DENVER — A Colorado legislative committee has advanced a bill that would limit train lengths within the state and draws other elements from the federal Railway Safety Act, which has failed to pass Congress, the website Colorado Newsline reports.
If approved by the Transportation Legislation Review Committee, the bill will be introduced in the state’s 2024 legislative session beginning in January. It limits train lengths to 8,500 feet; requires wayside equipment detectors every 10 to 15 miles; prohibits stopped trains from blocking grade crossings for more than 10 minutes; and requires railroads to offer training to first responders along rail routes where hazardous materials are transported.
Carl Smith, state legislative director for the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division (SMART-TD), told the news site, “Most parts of this bill are major asks for our organizations,” and that they are about safety for both workers and communities.
But the legislation will face legal questions, as similar bills have in other states, given the federal government’s regulatory authority in matters of interstate commerce. Only the Federal Railroad Adminstration and Surface Transportation Board have the authority to regulate rail operations, Union Pacific spokesman Mike Jaixen wrote in an email to Colorado Newsline, saying that UP and other railroads continue to “work closely with federal policymakers on both sides of the aisle to ensure any potential legislation takes a data-driven approach to enhancing safety that does not negatively impact our nation’s supply chain.”
Once again, Colorado is out to make itself the source of all knowledge and wisdom about subjects to which they have no right to legislate. The real place to lobby this type of issue is for legislative relief is with the STB, FRA, USDOT and/or the United State Congress.
Imagine the chaos if every train has to perform switch actions upon entering every state to meet that states various rules regarding transportation issues. Further, if this is going to be the tact, what ever is determined for railroads should apply as well to the states traffic on the roads, ie; elimination of hazardous material transport, environmental issues, length of truck trailers (we should be glad we don’t have the 5-10 trailer road trains seen in Australia!) or any other issue that can be attributed to trains.
Were this to be the case, commerce in every state employing such archaic thinking would come to a grinding halt as material necessary to industry or consumer consumption would become subject to laws making transport impossible. Another case of parochial thinking when these issues are of a national scope and not a local one.
Nothing like our Democrat legislature and governor here tackling problems that aren’t theirs to solve instead of paying more attention to homeless drug addicts, thieves and illegal immigrants. They’ll never tackle a real problem when they can showboat on one out of their jurisdiction.
Mr. Thomas’ suggestion about no train longer than the shortest siding seems to be very sensible. I would think dispatchers and crews would both be in favor of it.
A little off topic, something I’ve noticed about Colorado. Alone among the Great Plains states, it’s dominated by north-to-south traffic (Wyoming coal to Texas) as opposed to the dominant east-to-west traffic dominant in the region. The Centennial State, or as I call it the Land of Bicycles, Subarus and Democrats, must hate all those long trains of evil fossil fuel coal rolling right through the downtowns of its two largest cities, Denver and Colorado Springs.
Life is so tough in the state which fancies itself as some sort of “green” paradise.
…and don’t forget the oil. The folks in Eagle County think it is the great demon cargo…
Colorado was a Democratic Governor and Republican house/senate. Now it is all Democrats. No big surprise for Colorado residents with the endless laws and regulations created at the state capital.
In defense, some areas of Colorado have no underpass/overpass options. So a long slow train can impede fire/ambulance/police.
I am amazed a the lack of Hazmat training in the United States. I guess that is seems as Government overreach or some other excuse. I just can not send untrained, uncertified personnel to a job site of any nature. It costs more, but health and safety demands it (here anyway).
The state should limit truck lengths. Triple trailer trucks are scary
Yet another exercise in futility. I should have stuck with my original plan for “what do you want to be when you grow up” , which was a lawyer. Seems people, companies and organizations just LOVE to throw money at lawyers.
And the other problem with lawyers (in addition to the fact there are too many of them in this country), is that so many of them end up as legislators pushing/writing so many of these silly (and ultimately unconstitutional) laws.
The Supreme Court has overturned similar laws in the past (notably the Arizona law limiting freights to 70 cars) . These people are just wasting everyone’s time.
Now me, I wouldn’t set a specific maximum length. Instead, I would specify that no yard could release a train longer than the shortest siding on the entire route to its destination yard. So trains could always pass each other without any dipsy-doodle switching back and forth.
Can long trains sometimes lose communication with end train power? Not good.
This is the ultimate solution. No train dispatched out of a yard that would exceed the length of that routes shortest passing siding. Unless the train is the only train that uses that route outside of regular locals.
Wow! A sensible solution! Naturally, it has the same chance of being implemented as does a snowball lasting an hour in hell, but that doesn’t make it any less sensible. Well done, Mr. Thomas.