Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rail Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Railroad employee transportation safety bill tabled after mixed testimony
Summary
House Bill 30, which would impose inspection, insurance and driver‑training requirements on third‑party vans that transport railroad crews, drew support from railroad unions and opposition from the major railroads and was tabled by the committee for further work.
Santa Fe — A bill that would impose safety and accountability requirements on third‑party companies that transport railroad crews drew extensive testimony and was tabled by the House Transportation, Public Works & Capital Improvements Committee for further stakeholder work.
Clem Harris, who identified himself as representing the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, said the measure is “a simple safety bill” and argued that railroads contract with out‑of‑state van companies whose vehicles and drivers sometimes present safety risks. Harris and multiple union witnesses described crashes, near misses and driver fatigue that, they said, demonstrated the need for clearer standards, regular inspections, insurance minimums and driver training requirements.
Proponents included state and national representatives of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, who said a Minnesota statute with similar requirements has worked successfully and urged New Mexico to adopt comparable rules. Union witnesses also said some railroad employees feel compelled to buy supplemental insurance to cover gaps when they are transported in underinsured third‑party vehicles.
Union Pacific and BNSF Railroad representatives opposed the bill. Union Pacific’s registered lobbyist, JD Bullington, told the committee the railroads had met with sponsors but described the draft as “overbroad” and said many of the bill’s requirements duplicate existing practices, could be unworkable, and could increase crew wait times and operational disruptions. BNSF also said most provisions are already in place in their contracts and warned the bill could exacerbate rail delays.
Representative Kates, the sponsor, said she had sought middle‑ground language and asked the committee to allow more stakeholder engagement; she acknowledged areas for refinement and indicated willingness to work with the railroads and industry groups.
Representative Armstrong moved to table the bill; the motion was seconded and the committee voted to table HB30. Roll call in the transcript showed a mix of yes and no votes and the motion to table carried. Committee members who supported tabling asked for additional stakeholder outreach and technical revisions during the interim.
What’s next: HB30 was tabled for further work. Sponsors and opponents indicated they will continue negotiations and pursue amendments before bringing the bill back to committee.
