Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rail Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables bill to tighten safety standards for rail crew shuttle contractors after mixed views
Summary
House Bill 30, which would require inspections, insurance and training standards for third‑party vehicles that transport railroad crews, drew support from rail unions and objections from railroads. Lawmakers voted to table the measure for further stakeholder work.
A committee tabled House Bill 30 after an hours‑long hearing that exposed sharp differences between rail unions seeking new safety rules for third‑party crew transportation and the major freight railroads opposing the measure as overbroad.
Union witnesses said the bill is a narrow workplace‑safety proposal to ensure vehicles used to move crew members between trains and parking areas meet inspection, insurance and driver-training standards. Clem Harris, testifying for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, summarized the sponsor’s intent: “The bill before you is a simple safety bill,” he told the committee, describing repeated accidents, injuries and recent fatal incidents tied to contractor shuttle operations.
Union speakers described instances in which contractors registered vehicles out of state, used drivers with spotty records, or relied on taxis and unregulated services when dedicated vans were not available. Charlie Jeffcoat, a legislative representative for BLET in Clovis, and other crew members said the measure would create consistent safety expectations.
Railroad representatives said most safety elements are already handled through company policies and contracts and argued the bill contains impractical or duplicative provisions. JD Bullington, representing Union Pacific, said the railroad has met with union representatives but concluded, “We oppose the bill,” and BNSF argued the bill could increase crew wait times and disrupt operations.
Members questioned whether the bill improperly shifted liability or required impractical standards for small contractors. Representative Armstrong moved to table the bill; the committee voted to table and asked the sponsor to continue stakeholder discussions and return with agreed changes. The clerk recorded the motion to table and the roll-call proceeded; sponsors and opponents agreed to convene additional talks in the interim.
What it would do: The bill sought to amend motor-carrier safety requirements to cover third‑ and fourth‑party vehicles hired to transport railroad crews; it included minimum inspection, insurance and driver-training provisions and reporting requirements. Sponsors said it would not require rail companies to provide their own transportation but would require companies to show they hold contractors to standards.
What’s next: The committee’s tabling means sponsors will continue negotiation with railroads, trucking stakeholders and the Department of Transportation. Committee members said they want more stakeholder input and legal drafting to avoid unintended operational impacts.
