U.S. Infrastructure Crisis: Funding, Rail Safety, and Congress

Funding Issues for U.S. Transportation

The federal Highway Trust Fund is the fiscal foundation of the highway system in the United States. Without adequate funding, highway construction stalls and road construction workers are put out of work. Congress has dallied with the economic future of America for years by refusing to pass a multiyear transportation bill. The reason is likely apparent to most people: a conservative Congress that does not want to increase taxes, even to fund repairs and new roads to meet the infrastructure needs of the country.

A recent study from the White House reports that more than two-thirds of the nation's roadways need to be repaired, and that continued dilapidation results in higher eventual costs running into the billions of dollars (Runningen, 2014). The 27-page report, released in mid-July 2014 by the Council of Economic Advisers and the National Economic Council, was published in part as the President made his bid to Congress to replenish the Highway Trust Fund, which was nearing insolvency (Runningen, 2014). A key message of the report was the inadvertent economic costs of allowing such poor conditions in America's infrastructure (Runningen, 2014). Economic growth is severely impacted by crumbling roads and bridges that have fallen into such disrepair they have become dangerous. The situation was cogently summarized in the report: "A well-performing transportation network keeps jobs in America, allows businesses to expand, and lowers prices on household goods to American families" (Runningen, 2014). Experts call for a long-term resolution and argue that an estimated $4.6 trillion is needed to repair the nation's roads and bridges. In terms of international standing for transportation and infrastructure, the United States has dropped from 7th place — the position it held in the previous decade — to 18th place. The current state of American infrastructure is so poor that 65% of U.S. roads are rated as "less than good condition" and one in four U.S. bridges "require significant repair or cannot handle today's traffic" (Runningen, 2014). Simply building more rails, roads, and ports does not solve the challenges of repairing and upgrading national infrastructure and transportation. Even when funding is available and adequately allocated, implementing national infrastructure and transportation projects is among the most complex policy work in which government at all levels engages.

This paper addresses the relationship between funding and the condition of infrastructure and transportation in the United States, and offers a brief explanation of how the congressional budgetary, program authorization, and appropriations processes work. The transportation authorization bill is a pivotal topic in the discussion, particularly for the way it illustrates the partisan tension driving the highway construction crisis. The tragic railroad accident that occurred in Philadelphia on May 12, 2015 — when Northeast Regional Train No. 188 careened off the tracks at 106 miles per hour — illustrates these relationships and serves as a point of discussion about the substantive decay of infrastructure and transportation that places America in twelfth position globally, as articulated at the last global summit. A closer look at the impact of crumbling infrastructure on cities underscores the significance of the transportation authorization bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century. The paper also considers the emerging threat posed by oil tank cars that are significantly vulnerable to fires and explosions, and concludes with an extended consideration of the impact that inadequate funding has on regulatory oversight of maintenance and safety inspections.

On May 12, 2015, an Amtrak train traveling many miles per hour above the approved speed for the section of rail it was traversing went off the tracks, causing a multi-car crash that left eight passengers dead and scores more seriously injured. The engineer survived, and at the time of this writing the problems that contributed to the crash — and the engineer's role in it, if any — had not been disclosed by the investigation, which was still active but proceeding carefully out of consideration for the shaken trainman and passengers. Hours after the crash, a Congressional Appropriations Committee voted to cut the Amtrak budget. The puzzling logic behind this decision was not made any clearer by the top House Appropriations Democrat, Nita Lowey of New York, who asserted that "while we don't know the cause of this accident, we do know that starving rail of funding will not enable safer train travel" (Caygle, 2015).

Congressional Budgeting and Appropriations

When discussing congressional budget and appropriations activities, it is important to understand how the two fiscal phases work in concert and the challenges they present to legislators eager to make progress. Budgetary processes that include the President's annual budget proposal, congressional budget resolutions, and the 302(b) allocation precede appropriations bills. Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution states that "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." Through this constitutional authority, Congress is granted the power to make appropriations, and the President holds the power to veto appropriations bills.

Appropriations bills both set aside money for and allocate money to specific departments, agencies, and programs of the federal government. These allocations ensure that money is available for activities, equipment, operations, and personnel. Each year, appropriations bills are passed to cover spending for one fiscal year — an accounting period that begins each October 1 and ends on September 30 of the following year. Moreover, some programs are authorized but not necessarily funded. For instance, Congress did reauthorize Amtrak, but the Appropriations Committee actually reduced the appropriations that would ensure enforcement of the protections named in the reauthorization.

The United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch has jurisdiction over the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2015. This bill covers appropriations for the United States Congress and related agencies. Appropriations bills are considered simultaneously with the House Committee on Appropriations reports in May and the Senate Committee on Appropriations reports in June. Differences between the House and Senate on appropriations bills must be resolved in the fall of the year. The Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2015 is a typical appropriations bill.

The importance of appropriations bills is apparent from the congressional sessions of 2013, when Congress failed to pass 12 appropriations bills for fiscal year 2014 before the October 1, 2013 start date of the new federal fiscal year. The congressional impasse resulted in the 16-day shutdown of the United States federal government. In order to end the shutdown and suspend the debt limit until February 17, Congress passed the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2014, which President Obama signed shortly after midnight on October 17, 2013. Once burned, as the saying goes, Hal Rogers, Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, set a goal of passing all 12 regular appropriations bills for 2015 before the Congressional recess in August.

Of the 12 regular appropriations bills for 2015, the bill covering transportation and infrastructure is the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, which covers the agencies of the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The relevant House bill (H.R. 4745; 113th Congress) totals $52 billion, with $17 billion going to the United States Department of Transportation and $40.3 billion going to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. The bill appropriates $1.8 billion less than was spent in fiscal year 2014. The "Minibus" amendment to H.R. 4660 totals $120 billion.

Is the Canary Still Alive? Railroad Safety and Grade Crossings

Railroad safety is like the canary in a cage that miners used to signal dangerous levels of hazardous gases or a lack of oxygen in mineshafts. The trouble with that archaic system was that by the time the canary died, the miners were likely to die as well. Those who would buy time — and not spend money — to take preventative and proactive action to address the crumbling U.S. infrastructure have apparently decided to use American railroads as the canary in the cage. Except that the debate, they insist, cannot be about whether the mines are structurally unsafe due to aging or whether there has been adequate spending for repairs; it must be about whether human error caused miners to enter mines that collapsed on them — conveniently providing evidence of crumbling, tumbledown infrastructure.

Trains and vehicles don't share the road, but they do share the intersections that have railroad crossings (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Tens of thousands of railroad crossings in America are grade crossings — a label indicating that vehicles cross the tracks at the same level as the rails on which the train travels (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Sometimes these grade crossings have gates that lower and lights that blink a warning; other times, no such system is in place and drivers must determine on their own when it is safe to cross (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Even when railroad crossings are gated, vehicular safety is not guaranteed (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

On February 3, 2015, six people — five of whom were passengers on the train — were killed when an SUV became stuck on the tracks at a railroad crossing in Valhalla, New York (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). The train engineer applied the brakes as soon as he saw the vehicle partly blocking the tracks, slowing the train from 58 miles per hour to 49 mph in the four seconds before impact (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). A dozen large pieces of the third electric rail were somehow wrenched from the bed of the railroad track during the crash and pierced the train cars (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

According to the accident prediction value — a metric developed by the Federal Railroad Administration — a grade crossing in Elmwood Park, Bergen County, New Jersey, is one of the most dangerous in the nation (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). On one occasion, former police chief of Elmwood Don Ingrasselino was riding a bus with his son and classmates on a field trip when the gates of a railroad crossing on the outskirts of town lowered onto the bus, trapping it on the tracks while a train raced toward them (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). The fathers on the bus tried to push the gate rails off while shouting at the bus driver to move (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

While Mr. Ingrasselino helped avert a tragedy that day, in his official capacity as a police officer and police chief he responded to a number of tragic accidents at that very crossing, where the New Jersey Transit tracks are intersected at a sharp angle by Midland Avenue (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Since 1975, that grade crossing has been the site of 29 accidents, leaving two people dead and six injured, giving it the eighth highest accident prediction ranking of grade crossings nationwide (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Close to 130,000 public crossings are scattered across the country; of these, 112 have accident prediction values as high as four grade crossings in New Jersey and six in Long Island (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). A freight railroad crossing in Ashdown, Arkansas holds the highest accident prediction value in the nation; it has neither gates nor warning lights and has been the site of 19 accidents since 1975 (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

A number of variables make sites with high accident prediction values as dangerous as they are (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Many of these grade crossings are in densely populated areas where trains can travel at 80 miles per hour (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Regulations covering freight trains require them to travel at much slower speeds, often as slow as 10 mph (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Also, the number of commuter trains traveling on stretches of commuter rail lines each day is comparable to the number of freight trains on other rail lines over the course of an entire month (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Congestion is only one contributing factor. A number of grade crossings with high accident prediction values are configured with roads and tracks meeting at sharp angles and nearby traffic signals that can create situations in which motorists become trapped on the tracks (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

Because of traffic flow issues and other local concerns, grade-level railroad crossings cannot simply be eliminated (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). The cost of constructing a bridge over or a tunnel under a railroad crossing can run close to $40 million (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). This means that construction of this type typically occurs only in the aftermath of tragic accidents, and projects can take considerable time since they require the cooperation and fiscal support of federal, state, and local agencies (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). For example, in 1982 a train struck a van in Mineola, Long Island, killing nine teenagers. It cost $85 million to build a railroad bridge over the crossing and took 16 years to complete (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

Although it may seem an oddity, there are parts of the country where patience — and perhaps prudence — are not considered virtues (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). The New York region is one such area, and the expression "faster than a New York minute" aptly applies to situations where motorcycle riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians decide they do not need to wait for a train and race across the tracks (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). No amount of bells, lights, and safety gates will suffice to discourage the mindset that justifies risking lives — including one's own — to avoid waiting a few minutes for a train to pass (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015). Two of the most hazardous grade-level crossings are in Brentwood, New York, where federal data show 16 crashes with trains on Washington Avenue and Fifth Avenue. Eight people have been killed and three injured, with a number of them walking, cycling, or driving around the lowered gates (Buettner & Fitzsimmons, 2015).

In 2008, a tragic Metrolink train crash killed 25 people because the engineer was texting on his cell phone and missed a signal warning him of a train ahead on the same track. The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 followed, which included a regulation compelling railroad companies to install Positive Train Control (PTC) — a feature that would automatically apply brakes when a train exceeds the safe speed for a section of track, and would prevent crashes caused by operator error, such as an incapacitated or distracted engineer.

Congress enacted the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 on the heels of that Los Angeles crash and mandated that PTC be installed by the end of 2015. Positive Train Control is due to be installed on the rails running between Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., which will unfortunately be of no solace to those injured or bereaved by the 2015 crash. Nor had the technology been installed prior to the 2013 train crash that killed 4 and injured hundreds more. Corporations have been pushing back against the seven-year rollout, asking that the installation deadline be extended to 2020. Moreover, corporations involved in the oil transport business have been lobbying Congress to reduce restrictions on the rail transportation of oil tanker cars.

The issue of rail safety in America is particularly challenging because, unlike European countries that operate high-speed trains on dedicated tracks, all types of trains share the railroad tracks in the United States. Furthermore, trains can travel at higher speeds in Europe because rail systems there are vastly superior to those in the United States. For the sake of comparison, the journey from Boston to Washington, D.C. takes six and a half hours by the fastest available train, while a trip from Paris to Marseille — somewhat further in distance — takes just over three hours. The French train travels close to 200 miles per hour, considerably faster than the Philadelphia train that ran off the rails going into a curve at more than 106 miles per hour — twice the speed limit for that section of track.

The Unhappy Union of Congress and Infrastructure

The significance of the relationship between rail safety and highway safety can be found in Congress's resistance to adequately prioritizing human safety in its appropriations for transportation and infrastructure. The astonishing decision not to appropriate adequate funds to Amtrak immediately following an Amtrak train crash starkly illuminates the misguided position the conservative Congress insists on taking — regardless of human costs. In their reductionist approach, Congress pre-empted any official determination of the cause of the 2015 Amtrak crash by claiming it was operator error, a condition that additional funding for Amtrak would not address. The appropriations committee apparently chose a myopic view that did not factor in the possibility of parallel accidents occurring with oil tanker cars.

In their allocations deliberations for transportation and infrastructure on May 13, 2015, Congress was, as usual, split into two camps. John Boehner spoke for conservative Republicans when he dismissed Democrats' concerns that the underfunding of the rail system was responsible for the derailment in Philadelphia (Bennen, 2015, p. 1). Calling a journalist's question "stupid" at a morning press conference, Boehner claimed the accident had nothing to do with funding since the train was traveling at twice the speed limit (Bennen, 2015, p. 1). Republican House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan spoke on Fox News, "dismissing those who want to increase 'the size of government programs,' all in response to an accident he said was 'human error'" and expressing hope that "people won't seize on political opportunities out of tragedies like this" to spend more money (Bennen, 2015, p. 1).

Taking a macro view, and temporarily setting aside the tragic train accident in Philadelphia, a broad swath of people — from the President to infrastructure experts to the general public — who have formally and informally assessed American investment in domestic infrastructure arrive at the same conclusion: national embarrassment. The days when the United States was the global leader in infrastructure innovation and development are long gone. An evident relationship exists between the relative standing of domestic versus foreign infrastructure, the abysmal condition of U.S. infrastructure, and the Republican platform that public investment in government programs is, de facto, bad economics (Bennen, 2015, p. 1). Taking a micro perspective, it is readily apparent that a Positive Train Control system would have prevented the Philadelphia accident by automatically braking the speeding train. Funds must be specifically allocated to improvements such as PTC for them to be prioritized and integrated into the rail system — a factor that makes the Philadelphia train crash very much about the funding.

A Perfect Storm for Catastrophe: Positive Train Control Delays

The backstory of Amtrak's downhill trajectory is telling. The automatic speed control system that would have prevented the 2015 Philadelphia train wreck was very close to being installed. The delay was the result of a perfect storm caused by intentional budget shortfalls, bureaucratic rules, and technical hurdles (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). As far back as 2008, Congress ordered that Positive Train Control systems be installed so that a speeding train that was out of control could be automatically slowed down (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). A PTC system includes hardware and software technology, antennas, locomotive equipment, track equipment, and radio transponders (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). A PTC system alerts operators about dangerous curves and objects on the tracks, and can stop a train automatically. Its installation required railroads to have access to certain wireless frequencies to function (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). However, lawmakers failed to provide this access, leaving Amtrak to negotiate for airwaves that were privately controlled and frequently used for mobile broadband (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

For roughly four years, Amtrak was unable to activate the system because it could not purchase the right to use airwaves in the Northeast Corridor (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). The transponders that would have allowed the system to be activated had been installed on the tracks, but they were not operational at the time of the Philadelphia crash because airwave access had not yet been secured (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Compared to other U.S. railroads, Amtrak was more progressive simply for having installed the transponders and pursuing airwave access so that the congressionally mandated PTC systems could become a standard safety feature (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Indeed, Amtrak's application to purchase a wireless spectrum from Skybridge Spectrum Foundation, filed on March 5, 2015, had been approved by the Federal Communications Commission, removing another important obstacle (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Approval of the application was not the final step, however, as the system still required testing on MHz radios, which Amtrak planned to complete by year's end (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

Communication about the status of Amtrak's safety system was also inadequate, as evidenced by the assumption of senior Amtrak officials who believed that the PTC braking system had already been installed on the track that Northeast Regional Train No. 188 was traveling (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). In fact, an older automatic braking system was in place — but only on the southbound side of the stretch of track, not on the northbound track that Train 188 was using (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). A legacy decision made in 1990 had resulted in the system being installed only on the southbound side, yet it was configured to detect the maximum permitted speed for trains traveling in both directions (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). An embedded complication is that trains are permitted to travel at different speeds depending on their direction, including different deceleration requirements as they approach the curve where Train 188 derailed (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

Train 188 was equipped with another type of safety system designed to alert the engineer if the steering panel has not been touched for a certain period of time (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). The system sounds alarms to alert a distracted or dozing engineer, and if the panel remains untouched shortly after the alarms sound, the system is designed to stop the train automatically (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). An explanation for why this second safety system did not stop the train had not been forthcoming as of the date of this paper (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

The tragic irony is that Amtrak had demonstrated a strong commitment to installing safety systems and was further along in the actual process than other railroads — particularly freight railroads (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). With all the equipment shortages, lack of available and affordable radio spectrum, and other technological challenges, the installation of all PTC systems was not expected to be completed until the end of 2018 (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Even then, it would take an additional two years for all system components to be tested to ensure they work together seamlessly.

The federal government has mandated that the safety technology be installed on 60,000 miles of track (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). To date, approximately 8,200 miles have been updated with PTC safety installations (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Railroad statistics at the close of 2014 showed that only 15% of locomotives were fully equipped with PTC systems, while 56% of the track systems had PTC safety braking installations in place (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

It is important to note that Federal Communications Commission rules regarding environmental and preservation reviews prior to the installation of PTC system antennas on tribal lands or in historic areas resulted in a delay of more than one year (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). However, the FCC countered by noting that Congress had relaxed those environmental and preservation reviews in 2014, and that no new antennas were required in the largely urban Northeast Corridor where Train 188 derailed (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). Moreover, the FCC claims that new procedures have accelerated reviews, enabling the commission to process and approve applications for close to 1,400 antennas from railroad companies every two weeks (Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

The cost of the PTC system has been estimated by the Federal Railroad Administration at $52,000 per mile of track (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). This puts the total cost of PTC installation at more than $9 billion, of which $5.2 billion has already been spent (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). A key factor making PTC systems expensive is that they must be interoperable — the equipment used by different railroads, which may vary considerably, must communicate seamlessly with PTC systems across the network (Shear & Mouawad, 2015; Wolfe et al., 2015). Accordingly, the Federal Railroad Administration sought funding on two separate occasions to finance the technology for Amtrak and other commuter railroads (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). The first request, for $825 million, was ignored by Congress. A second request was made in 2015 for the 2016 budget as part of the Department of Transportation's Grow America budget (Shear & Mouawad, 2015). The situation points to an unfunded mandate: Congress's failure to invest in Amtrak's capital program or to make rail safety a public priority (Rogers, 2015; Shear & Mouawad, 2015).

Conclusion

The 2015 Department of Transportation budget provides a total of $91 billion in discretionary and mandatory budgetary resources. Importantly, a $302 billion four-year surface transportation reauthorization proposal will support much-needed infrastructure projects and create construction jobs while improving bridges, roads, railways, and transit systems. The key components of the budget will go a long way toward addressing the infrastructure issues that have jeopardized the U.S. economy. The budget reflects a prioritization system called "Fix It First," which emphasizes maintaining existing infrastructure in a state of good repair, facilitated by new federal performance measures. The budget also provides a TIGER Grant program to help states and localities with innovative projects that deliver exceptional benefits, such as widening and deepening U.S. ports. Should the money be allocated, a four-year, $10 billion freight program will be implemented to eliminate existing bottlenecks for freight transportation and improve the efficiency of moving goods in support of President Obama's National Export Initiative. Transit and passenger rail programs are also slotted to receive funding in this budget, beginning with $12.3 billion and increasing to $22.3 billion in 2015. The rail funding would provide grants for expanding transit capital investment, significantly improving existing and new intercity passenger rail service, and strengthening the economic competitiveness of the U.S. freight rail system.

With substantial media coverage of oil tanker explosions — five of which occurred in 2015 alone — it is important to recognize that the Department of Transportation budget also provides $14 billion in discretionary funds for air transportation, maritime, rail safety, pipeline safety, and hazardous material transportation activities.

After a difficult 2014 Congressional session, the new 2015 Department of Transportation budget provides $91 billion in discretionary and mandatory funding directed at infrastructure support projects that are crucial for long-term economic growth. A well-functioning transportation system and a safe infrastructure that enables efficient business and trade will facilitate commerce — both national and international — foster the safe movement of people and goods, support many types of jobs across multiple sectors, and attract and retain businesses drawn by improved infrastructure.

The relationship between proposed budgets, unfunded authorizations, and realized fiscal allocations has been examined throughout this paper. A substantial degree of deterioration in U.S. infrastructure and transportation systems has taken place since the conservative Congress took their seats, with the only real respite from myopic federal policy occurring under President Obama's stimulus package. The American people deserve transportation systems and infrastructure that will enable the country to reclaim its economic stability and leadership in global commerce. For this to be accomplished, the 114th Congress will need to allocate funds as though they genuinely believe that investing in America is both critical and urgent.

References

Bennen, S. (2015, May 14). Boehner rejects Amtrak question as 'stupid.' The Rachel Maddow Show. MSNBC. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/boehner-rejects-amtrak-question-stupid#break

Buettner, R., & Fitzsimmons, E. G. (2015, February 12). In New York area, points where train and tragedy are likely to intersect. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/nyregion/at-rail-crossings-in-new-york-area-a-constantly-lurking-danger.html

Caygle, J. (2015, May 13). House panel votes to cut Amtrak budget hours after deadly crash. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/amtrak-budget-house-panel-crash-117904.html

de Blasio, B., & Cornett, M. (2015, May 13). Let our cities move. The Opinion Pages. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/nyregion/metro-north-engineer-tried-to-slow-train-before-crash-with-suv-report-says.html

Everett, B. (2015, May 15). Sen. Pat Toomey changes his tune on train safety. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/pat-toomey-train-safety-system-118002.html

Fitzsimmons, E. G. (2015, February 23). Metro-North engineer tried to slow train before crash with S.U.V., report says. The New York Times.

Leonhardt, D. (2015, May 13). Amtrak crash and America's declining construction spending. The Upshot: Wear and Tear. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/upshot/amtrak-crash-and-americas-declining-construction-spending.html

McGeehan, P. (2015, March 18). Inquiry into deadly East Harlem explosion focuses on Con Ed's plastic pipes. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/nyregion/inquiry-into-deadly-east-harlem-explosion-focuses-on-con-eds-plastic-pipes.html

Mouawad, J. (2015, April 6). Transportation safety board seeks stiffer standards for oil tank rail cars. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/business/transportation-safety-board-seeks-stiffer-standards-for-oil-tank-rail-cars.html

Rogers, D. (2015, May 13). GOP cuts to transportation, housing draw fire. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/gop-transportation-cuts-housing-cuts-117905.html

Runningen, R. (2014, July 15). Crumbling roadways add costs to U.S. economy, White House says. West Hawaii Today. Retrieved from

Santora, M. (2014, March 12). At least 3 killed as gas explosion hits East Harlem. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/nyregion/east-harlem-building-collapse.html

Shear, M. D., & Mouawad, J. (2015). Amtrak says shortfalls and rules delayed its safety systems. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/us/amtrak-says-it-was-just-months-away-from-installing-safety-system.html

Weisman, J., & Baker, P. (2014, July 15). House passes interim fix for highway trust fund. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/us/politics/house-passes-interim-fix-for-highway-trust-fund.html

Wolfe, K. A., Caygle, H., Scholtes, J., & Byers, A. (2015, May 15). Railroads, Congress feuded while life-saving technology lagged. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/train-safety-technology-speed-control-117973.html