Based on casualties, which is the true yardstick of safety, we have shown improvement in virtually every statistical category during the last 10 years.

We are proud of our safety record. We feel the steadily improving casualty records testify to the fact that safety is a matter of utmost importance to our railroads.

As long as there is a single casualty, however, there is room for improvement. And in recent months our individual railroads and our association have undertaken a thorough examination of our efforts in the safety field.

Where we have found weaknesses, we have made changes.

Every one of our railroads has a well-planned and well-organized safety program. And we are placing renewed emphasis on implementation of these programs right now.

We have had a great deal of experience in the safety field. Organized programs of industrial safety were pioneered by railroadmen. Our programs are based on sound, time-tested concepts.

Our individual railroads compete for national safety awards each year. This program has recently been broadened to stimulate safetyconsciousness.

There is not a single area of safety in which our railroads are not active and alert. This is not a new activity with us. It has been going on for years, and our record, extending back over 50 years, attests to its effectiveness and to our progressiveness in this field.

In the area of new equipment and the technical problems new equipment often brings with it-our railroad research center and technical divisions work closely with rail equipment suppliers and individual railroads to promote the highest possible standards of car and track construction and maintenance.

The last few years have seen many important changes in rail equipment, technology, and methods of operation, all of which are a part of progress. But progress is sometimes accompanied by problems.

We have identified and corrected many of these problems almost as soon as they became evident. And we are on our way toward solving and eliminating the others.

We fully agree with the National Transportation Safety Board's April 3 report that "The Primary Responsibility for Improved Railroad Safety Should Rest Upon Management and Labor."

We in management accept this responsibility.

By the same token we will appreciate, most sincerely, all the assistance labor and Government can give us in getting to the roots of our present problems--and in helping us to correct them.

In this way we can most effectively and most quickly achieve the goal we are all seeking the ultimate in railroad safety.

It is our sincere belief that we can do far more by working together in a spirit of cooperation than by attempting to "legislate safety." The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Goodfellow.

Is this the extent of your statement?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you. I agree with you that by cooperating and working together we can do many things that we cannot do if we work on an individual basis.

What the bill says is that we shall somehow set a minimum standard and have the right to enforce it. I believe that in our society when we

say to a man you shall not commit a crime there has to be somebody to enforce it.

Just as we have today on our streets and cities a lack of enforcement somewhere. Something has happened in our land. If there are minimum standards, after consultation with all concerned, that they consider fair and somebody to enforce it, would this be a fair statement or not that it may be for the common good?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think, as we have had in the past, Mr. Chairman, we need some minimum standards, but to give the Secretary of Transportation practically the power of life and death over our safety activities, our operational activities, the maintenance of the equipment we buy, we think this will accomplish nothing.

The CHAIRMAN. I agree with you. I agree that private industry ought to be allowed to run its own affairs as much as possible. I am not talking about that.

I am talking about minimum standards that maybe could be prescribed, that every person in this land knows what they are expected to keep to those minimum standards.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think we have practically that in the railroad industry today. We can get dozens and dozens of safety books from the different railroads. The safety rules are all the same.

There is an old saying you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. This has been our problem in safety. We can write safety rules. Our biggest problem is to enforce the safety rules and to get people to remember that it is dangerous to do some things and they must keep their wits about them.

This is a matter that I don't think this bill does anything for. That is to help us somehow or other keep our employees working in a safe

manner.

I don't see that the bill is going to help us on that a bit.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to say this again, to repeat what I have said, to have minimum standards promulgated that everyone understands, with a power of enforcement, and somebody must enforce it because I know that in our society, it does not matter where it is, in America or any other place in the world, down through history, unless you have the power, some power of enforcement, there are some who just will not keep the rules and we have to have the rules in our social affairs and everything else to keep to people in line.

I am just talking about some of the essentials that we need perhaps and to have them standardized.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. If you are talking about stopping, looking, and listening at railroad crossings, I think that ought to be a minimum standard.

The CHAIRMAN. That is all I have.

Mr. Springer.

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Goodfellow, at the present time, who has all of the enforcement of safety standards by law?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. The Federal Government Department of Transportation has. In the States, of course, various bodies are appointed by the State legislature to take care of that.

Mr. SPRINGER. What would be added by this bill to the powers that the Federal Government already has?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I have somewhat wondered, myself, whether the Secretary in some way in his bill setting up the Department of Trans

portation does not have almost this same power. But he has chosen to say that he doesn't have.

Mr. SPRINGER. Will counsel comment on that?

Mr. MOLONEY. My name is W. M. Moloney. I am general counsel for the Association of American Railroads.

There are certain Federal statutes today, Mr. Springer, that place in the Secretary of Transportation almost unlimited safety authority in those areas.

I think when the spokesmen for the Department of Transportation were appearing before this committee, I think you took one section of the bill and said now do you have this authority today?

And the answer came back, "Yes," in signals we do, and locomotives. we do, and so on.

They pointed out the various areas that the Secretary does have that power today. However, the bill does reach into areas that there is no Federal regulation vesting him with this broad authority.

Mr. SPRINGER. When you say it vests him with new authority, will you indicate those areas where you believe new authority vests.

Mr. MOLONEY. Rather than indicate all the activities I could illustrate the areas.

For instance, the track, roadway structures other than signalingyour buildings, your shops, the design of freight cars, size, shape, form, and fashion except to the extent that the Safety Appliance Act and its provisions may apply.

Mr. SPRINGER. Is that all?

Mr. MOLONEY. As I said, I was using that as an illustration. In the conduct of our operations themselves, that is our operating rules, how we run our operations, the Secretary does not today have the authority to tell us how to run those operations.

Mr. SPRINGER. Will you indicate what operations specifically then he would have jurisdiction of that he does not have jurisdiction of now? Mr. MOLONEY. Commonly known as our "Operating Rules." I think Mr. Goodfellow could explain the nature of those rules better than I could.

Mr. SPRINGER. At the present, you set up the Operating Rules, is that right?

Mr. MOLONEY. Yes.

Mr. SPRINGER. And the Secretary does not set up the Operating Rules, is that true?

Mr. MOLONEY. That is correct.

Mr. SPRINGER. Are there any other items?

Mr. MOLONEY. As far as the railroads are concerned; yes, the qualification of employees.

Mr. SPRINGER. That is two.

Mr. MOLONEY. I think to a large extent we have covered our track, maintenance of our roadway.

Mr. SPRINGER. That is three.

Mr. MOLONEY. I am not sure I have named them all, Mr. Springer. I have tried to.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Design of equipment would be four.

Mr. SPRINGER. That is four. Is there anything else?

Mr. MOLONEY. As far as the railroads are concerned

Mr. SPRINGER. What about scheduling of trains and equipment?

Mr. MOLONEY. That would be the operation of our industry as I told you. You heard the Secretary say that to the extent that that might enter into safety he would be given authority under this bill. He does not have it today.

The length of trains was discussed with him, crew consist, all of these matters of our operation, I attempted to cover that when I designated our operations.

I might point out that the bill goes beyond the railroad industry because we are not the only one that use equipment, the shippers use equipment, too.

Mr. SPRINGER. Would he be able to tell you, for instance, how many employees you would have on a caboose?

Mr. MOLONEY. I suppose he would if he had control over the crew consist which they say he would have to have under the bill if he were going to properly enforce the safety regulations.

Mr. SPRINGER. Would he have control over whether or not there are one, two, or three in the cab?

Mr. MOLONEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. That would be part of his concept?

Mr. MOLONEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. I presume also, depending on the length of the train, and the number of switchmen that would be necessary to handle so many cars?

Mr. MOLONEY. That would mean the train crew consist which covers the front end, the rear end, and the middle.

Mr. SPRINGER. Now the safety features with reference to the entire train are already subject to an act which is in existence, is that right? Mr. MOLONEY. I did not hear you.

Mr. SPRINGER. The safety features of the equipment are already contained in the present law.

Mr. MOLONEY. The locomotive almost entirely, 100 percent.
Mr. SPRINGER. What about freight cars?

Mr. MOLONEY. Freight cars, the Safety Appliance Act applies there.
Mr. SPRINGER. The same is true of passenger cars?

Mr. MOLONEY. The Safety Appliance Act applies to passenger cars. Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Goodfellow, just one thing further. Mr. Bloom has come up with an idea here, NARUC, in which he would like to have appointed a board. Were you here when he was testifying?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Called the National Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, which would be made up of nine members. Three from the State regulatory agencies, three from management, and three from labor.

They would have the power and the right to advise and consult and make recommendations to the Secretary on matters relating to the activities and functions of the Department in the field of railway safety.

Then they are authorized to do two more things here: To review research projects, review programs submitted or recommended to it by the field of railroad safety, and recommend to the Secretary for prosecution any project which they believe shows promise of making valuable contributions.

Second, to review priority of standards proposed to be issued by the Secretary under the provisions of this act.

What do you think of this idea?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think it would depend entirely on the Secretary. I didn't see that this advisory board had any authority except to recommend to the Secretary that he do something.

Mr. SPRINGER. We had this kind of feature in the Oil Safety Act. Mr. GOODFELLOW. Any time you get management, labor, and regulatory bodies sitting down together, usually something good comes out of it.

But with the Secretary having the law empowering him to establish any standards or any safety regulations he wants to, I don't see that this board wolld be of any use, because certain Secretaries might not pay any attention to the board.

Mr. SPRINGER. Do you believe that if such law is passed that that is a wise provision?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Pardon?

Mr. SPRINGER. If we assume the law is going to be passed, would you like to see such a provision in it?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think it would be very helpful.

Mr. SPRINGER. In looking at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's page 7 of the Railroad Regulations, do you have a Joint Committee on Grade-Crossing Protection?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. We have a committee on the AAR which concerns itself with grade-crossing protection. We have been working with the Department of Transportation on this matter. The Secretary some months ago, I guess it was last fall, asked if we would furnish members for a joint committee.

I think it was a month ago he said they were about ready, and we are getting ready to appoint some people to a real joint committee with the Department of Transportation.

Now the first committee I told you-we have a committee in our engineering department that works with anybody that wants to work with us on crossings like the States or the AASHO (American Association of State Highway Officials).

Mr. SPRINGER. What kind of grade-crossing protection do you recommend?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Well, the most popular grade-crossing protection and the most effective one and the most economical one is a short-arm gate, with flasher lights and the short-arm gate that comes down automatically.

Mr. SPRINGER. What about grading?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. You mean

Mr. SPRINGER. Approaches.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Fixing up approaches? You mean a profile of the crossing?

Yes; we work with them. We work with the local highway departments on that kind of thing.

Mr. SPRINGER. Do you have standards?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I am not sure, Congressman, whether there is a standard for that or not.

Mr. SPRINGER. It must be high. Let me read you the language. Page 7, rule 2 of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Protection for Crossings of Grade, from B-2 on page 7.