BILL ANALYSIS 1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
SB 1491 - Leslie Hearing
Date: April 25, 2000 S
As Amended: April 25, 2000 FISCAL/URGENCY
B
1
4
9
1
DESCRIPTION
Current law requires the sounding of a locomotive bell or
whistle at least 1,320 feet from the place where the
railroad crosses any street, with certain exceptions.
This bill adds an exception to current law in the case
where the railroad crossing has a permanently installed
audible warning device that automatically sounds when an
approaching train is at least 1,320 feet from the crossing.
This bill authorizes the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) to conduct pilot projects for the purpose
of evaluating proposed railroad crossing warning devices.
This bill declares the intent of the Legislature that the
CPUC authorize pilot projects in Roseville and Lathrop to
test the utility and safety of stationary, automated
audible warning devices as an alternative to trains having
to sound their horns as they approach railroad crossings.
BACKGROUND
The City of Roseville asked the CPUC for permission to
create a pilot project to install an automated horn system
at two railroad crossings as an alternative to having
trains sound their whistles as they approach the crossings.
This automated horn system, known as a "wayside horn," has
the potential to reduce noise pollution because the horns
are stationary, located at the crossing, and can be
directed down the street - as opposed to a train whistle,
which sounds for about a quarter mile as a train approaches
a crossing.
The CPUC didn't grant the City of Roseville's request for a
pilot project because it found the project ran contrary to
state law - the state law this bill proposes to change.
Some cities, including Sacramento, have established "quiet
zones" in which train whistles are either banned or
restricted. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the
federal agency responsible for railroad safety, is
formulating draft regulations to limit "quiet zones" to
areas only where supplementary safety measures are
installed, such as four quadrant gates. (Public hearings
were held on these draft regulations in Los Angeles on
March 15 and are being held throughout the country over the
next month).
These regulations are in response to an FRA study of
Florida's train whistle ban, which found that trains not
sounding their whistles were far likelier to have a
collision than trains which did sound their whistles.
Because the supplementary safety measures are costly (e.g.
the author estimates the four quadrant gates cost about
$250,000) the consequence of the FRA regulations will be to
effectively eliminate "quiet zones."
KEY QUESTIONS
1.Should California permit a pilot project to allow
"wayside horns" to be tested in the state with the hope
that the FRA will adopt the use of such horns as a
"supplementary safety measure?"
2.Will the use of "wayside horns" lead to a reduction in
noise pollution from train whistles or will it simply
move the noise from one place to another (from up and
down the train tracks to up and down a street where a
crossing is located)?
COMMENTS
1) Pilot Project . This bill proposes to evaluate the
effectiveness of wayside horns by conducting pilot
projects and in turn providing the analysis of those
projects to the FRA in the hope that the wayside horn can
provide for adequate safety and less nuisance than
sounding the train whistle in the more traditional
fashion.
2) Relevance of Prior Study? The FRA has evaluated the
wayside horns proposed in this bill, having commissioned
a study of such a system that is deployed in Nebraska.
That study noted that using a wayside horn in lieu of the
train whistle reduced net community noise impacts, but
the report questions how effective that particular system
was in alerting motorists. The FRA noted the study "did
not contain adequate data or analysis to permit a
determination of whether a wayside horn could fully
substitute for a train-born audible warnings (sic)."
However, the study itself does note "the wayside horn
shows promise as a warning device that can reduce
community noise impact without adversely affecting
safety."
3) Public Safety . The purpose of having a train sound its
whistle as it approaches a crossing is to warn
pedestrians, drivers, and others that a train is indeed
coming down the tracks. The question posed by this bill
is - in the absence of quiet zones or the use of four
quadrant gates - whether it's better to have the whistle
sounded from the train as it approaches the crossing or
from the crossing gate as the train approaches.
According to RCL, a wayside horn manufacturer, wayside
horns have been installed in five cities throughout the
United States without any grade crossing accidents.
The United Transportation Union, which represents
railroad employees, opposes the bill, arguing that a
safety hazard is created when a train fails to sound a
whistle at a crossing.
POSITIONS
SPONSOR:
Author
SUPPORT:
Orange County Transportation Authority
OPPOSE:
J & L Enterprise
United Transportation Union
Randy Chinn
SB 1491 Analysis
Hearing Date: April 25, 2000