continue to do all of that because it's obviously in our interest to get ptc implemented as safely and efficiently as possible. >> i was aware of, you know, making sure that anything and everything that happens in a state of west virginia and every over governor in the states does so with the utmost concern of the safety of the citizens. i used to get complaints years ago when i was governor and the first responders didn't know what was traveling through the state and god forbid an accident would happen and i sit on mt. carbon. if it happened a mile or two down the track it would have wiped out montgomery. the whole town. hard to tell how many people would have lost their lives what we saw happen just outside the town and those are the things i'm concerned v. you all been able to better coordinate with the first responders and with the state coordinators and first responders? >> we have. i mean, we have -- i have said

to the railroads that i think notifications of first responders should be a priority. that they are -- we have an emergency order that went into place in may of 2014, that remains in place. we have reiterated its importance with the railroads. i wrote them a letter reminding them the expectation to be sharing that information with first responders so those individuals have as much information as possible. >> are the states saying we don't are the info in time enough to make sure they have the proper equipment and people available in case god forbid something would happen? >> it depends on the state. some states have said they want more and we are asking the railroads to please work with them to give them all of the information they could possibly need. some are satisfied. and then, depending on -- whether that information is made public frequently depends on the states -- >> finally, if you put a working group together working with the railroad executives and engineers and the people on the front line and all the people that are on the rails, trying to get input from them?

to try to to better this, do the things acceptable and can be done? >> yes, sir. we have a task force within fra seeking to do that. >> thank you. my time is expired. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator manchin. i have senator wicker followed by senator -- told we have a vote at 11:00. if we can get everybody in before we have to bust over there would be a good thing and i'm sure ms. feinberg would appreciate that, too. senator wicker? >> thank you, ms. feinberg. i think we have been kind today but i do think the committee on both sides of the aisle, the members are a little confused and frustrated by a lack -- the lack of a specific proposal concerning the extension. now, the chairman came in and clarified that apparently fra

still stands by the grow america recommendation concerning extensions on a case by case basis. is that your position? >> well, we ask -- what we asked for in the grow america act was not a blanket extension but flexibility to work with railroads so that we could prioritize where ptc would be turned on. so the statute is very black and white an offers literally really no wriggle room and soo what we asked for in the grow america act was flexibility to work with railroads, post-january 1 to turn on portions of ptc before waiting for an entire system. >> you know, if i were a railroad and struggling to meet the deadline, i would find that so uncertain that i don't know if i could develop a business plan. it seems to me that what that would do is leave it up entirely to the discretion of the fra and

the people trying to get this thing done in good faith would be so frustrated that they wouldn't know where they stood. you know, it seems to me, ms. feinberg, that we are going to have to extend this for a period of time just to give people out there in the country the ability to know where they stand. and so, to me, it would be helpful -- i don't think this -- i think we can all acknowledge a grow america act is not going to be passed by the house and senate, passed out of the committees, signed by the president of the united states before the end of this year. and so, i would appreciate you coming back to us, the administration coming back to us, about what vehicle we might have, do we need to put it on the cr? if we do, we need to move it pretty quick an i understand the cr, the folks designing that are intending for it to be very, very clean and not have a lot of new provisions.

do we need to put it -- can we wait until the omnibus at the end of the year? looks like that's where we're headed is this -- is the reauthorization of the transportation bill in an appropriate way. but i would appreciate a specific recommendation as to the length of time that might be appropriate. is it six months? is it a year? is it two years? you deal with this every day. we're trying to deal with 100 things so i really would ask you to get back to us and provide some leadership there in terms of letting us know how industry can get this done. and i realize we spent a lot of time on this topic so let me switch -- let me be provincial then and ask you about gulf coast service. you know, the house and senate, we haven't quite gotten a bill to the president's desk yet but

i think -- would you acknowledge that we have made it clear in legislation that it is federal intent to have a working group formed to restore the gulf coast passenger service that we lost after hurricane katrina? would you agree that that congressional intent is becoming clear based on the legislation so far? >> yes, sir. >> and are you aware that a working group is proposed to develop and answer the question of how we implement this? >> yes, sir. >> and will you acknowledge that fra doesn't have to wait until the legislation is actually enacted to form such a working group? >> yes, sir. and i have met with your staff on this. i am supportive of gulf service being of gulf shore service restored.

we have had a good conversation about it. i will actually be down there next month. i have met with the southern rail commission. they are lovely and excellent -- >> where's down there? >> i'm sorry. i'll be in la l and mississippi. >> good. wonderful. governor bryant, senator cochran and i would like to host you on a ride along that proposed route with the other members of the delegation, with amtrak president boardman and csx ceo to asez the line. are you willing to join us on that ride if we can work out convenient date? >> look forward to it. >> wonderful. thank you. i look forward to working with you on that and wish you the best. thank you for your service. senator klobuchar i believe is next. >> thank you very much, senator wicker. ms. feinberg, congratulations. any friend of mention manchin is a friend of ours so first i want to just talk to you about the

blocked crossings issue. as i travel across minnesota, i hear from people all over the state who have spent an excessive amount of time, sometimes hours stuck waiting at a blocked rail crossing. blocked rail crossings not only inconvenience drivers but delay emergency vehicles, in july i was in minnesota which is on the canadian border, it's a major crossing and very small town. their rail crossing blockings 6 to 8 hours a day in the town. so in the drive act, we actually put a provision in there to direct the secretary of transportation to develop highway rail crossing action plans including tools and data, safety risks, other things. and that is the amendment that's in there. acting add min stray ift feinberg, as the process moving forward, what steps can the fra take to minimize blocked rail crossings? and do you think you have the best practices in place? >> thank you for the question.

we are also very concerned about blocked crossings. we do not have regulations in place to govern how long a train can block a crossing but we frequently hear from communities in minnesota and elsewhere where you have folks who are waiting for sometime while a train is blocking a crossing and it can sometimes lead to safety concerns, as well, when you have first responders on one side of a crossing and can't get to the other side of a crossing so we frequently work with railroads individually to address specific problems. we have also suggested we do a study to understand the impact of blocked crossings and also worried about that and attempt l to resolve it. >> it's dictated by the bill once i know we're going to pass it eventually. this year. also, i hear from communities that they don't have the capacity to prepare to a respond of a derailment or a hazardous material spill.

firefighters and first responders don't have the resources to purchase the equipment. when's the fra doing to ensure local units of government have the resources to be able to properly prepare and do you need additional authority for that? >> i don't know that we need additional authority. we have worked closely with our sister agency pipelines and hazardous materials on programs to assist with training first responders, may recollecting sure they have the information they need, the resources they need. trainings that frequently happen the training and testing facility in pueblo, colorado, which is an excellent facility for training, so we will continue to look for resources where we can assist first responders with that. and appreciate your focus on it, as well. >> and then one last question. i'm going to end short here and give you the rest in writing so my colleagues ask questions before the vote. do you support leaders from local government serving on the railroad safety advisory

committee? that isn't happening now and we think that would be helpful. >> certainly. they can present at any point. they can comment, reach out to us and make sure that they have a role in the meetings and process and we're happy to do that and follow up and make sure that they feel like they're welcomed and listened to at our meetings. >> okay. we would like them on the board to discuss that later. i'll put the rest of the questions in writing and turn it over to senator blumen that will. thank you. >> thank you. >> actually, senator danes is next. >> okay. there you are. >> thank you anyway. >> thank you. appreciate that. ms. feinberg, congratulations on your nomination. it's nice to see you here again. montana is home to nearly 3,200 miles of railroad tracks that move record amounts of crude oil, coal and other manufactured products across the rail system every day. in fact, we export the majority

of our energy in ag production,. 80% of the wheat harvest to asia and most of that by rail. last summer, there's challenges and delays in shipping some of the goods, our phones were ringing a lot. a lot of concerns about this. this year, i know the burlington northern santa fe made nftmentes in montana to increase capacity and enhance safety and we expect smooth and efficient shipments of this year's harvest and come mod ties. i have the inthat sis amtrak builder along the high line with much-needed transportation and connectivity for the world communities. last year, nearly 120,000 people boarded and alighted amtrak trains in montana. i recall as a kid hearing stories about how my great grandparents take passenger rail from shelby where the empire builder stops there and how my family got back and forth when they came out to montana a century ago. needless to say, it's imperative

to montana to continue to move the passengers and come phdtys so my question is probably the same horse we've been beating here during this hearing which is regarding ptc. we all saw in the report released yesterday recommended again that congress extend the december 31,2015, deadline. the largest railroad in my home state in montana is bnsf. they have been working diligently. they have invested $1.5 billion. in fact, in another $500 million to implement across the nation including on nearly 2,000 miles of track in montana. as we all know, this deadline is approaching. the senate highway bill has an extension on a case by case basis. i think we continues the move passengers and commodities. wouz these rail connections we are in big trouble in montana. so, my question is, administrator, what would you do in the immediate future to ensure our railroading do not

come to a grinding halt on january 1, 2016, beyond the threat of fines? >> well, senator, it's good to see you again. i cannot -- i cannot -- i cannot give the railroads individual legal advice. i don't think that's an appropriate role for the fra administrator. we have said as clearly as we can possibly say that we will enforce the deadline. i know that many railroads are considering not operating starting on january 1st because they will not be in compliance with the ptc law. but -- >> would you have your cell phone to forward the calls from montana to you so you could take them? >> sir, i am getting the calls. yes, yes. i'm happy to take yours, as well. yes. >> i'm talking from the people of montana. >> yes. >> because the phones will be ringing. this will be a crisis. i'm sorry. i interrupted you. go ahead. >> i am also worried about the

crisis that could ensue on january 1st, as well. we have tried to be as clear as we can possibly be. we will continue to try to assist this committee and the congress in any way that we can as you con tom plait the possible extension of the deadline. and we will work with you in way that we possibly can. >> we're down to about 100 days. >> yeah. >> plus or minus. there's something called thanksgiving in the way. there's the christmas holidays. so the time is of the essence and giving everything else going on in this town crisis driven, it would be nice to avoid yet another crisis driven event. >> sir, i completely agree. i do not have the authority to extend the deadline. and the secretary of transportation does not. and we will work with the committee any way that we can but we're not able to do it ourselves. >> on your testimony, you mentioned there's a $1 billion

loan from fra to new york's transit authority to help implement safety measures. often the focus of passenger rail is on the northeast corridor and i understand the reason why, because the dense populations but sometimes perpetuates this urban world country. as administrator, what efforts would fra take to ensure that passenger rail service is notdy fin minnished in rural america, places like montana? what loans are made available to passenger rail in these rural areas? >> well, the riff program is certainly available and has -- is frequently sort of gets the most interest from short lines which tend to be functioning in these rural areas. as west virginian, as someone from rural america, i can tell you i'm a strong supporter of the importance of passenger rail between rural areas. we're working with amtrak all the time.

look. the northeast corridor is important. $100 million a day in economic impact but getting a lot of attention but it no way takes all of our attention and we are laser focused on the state routes, as well. >> thanks, ms. feinberg. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator danes. we are still waiting for passenger rail to come to south dakota. have in it wyoming. montana and south dakota, only two that 48 lower that don't have. senator blumenthal and cannotwell and the vote called. >> i'll be quick. my main reason to speak is to say how fervently i support passenger rail in south dakota. >> i agree. >> first of all, ms. feinberg, i want to thank you for the breath of fresh air that you have already brought to the fra. your diligence and determination

have made a significant difference already in the enforcement and the vigilance and vigor of oversight by an agency that has been asleep at the switch for much too long. there are still 64 recommendations i believe from the ntsb that have not been closed by your agency but you have made a lot of progress over a short period of time. and i hope that you will continue to focus not only on positive train control but on very significant other rail safety issues. close call reporting, redug nant signal protection, commuter rail inspection practices, cameras, speed restrictions, fatigue and so many other issues. i think your agency obviously can focus on more than one issue at once and these other challenges are as important as positive train control and a lot less expensive. so i hope that you will continue

this effort because rail safety in the united states is sorely lacking. and there will continue to be catastrophes often with fatal results and tremendous costs if the nation fails to do better and you are at the tip of the spear so far as rail safety is concerned. so, i hope you'll continue your efforts in that regard. there's a vast difference in different kinds of extensions of ptc. i strongly support the railroad by railroad year by year vigilant oversight approach. which i believe was embodied in the grow act. as to posed to the unlimited indeterminant open ended approach which is currently embodied in the drive act and i will oppose that kind of

extension if it is incorporated in any sort of continuing resolution or short-term fix. i believe that approach is simply an invitation to disaster. and i know that you have walked a fine line in your testimony today in a very understandable effort to be accommodating to the different views that are on this committee but i would like a commitment from you that you will vigorously enforce whatever ptc extension is adopted if one is adopted by this committee and congress. >> absolutely. we intend to vigorously enforce the deadline in front of us now and should it be moved we'll enforce that one. >> i take it you would favor the more limited and year by year case by case approach embodied

in the grow act. that's been the administration policy, is it not? >> well, the grow act -- our purpose in the grow act was to ask for flexibility for railroads that had made progress and that -- where we were trying to priorize impleation in certain areas. we are committed to ptc as sa safely as possible. >> i want to focus in the short time i have remaining on the need for greater oversight on the hartford line. i want to thank you and secretary fox for hosting a meeting including myself and the connecticut delegationnd our governor. i'd like you to commit as you did in the meeting that you will ensure that amtrak manages this project more ably and efficiently. >> you have my commitment that we will remain very vigilant

over that project. it is one of the most important projects in the country and as we said in the meeting, we are lucky to have good partners in connecticut that are actually prioritizing this kind of work and so we will remain very focused on it. >> there is an opportunity and obligation for more collaboration and cooperation here. the contention and disagreement that is have occurred really are regrettable and ultimately will contribute to delay and cost overruns of this line. would you agree? >> yes, sir. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, thanks for the opportunity. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. senator cantwell? >> thank you. we've talked experiences especially in the northeast with train traffic. do you believe that oil volatility is an issue that needs to be addressed and that the d.o.t. working with d.o.e. should resolve this issue doing

testing required to say what vapor pressure should be on trains? >> i certainly think it will be helpful to determine what role volatility plays. as you know, the department of energy is -- has partnered in our sister agency, with us to do a study of the backen crude to determine the volatility and what impact that volatility has so does it matter and how much which will guide a lot of our thinking and be helpful. >> i know that it's astounding to me that neither fra or fimsa thinks that they have the ability to regulate this vapor pressure which we do in other areas that somebody's waiting for a cat strask accident to say we should regulate this but are you concerned that these read vapor pressure readings as much as 18.5 pounds per square inch when in reality a lot of people

have concerns above 10 so we're not only seeing north dakota saying, well, let's set a standard of 13.5 which or 13.7 i have a concern about and finding that they're not even meeting there, there's no oversight or regulation whether the train traffic is meeting that standard. in fact, some people finding much more higher vapor pressures and i think volatile till comes into play. >> it's hard to comment on what fimsa's authority is. our authority is the vehicle that that product is traveling in when it's on rail so the tank -- so assisting fimsa with the tank car and the way the train is operated. but i have -- i have been a loud proponent of asking the energy industry to play a role in assisting us with the safety of transporting crude oil across the country. i think it's important for the rail industry to be accountable but i have been very vocal about my interest in having the energy

industry have some skin in the game, as well. >> the energy industry? meaning? >> meaning the shippers. >> do you think the federal government needs to resolve this issue and weigh in? whatever agency it is. whoever has the authority. i mean, i don't think the general public cares, like, what we're all doing back here as it relates to this industry and this doctrine and this regulation, oh, falling through a loophole. people want to know whether volatility is address or not and you think the administration should address volatility? >> i think if the study that is are being done by the department of energy suggest we need to address volatility before it's placed into transport, we should do that. we should absolutely do that. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you senator. i want to point out for the record that the grow act had an open-ended extension. there wasn't any deadline in the grow act. the drive act which passed the senate a few weeks ago has a

three-year deadline through 2018 for installation and then of course certification dependent upon working with the d.o.t. and in addition, the drive act included a number of other safety related measures including inward facing cameras, requiring speed limit action plans to address automatic train control modification, crew mentions, speed enforcement issues, hazardous materials with realtime information for first responders and response plans. requirement for grade crossing action plans to facilitate improved state grade crossing safety efforts and included a number of other safety issues. such as sign and alerters and track inspections. so the drive act does have a number of safety provisions in there in addition to the ptc extensions. so, ms. feinberg, thank you for appearing today and we will keep the hearing record open.

if i find my act for open for two weeks during which time senators are asked to submit questions for the record. you would be asked to request and submit the written answers to the committee as quickly as possible. and as you can tell, obviously, a lot of focus on ptc. we have a big problem. you're coming in at a very important and critical time to try and help solve what most of us i think recognize is a mayor crisis and your role is going to be important in the administration's role is important in trying to build the necessary bipartisan coalition that will take to pass legislation that gets us to where we need to go. so, thank you for your time today and for youre

athletics, and the senate transportation committee looks at the implementation of railroad safety technology. >> sue coppedge had been nominated to lead the state department's efforts to