OKLAHOMA CITY — The State of Oklahoma has argued all the way to the highest court in the land – and all to no avail – in support of its statute to penalize trains that block railroad crossings for longer than 10 minutes.
A federal trial court ruling that struck down Oklahoma’s law was upheld by the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to revisit the issue.
The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 preempts Oklahoma’s statute because the ICCTA regulates railroad operations, U.S. District Judge Charles B. Goodwin in Oklahoma City ruled, and the 10th Circuit affirmed that decision. On June 21 the Supreme Court denied the state’s request to review that order.
The Oklahoma Corporation Commission in 2019 sought changes to its rules, including one about trains blocking at-grade railroad crossings.
Later that year the Oklahoma Legislature passed House Bill 2472, the Blocked Crossing Act by House Speaker Charles McCall. That measure would have prohibited railcars from blocking vehicle traffic at a crossing on a public highway or street for longer than 10 minutes, except in emergency situations or if the train is “continuously moving”. The law authorized a fine of up to $1,000 per violation.
Sixteen days after the 10-minute blockage statute went into effect, a Burlington Northern Santa Fe train occupied the side track in Davis for 38 minutes to enable another train to pass on the main line. During that time the BNSF train blocked at least one grade crossing, and a police officer issued a citation for violating the state law.
The next day, in Edmond, another BNSF train occupied the side track for 40 minutes so that two other trains could pass; that train, too, obstructed at least one grade crossing. And 12 days later a BNSF train blocked a crossing while it stopped on the side track in Edmond for 24 minutes to let another train pass. On both occasions a police officer cited the company for violating the statute.
(Side tracks are used to park a train going one direction on a main line while a train going the opposite direction passes, the court noted.)
The cities of Edmond and Davis each filed a complaint against BNSF with the Corporation Commission, and a commission official issued a citation and notice of hearing.
BNSF filed suit after receiving 3 citations
BNSF filed suit in Oklahoma City’s Western District federal court against Edmond, Davis and the Corporation Commission to prevent enforcement of the statute, and Judge Goodwin sided with BNSF.
U.S. courts have observed that federal law “shall be the supreme Law of the Land” regardless of anything in a state’s constitution or statutes to the contrary.
Congress passed the ICCTA “to establish an exclusive Federal scheme of economic regulation and deregulation for railroad transportation.” The ICCTA provides that the Surface Transportation Board has exclusive jurisdiction over transportation by rail carriers and the operation of tracks or facilities, including side tracks.
“The plain language is clear: the Surface Transportation Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the operation of side tracks in Oklahoma,” the appellate court declared.
The Blocked Crossing Statute “regulates how long a rail carrier may block, or occupy, a grade crossing before municipal authorities may fine the rail carrier.” However, the judges noted, “many factors determine the time that a train will block a grade crossing,” including the train’s speed and length, whether the side track intersects the grade crossing, and when a railroad schedules a train to pass.
“The Court does not conclude that any statute relating to blocked crossings is prohibited,” Judge Goodwin wrote in his opinion on Nov. 30, 2020. “But a statute that tells railroad companies how long they may stop their trains – for whatever ends – intrudes on the territory reserved to the ICCTA.”
While Oklahoma contends its statute is “for the safety and welfare of the people,” it “effectively regulates rail operations” too, a task the ICCTA reserves for the STB, the appellate court wrote.
The Surface Transportation Board has concluded that the scope of ICCTA preemption “is broader than just direct economic regulation of railroads” and that states and municipalities “cannot take an action that would have the effect of foreclosing or unduly restricting a railroad’s ability to conduct its operations or otherwise unreasonably burden interstate commerce.”
State emphasized its safety concerns
States “generally assume they have safety authority over operations, while railroads generally assume complete preemption of state laws, making any legislative or negotiated solution needlessly difficult,” then-Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter told the Supreme Court.
“Moreover, clarity is needed because, aside from the states, no one is doing anything to solve the numerous safety issues arising from the chronic problem of stopped trains blocking public roads.”
BNSF “does not attempt to address these issues, choosing instead to jam as many trains onto its network as possible, maximizing both its profits and the harm caused by perennial blocked crossings,” Oklahoma Solicitor General Mithun Mansinghani wrote.
During debate on HB 2472 in 2019, Speaker McCall said some 9-1-1 coordinators informed him that because of trains blocking at-grade railroad crossings, they had to send first responders up to 20 miles out of their way to respond to emergencies.
The Federal Railroad Administration “has studied the issue for years,” Mansinghani noted, “and yet, despite acknowledging the safety hazards, it has not issued any regulation or order regarding the issue.”
The state pointed out that blocked crossings in Oklahoma have “forced a paramedic . . . to jump between rail cars of a stopped train to reach a patient in time,” delayed the response times of firefighters and paramedics, and “caused Oklahomans to engage in risky behavior to avoid blocked crossings.”
The “10-minute rule” addressed those safety concerns and therefore fell under the Federal Railroad Safety Act, the State of Oklahoma maintained. The 10th Circuit court, though, said that while the state’s safety concerns are “legitimate,” they “do not concern any ‘hazard to the railroad system or its participants’. Rather, they are local public safety issues – not rail safety issues.”
All three federal courts concluded that federal law preempts the state statute, so the state law is null and void.
Southwest Ledger previously contacted the offices House Speaker McCall and Attorney General John O’Connor for comments about the court rulings, but neither responded.
Okla. has 2,900 miles of tracks, 3,475 crossings
Oklahoma is crisscrossed by approximately 2,900 miles of railroad tracks that intersect with county roads, municipal streets, and state/federal highways at 3,475 at-grade crossings.
Major lines in Oklahoma include the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, which has 952 miles of track in this state, according to a document entered into the court record. The Union Pacific Railroad reports 1,240 miles of track in Oklahoma.
Other railroads in Oklahoma include the Kansas City Southern, 150 miles of track; the Stillwater Central, 257 miles; Grainbelt Corp., 180 miles; the Kiamichi Railroad, 156 miles; Arkansas-Oklahoma Railroad, 70 miles; the Wichita, Tillman & Jackson Railroad, 61 miles; the Hollis & Eastern Railroad, 14 miles; and several other “short lines.”