated Arkansas only limit on train crew sizes in the face of no empirical evidence that such a law is needed and a bald attempt to regulate a subject for which it has no authority the issue is a national narrative states should not create a checkerboard of crew sass mandates for interstate railroad operations. I'll take questions per share questions from committee. Represent Springer you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman I guess my question is I'm trying to understand your point with respect to states making of regulations regarding their roles I'm trying to compare and you say that there is some support there are some circuit court opinions regarding this particular topic I'm trying to weigh between of this our state this house of representatives of passing legislation where there's federal legislation that has already been dated or is in control of law so how do you weigh between those two we just recently passed legislation or we have a conflict with federal law so how do you respond to of this particular legislation conflict with federal law four in other words what I'm talking about is that the the the law with respect to abortions there's already a federal law that regulates that already however the state of Arkansas has gone ahead and and in his proposed new legislation to address state to abolish that so would you please explain to me the difference between the two with respect to this regulation with respect to railroad well let me answer it this way representative. It areas where the federal government has acted. States may not act so if a state attempts to adopt the laws that it's conflicts with a federal law or regulation is preempted in the federal rule prevails so in that so in this instance so you got it so so you follow follow so you saying that if this law is passed that of the federal that the federal government is going to going to do away with that then I can speak before court to affirm that a long time ago but I will say this there at least three federal laws that preempt state action that in improperly or adversely affect railroad operations. So there is a basis for preemption over well let me I'm I'm I'm just trying to understand the difference between the two on one hand you saying that you got a in fact the law here in Arkansas to preempt the federal law and then now you're saying that well if we enact this law we go to the federal laws you can't do it because the federal law I'm not I guess I'm not understand thank you. A representative bearing here recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman in it so The former administration the previous administration they had looked at this at a ruling that would mandate crew size that correct. Of in the final numbers yeah the the of the original map attempt was made for a long but but the Obama administration's and and nothing was changed under the the trump administration but would you agree with this statement I think this says it all the challenge that we had was that we had anecdotal evidence suggesting two man crews would improve performance. But we didn't have empirical evidence that would make it safer. So the FRA decided to withdraw the proposed rule because no regulation of train crew staffing is necessary or appropriate for real road operations to be conducted safely and you agree with that statement that was a statement made by the F. or a from what I understand the if the when the Obama administration proposal I gave a notice of proposed rulemaking. And then studies were conducted over a period of time I think perhaps five years and the Reagan Committee the. Yes but the trump administration issued a notice of withdrawing the proposed rule making and in that statement they. Gave the report that you just read they did not find over that five year period any empirical evidence of a correlation between two man crew and railroad safety now as a note noted earlier there has been a decrease. Concurrent with but it's a decrease in and axons an increase in safety conversely concurrent with the production and train sized is there a correlation everyone was not found but it does exist thank you. Any other questions committee. Okay thanks very testimony. speaking for the bill William my food. Are you may if I've got that wrong pronounce your name may fix you may I know I was close would you. If. Within five years have you may proceed. Thank you Mr chairman thank you committee members my name is William me for to. I'm a member of a smart to transportation you work for the railroad for seventeen years as a conductor I just like to. Talk a little bit about why didn't why the need for two members on a to persons on a crew. Lot of times we encounter emergency situations Fatalities at railroad crossings. Train may go emergency and block over crossing we need someone to be able to get down there to. Fix the situation the. Especially as possible and as soon as possible allow for first responders to Bill to address the situation. The main the main issue. At I. see if you have a one person. On the. On a train is when you have a an accident a crossing or emergency at a crossing. how. Is that one person to be able to get there to Cut the train crossing for the. merge personnel or or anyone anyone that providing some assistance to. Whether being injured person or or block crossing to get to. People through into their homes The issue at hand would be. With one person they would have to. Will tie the whole train down. And somehow try to be able to. Could a crossing by themselves. And that's to. A very just to that would be very difficult situation for any one person to. To be able to complete by themselves. Also I like to. Just make a year statement about with the ninth circuit court of appeals ruled it on the. Two person. VOL and they said that to. States may have more stringent stringent laws as long as they're not incompatible with federal laws. That's awesome. Any questions from committee representative right you're recognized for a question yes Sir yeah of questions do you Sir at this present time isn't there to people own ever trying. In Arkansas yes there is Sir okay. Any other questions committee thanks for your testimony. speak against Randy Zook ready would you identify yourself you may proceed. If if you I we can understand you better. Raise the. Brainteaser Arkansas state chamber of commerce I can't add anything to Paul Bennett's testimony that makes that's worth your time so I won't waste any more of it than is absolutely necessary I've got a couple of three very brief points to make. And I guess the biggest on Senate listen all the testimonials especially since the report general Barry had to say about. Technology and transportation and technology changes we we dig ourselves into deep ditches every time we try to impede or resist or slow down changes in technology we have seen in just the last year it Vance's in the adoption and uses of transportation that are mind boggling we've moved at least ten years on a lot of time lines in the last twelve months because of the pressures of the pandemic so it's not difficult for me at all to recognize that the transportation industry is going to move faster than any of us can imagine fully expect to live long enough with a little bit a lot to see autonomous vehicles autonomous I don't even I don't know about autonomous trains that's certainly not inconceivable but autonomous airplanes is again general berry pointed out these are these are very sophisticated technologies that can be employed and are being employed with these investments of safety by these railroads all across the country. Again we we do ourselves harm when we try to enter a market forces the transportation economics model is a very complex matter their constant comp competitive shifts that take place as technology and other investments pay off we see the balance between rail transportation truck transportation river transportation all being influenced constantly on a day by day basis and again it would be I think ill advised to try to interfere with that and finally the point about a patchwork of states the idea of people having to a border to or or get off the train at that texture canner West Memphis or McGhee my home town a long term real road town it's just it's it's silly on its face and we we are walking into a complex issue without anything to gain by that kind of a patchwork or checker board of of of of of regulation again I can add a thing of any value to what Paul Benham had to say but I appreciate your time thank you very much hope your vote against this proposal following dismiss alone will cause a good questions represent Springer you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair would you kindly give us an example of this new technology that you're speaking with respect to that's going to be implemented on the trains that you're talking about is our I'm I'm I think that the ten billion dollar investment that the railroad should be made in the positive train control system is is is rife with technology specifically for the computer chips signals all kinds of of of flashing lights than in controls positive control of a train itself the a million on a much more sophisticated dead man switch all kinds of things that they put in continue to put in so are you aware that these things are being operated without the need of an individual's on the train or any other place all I know I'm not suggesting that I'm suggesting I can envision that all too far down the road okay so you're not saying that there would not be a need for an individual no no not at all I just think this is a collective bargaining issue that needs to stay in collective bargaining thank you very much thank you any other questions for this is a thank you thank you for your testimony next to to testify for the bill Patrick Quinn. Patrick entity issue seventy may proceed. My name's Patrick Quinn I'm here to for the bill to answer a as an average Joe I've worked at the university railroad out North Little Rock for eleven years and the. First off when I started to railroad with a lot of lot of Gaza worked with the old head used to stay your your brother's keeper you watch after the other person for safety purposes. And this it was enjoyment for me to realize that because specially with my military experience I was in the Arkansas National Guard for ninety years. When I get when I stepped off the cattle Court Fort Benning Georgia. We were taught that same principle your brother's keeper safety you're watching yourself you watch your back you watch the back of your fellow person and my thing is the safety and extending further the railroad community with safety in our communities I mean I live in Bryant riboside a high school I can hear the train as it comes through downtown Bryant. All it takes and I know they talk a lot about. The safety equipment that we have PTC EMS all this different stuff. If you have one engineer up there running he falls asleep. That EMS system kicks in because the training to emergency you can go I do believe forty miles per hour on a loaded train that as a curve and then you can high string the training you can have an ammonia car back there derail puncture and within a one mile area around that train you would have my family die and if the school was in session you would have all those children die. And I just feel like the state to the community is being neglected. That's the issue. I mean that's why what I've been told my little civics is representatives are here to protect the life of your community project allowed liberty property. That Cardi rails it's going to show a life good for property. All four. All four I I feel like the railroads all for money and that's the issue. With my experience I have one more semester and I graduate with a software engineering degree from liberty university. I see a lot of issues with their state of the art system first of all as an engineer and a conductor when you put of a train engine it uses software for windows ninety eight. Most of your computers in here probably use windows ten let's use an apple. And it's just they say there is so advance but I don't see the advancement there. There's always an issue with technology will fail and you need the human counterpart there. And I can answer any questions for anybody here. Miss Quinn I think we have one question of a representative Christiansen you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman. How many derailment Sir have you been involved in just out of curiosity with hazardous materials for it has impacted the community. What okay. Can you tell me a little bit about that were that was that was it all timer what happened was as I was dog catching that means I went out to go get a train with another group. As we're going through all time or they're the sidings right there the train was going into the siding the switch split a hazardous tank car tipped over back came over the number of cars that derailed they would all talk to each other and the tank car was leaking there. The conductor responded before the first responders did in both the US be me and the other engineer they were there in the band I got to witness it we were there on site telling people they need to leave the area and find the information about the car so that when the first responders get there they know how to respond the first responders when they arrive on scene they don't know what's on your training they have to get with a conductor. To find out what's on your training. What's the I'm sorry go ahead that's why we have to have paperwork up there that says what's on our train. And how to respond to that it to respond to that has been up there. An engineer can do it because he has to be on the legal motive you have to have somebody to step down on the ground boots on the ground to walk back there. Final directly. June ninth nineteen eighty five was the day the panel of will not forget and that is when a cop bill trying coming into pine blow from the south had a son can't on the rails and ultimately I believe it was thirteen cars of hazmat that derailed that was in my fire district I was responsible for that district I responded when that happened we did get with the engineer at that point because we we could not the conductor was blocked because of the wreckage but we do get the paperwork on the train we set up a command post we know what the procedure is we probably thirty two thousand gallons of ethylene oxide the next morning and thirty some odd thousand gallons of butyl acrylate about four o'clock in the next morning. Very likely had we not had the. Quick response of our of our law enforcement and fire service at that time the train crew could not work as fast as they need to do so they are part of the team when you come to first response of there is nothing here that I'm saying it is against anybody all the real road to the train crew but we did have a fourteen agency command post for almost two weeks there. And it could have been a disaster it blew out about three thousand windows to close for my point is it is a team effort not just the engineer or conductor remembers on the train and that is why the railroad companies and are often in communication with your emergency management coordinators with every single county in this state that's part of what are we M. coordinators do is try to make sure when there is a problem that it mitigates as fast as it can I do understand what your concern is but one first response gets there they want everybody to be on the line. I got a question is that a question saying. So my question is is are you going to stay on scene or would you stay with your trying or follow what the first responder says to do. What you're incident commander sister. From my experience with dealing with the pine bluff that responded out there they still want us there they never cleared to clear this out they wanted to know what was in the House ministerial absolutely so I do understand that and and whether you have one or two people whether it's one or two people in the cab you're still going to have that information available for first response is that correct. Yes that's required thank you. Of any other questions from committee. Okay thank you miscreant cannabis state into that group. If you need a civic was really worried about safety wise arm C. C. an automated system now which is the rail emergency system. I've had people crossings asked me that before they call the box and it's an automated system rather than a response person there. Sir thank you Mister queen free testimony we have no one else to speak against the bill higher we do have another Frederick for sure is that correct to speak for the for the bill I called a lot worse and weirder fuchsia yes Sir. Do yourself you may proceed I appreciate you chairman I appreciate all members being here give me the opportunity to speak first off I'd like to tell you all that. The the. The impression that you're getting that this is done for collective bargaining is an absolute joke. I've been employed to the universe of growth for seven years I've worked a total of forty six months that's how will our collective bargaining agreement works This is one hundred percent to do a safety I'm not here to talk about collective bargaining I'm not here to talk about. How much money railroads are paid or the you know that all that's irrelevant what is relevant is the fact that we have. Hazardous material. B. and B. in traverse through our local communities not just interstate commerce is being affected we service many many small towns here in the state of Arkansas. And this team that we have. We want to maintain our number of team members. For sure not because of a financial issue I trust me is not because of a financial issue I'm going broke working for the railroad. It's one hundred percent about safety I don't understand how anybody can not see how having one person and it may it may be a misconception of how the trains are actually operated just to clarify real quick the the engineer never gets off locomotive. He's responsible for moving this train back and forth he's responsible for handling the train and train forces The conductor is responsible for everything else. All the cars behind the locomotives to the knowledge of what's in the car said how much the car's way how much how long the guards are the number of operative breaks the conductor is one hundred percent responsible for that now that the one thing I haven't heard ask is if if. If you get rid of a crew member is is such a big priority here then nobody's asked who are we get rid of her or get rid of engineer who we can you know get or the conductor nobody knows because it hasn't been. Finaliza has been really thought of this whole process of getting one getting rid of a crew member. I'm not as well Spokane youth you'll you'll see as a couple other guys here but one thing I've always been proud of is the fact access here talk to anybody about anything to tell the truth about. It doesn't bother me to be the sacrificial lamb. I will tell you this. As a member of a local community. Because I've been a member of a local community for more time. Being employed by the road then I have working for the railroad. It bothers me to know what's in these trains. How long these trains are the number of accidents we have not just in the state of Arkansas everywhere but it bothers me to know that that we would be willing to get rid of a team member. In the in a safety sensitive situation like that. It's it's not just about Interstate Commerce being affected your effect in. Towns all the way from south Arkansas from elder radio was there yesterday. Poplar bluff Missouri all the way every town in between here and there bald knob Jonesborough. It's imperative that we keep somebody or keep two people on these trains simply due to the the railroads lack of. I would say care. Sleep is an issue I'm pretty sure most of you all are aware of the fact that. We work twelve hours. We get ten hours of rest and they were called again. You can have a life you can't you can't. You can't perform your duties as a family member and be well rested. For this job. lack of sleep is an issue on the road David Dade my my understanding was they were they were told to implement some type of schedule or some type of of. Some type of way to make sure we were rolled well rested in my seven years of employment with the railroad. I've not seen it done. I work longer. I'm home for a short period of time. As far as the quality of trains. Has drastically decreased we've cut hundreds and hundreds of Carmen who are responsible for inspecting these trains. To make sure the brakes actually work. To make sure air flow goes through the trains and and we can stop it if need be we've taken away too many members out of the office team to be safe and efficient. We've had we had so many reports here lately of of train accidents Two thousand five sure everybody's aware of the situation Texarkana I had a big propane propane explosion caused by train. The derailment that Patrick was talking about had hazardous material on it there at all timer. We hauled trains the day before yesterday there's a train coming out of Texas fifteen thousand feet long. I wouldn't want to be responsible for knowing that I had an opportunity to. To assist in making this a safer situation by having that extra person on the train whatever this train comes through downtown Benton and the rails. And. God knows what happens. Like I said it's that that's far as money I made better money before I came to work for the railroad. The railroad has satisfied financially broken me. I've had personal experiences. Where I have had to play the first responder the fact that I was heard earlier that that I'm not the first responder. To an incident whenever something happens you are trained is absolutely ludicrous. The The rule book for union Pacific that we go by the General because of operate rules. That it's a decent size book is probably three inches thick. Hundred percent about safety. When we get to collective bargaining there's nothing about safety in it I don't understand why the collective bargaining is being brought up as an issue. When when we're talking about safety it doesn't make any sense to me. Mr shape the I am not trying could you show no trying room I could talk all day go ahead we've got another we've got another bill that says we have a question on the table so if you don't mind go ahead take a questions of the representative very you're recognized thank you Mr chairman so I appreciate your service to our community into commerce because is very important to our economy that I base a lot of my decisions on you know I believe. I use a single time in god we trust everybody else bring documentation in there as been no documentation there's no evidence. To the support of the issue about two man crews so where is the data where is the do you have data or documentation to to say otherwise it's been established by the FRA and all these all the other transportation agencies out there do I personally have that on myself no Sir I do not but I tell you there there have been lines established to documents. and and not just not just two people crew but you know technology has been brought up a lot today and how much. How much technology can be trusted as far as trains go and carrying this hazardous material and I can testify firsthand that this technology has been an absolute joke since it was implemented we actually have a stab list a line of communication to to keep record of technology of it felt or technology failure events you know they got rid of the boost to that and replaced it with an ELT and end of trying to device and that device if you're not aware is used to relieve all the air pressure from the rear of the train. In case of an emergency. I would say sixty five seventy percent of the trains I get on. That technology has failed. You can still plug it but you have no idea your air pressure alter the change the rear of the train It Carmen on inspected on so you don't know whether or not all your breaks are really working because they got rid of all Carmen. PTC yes I've invested a lot of money a whole lot of money and it doesn't work. Sometimes. It's the same situation with the tease you get on a train and you pull half a mile outside of little rock. In PTC fails PTC goes out it's an in route failure you're good to run from Little Rock to wherever you're going with this train. Without that technology. Then you're relying on the person sitting next to you to make sure you make it safely to make sure use you know what that next signals going to be and you stop the fact that that technology or this technology in particular is being used to as an excuse to get rid of one person is crazy because the technology has been proven and our cases been proven to fail quite often thank you for answering questions thank you thank you for your testimony as Ernest Green you're excused of accusing Mr for sure a student of. Per se Miller. Are you prepared closer bill. Any other granny other questions committee. Rebsamen to you might see. Thank you. We'll get it don't hang on just a second. Thank you of funds I know it's been a long morning. I will address a couple of a couple of quick things We've heard a lot today about technology. And it seems like. There's a there's a case trying to be made that this is an anti technology advancement bill. It's not the case. I love technology. There's more technology and this will chair that I'm sitting in that I can comprehend. I love being able to hit a button and persisting it goes wherever I want to. I love technology I'm all for technology continuing to advance earlier Mr is a with the chamber was set up here and he was talking about the ten or eleven billion dollars. That union Pacific has invested. And technological advancements if I'd been a member your committee. I would have asked and we're in this bill. Does it prohibit union Pacific from continuing to do that. Doesn't do it. Two more quick things that will be done number one. Who in here. Wants to be. The first passenger. An autonomous taxi cab. Alot forty going seventy five miler. That hasn't been proven. I want to do that. I've done some similar to that. It's a. Not a good result I don't recommend it. Thank god from the looks of you all I don't see any volunteers. What I want to do. The purpose I have to bring in this bill we talked about collective bargaining I don't really care about that and I would love for you all to come to. Click help this afternoon and see about collective bargaining as we deal with scope of practice bills of that's a lot of fun but anyway I'm all for collective bargaining this doesn't stop collective bargaining. At all. What I don't want to see happen. Is our state. Become. Again he paid testing ground. For some of this new technology. I don't want to see our communities that we serve that we work for. Deal with the repercussions of these failures. And. Yes this bill doesn't really change much. That means an excuse me. They're already doing it. Again I don't really know what the real opposition is. It's just that if anything I would think union Pacific would be glad to see this bill pass because it would ensure that their competition is all doing the same thing. Makes it a level playing field. Obviously I have been the case lastly real quick. I was on city council my hometown before I ran for the legislature. And. We had a couple issues come along when it came to dealing with our emergency response. Vehicles April of service so for first responders all that kind of stuff. And. Being. Stupid and ignorant of what all was available to me I didn't fully exercise all that I could have done. Nothing changed. And over the last few years. We had. Probably about. Four to five lives. That were lost. Because Is a public servant not and not just me but. I didn't. I didn't stress public safety. I will tell you that sucks. There's not a day that goes by. Represent Christiansen that I don't think about that. And so that's my purpose in being here I would ask that. This is not a political thing Senate Republican Democrat liberal conservative whatever it's a common sense issue what's treated as such when the technology is here I will be proud to come down here and advocate for doing away with this law. When it's proven that it's not needed but until then let's keep safety as a priority thank you Ferguson Miller Committee heard the discussion what's will of committee. Represent Whitaker you're recognized. Thank you Mr motion do pass I have a motion do pass any discussion of committee. All right. Represent Hillman you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman I would like to speak against this motion and I'll tell you one. Right now in the state of Arkansas. We all have to ban cruise NO one has to stay at the disputed that here today. And like the sponsor of this bill says this body meets every two years when there is a problem that's when you need to have the bill not before you have a problem for you thank you might have a problem but now is not the time to pass this bill therefore I will vote against thank you thank you representative wicker you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair just some thoughts on why am I have come to a conclusion minimum support Mr Miller's bill. a good deal of talk is been brought about here about collective bargaining and I'm a firm believer in it. But I'm gonna tell you here's the truth. When. Collective bargaining is initiated there are two parties at the table. Unions in management. And they're going to do what they can do. Legally and selflessly for the people they represent they should and the hope and a past experience has been that when they have finished they come up with a good answer and they adopted in their collective bargaining agreement. But. To suggest that this is about collective bargaining misses the the real point. The most important party here isn't going to be at that table. The people that we are elected to represent. Don't see that that came. In your ear talking about trains. With. Thousands if not millions of tons going through their communities night and day every day three sixty five. They'll be the one that pays the price if the safety. Met fails the. Whether or not you agree that the time has come or not. The truth is do you want to be on the committee speaking for an entire hundred member house do you want to be the one that says let's put it off until something really bad happens. What are you going to tell the school children and and the windows. Our job is to represent the people. The union to represent the workers. The attorneys and the lobbyists to represent the corporations. But we've got to speak for the people that live along the sightings of these railroads and that's one of the yes and as a final Mister chair if anybody's worried about you know the fact that we might get sued or the federal government might preempt this hasn't been watching us lately because we are quite happy passing bills that we know are unconstitutional so that that will does not amount one right off the table that's not a good reason not to vote for a bill you think might protect your constituents thank you Mr president right you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman I'll try to keep my comments brief because I know the hours getting late Representative Miller is one of the members of this body that I most admire. I've been observing him for a good number of years and so. I believe that he is completely sincere with his goal of bringing this bill. I'm going to vote no on this bill for a couple of reasons. I do not believe this is the proper that the state legislature is the proper venue to resolve this issue the collective bargaining process ought to be where this is sorted out to representative Hillman's point. That. Our trains in the state are already using two man crews. I don't see a compelling reason to mandate from government what is already taking place. To the point about safety. Two insinuated the railroads are somehow not concerned at all about safety. I don't see as a particularly valid point that would be like saying that trucking companies are not concerned about. accidents on the road for that Boeing is not concerned about. Their planes falling out of the sky. We'll you saw what happened Boeing stock price. When that when that jet fell out of the sky okay safety is of importance to everyone. And when we look at the numbers that have been provided. I mean the safety is continually improving year after year after year even as the crew members the numbers have gone from five to four to three to. And and yes nine states have mandated this but it means that forty one have not. And I I've seen no to to represent a berries point I've seen no compelling evidence that the people in these forty one states are any safer than the people. In the nine states and I'll finish by saying this. My house is just a couple hundred yards from a railroad I live on the north end of Maumelle. I hear it I hear the train come through several nights a week. It's where my three year old daughter Charlotte sleeps it's where my one year old son Williams. If I had any concerns. But not passing this law would in anyway put me or my wife for my children in danger. I can promise you. I would not vote against this bill. Without a closed. Thank you that's all we have for comment into someone else's comment. Okay the motion before the committee is a motion do pass all in favor do pass say aye. All opposed say no. it's obvious to me that the nos Han. I see I see two hands accessory more than that so we are going to do a roll call. miss Smith. Representatives building. No representative would occur yes yes. The end of Hillman Nile representative Tosh representative Tosh representa Barker. No representative rye. No representative Christensen. Now I'll representative Breil. Representative riled. Representative Ennett yeah yes representative Springer yes yes representative tell let narrow representative Brady. No representative Brooks. No representative Pat. Representative packed. Representive car. Representive car. Representative to Bryant. No representative very narrow represented Fuhrman. Nat'l vice chairman wipes and the. Now. Okay committee it takes eleven votes to get it out we only got three eighths of the bill fails. Thank you very time thank you that concludes the first few minutes give me we have we have a. We are one more bill us about get past you Senator if you come back to the table we'll go back to the Senate bill two twenty five. You may proceed with the what information you found out they are at the heart of the committee the information come up and certain. I'll never I'll never not have all the information when I set down here again. This refresh our memory what what are we asking for that we've been through a lot of discussion so. Read review ray we resent your question we're asking for what yes I I I apologize I did not know. you a burger or beer or something. Your coupon either you're on your your choice I was I was confused about whether this would be special revenue that goes directly to our dot org this would be general revenue And I'm looking at. A it looks like this is not going into effect until fiscal year twenty twenty two but I know. You know every session there's going to be a discussion about you know do we have enough money to do this tax cut or that such that tax cut and and even if it's not affected this session is going to come into play next session and so I just wanted some clarity on where that money's coming from thank you representative ray this in in when these two groupings we all just a hundred dollars and a two hundred whenever in that bill that guaranteed revenue for the highways of thirty five million anything that didn't go up to thirty five million would come out a restricted use or other funds so of the highways are guaranteed this and the highway department's neutral on the bill and if there's anything further that the F. naked answer that you have a finance greater than thirty seven PM please yes Aleisha Austin Smith with the FAA your your question is well taken because there's kind of two streams here these specific funds acts four one six of twenty nineteen provided funding for highway right in multiple ways these specific additional registration fees on electric and hybrid vehicles are special revenues that go to the highway so if you if you reduce if you pass this bill and reduce those fees that would reduce the funding to highways but senator Johnson is also correct that that bill also mandated that there would be thirty five million to the highways and that if the casino gaming revenue tax isn't sufficient those funds go into a sub account so if that funding is not sufficient to make about thirty film five million distribution that would come from restricted reserves said no matter what the highway fund will get that thirty five million but yes these are separate from that thirty five million follow. Okay so that I'm satisfied with that answer like ninety nine percent of the way. It what is the casino revenue bring in any given year. We know that is not information I would have with me today. We we I think we can only estimate that because we had had a full year we have had a the have made to get the receipt yes Sir there are many others not at I just find it hard to believe there's not an estimate I mean all of estimates for all kinds of things even things we don't ask for their likely would be an estimate that is not something I would have with me today okay. President feeling did you have a question. So far as they have a position at this time. We are not taking a position on this bill we're just here to speak to the revenue impact. Any representative Sturch you have another question. Okay. Represent right I feel it's only fair at this point that I make a motion to pass. Okay I I have a motion or are you closing I guess you are said you got to do that I'm good I'm have anything to add. Okay I have a motion do pass is there any discussion between committee. All in favor of the first. All in favor of the do pass say aye. All opposed same Lacson hearing none the bill passes resolutions. miss Smith would would would you get that information from a I'm going to run this on the house floor and I want to be able to answer these questions in case so. Thank you resident of Iraqi. All right we unless there's any other business we stand adjourned.