REPORT  DIGEST

 

Management Audit of the

 

Expenditures from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund

 

Illinois Commerce Commission and Department of Transportation

 

Released:

November 25, 2003

 

 

 

State of Illinois

Office of the Auditor General

 

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND

AUDITOR GENERAL 

 

To obtain a copy of the report contact:

Office of the Auditor General

Attn:  Records Manager

Iles Park Plaza

740 East Ash Street

Springfield, IL 62703

(217) 782-6046 or

TDD:  (217) 524-4646

 

This report is also available on the worldwide web at:

http://www.state.il.us/auditor

 

 

 

SYNOPSIS

 

Legislative Audit Commission Resolution 123 directed the Auditor General to conduct a management audit of expenditures from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.

Money in the Grade Crossing Protection Fund is administered by the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) but appropriated to the Illinois Department of Transportation to assist local jurisdictions (counties, townships and municipalities) in paying for safety improvements at highway-rail grade crossings on local roads and streets.  In carrying out its mandated responsibility, the ICC orders improvements at public highway-rail grade crossings and bridges that it determines to be in the interest of public safety.  The audit concluded the following:

·        The Department of Transportation and the Commerce Commission do not have an interagency agreement that clarifies each agency’s management responsibilities.

·        The Commerce Commission does not assure that prescribed project work is done, work is done on schedule, or that expenditures for the project are appropriate.

·        The Illinois Commerce Commission’s computer system does not capture certain date information that would allow for more effective analysis and management of Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.

·        The Department of Transportation and the Commerce Commission do not have clear standards for what expenditure documentation is required for projects.

·         The Commerce Commission does not get copies of signal failure reports to help them to assure that adequate warning devices are in place, and which projects or types of projects should be funded.



REPORT CONCLUSIONS

Money in the Grade Crossing Protection Fund is administered by the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) but appropriated to the Illinois Department of Transportation.  The program was created by the General Assembly to assist local jurisdictions (counties, townships and municipalities) in paying for safety improvements at highway-rail grade crossings on local roads and streets.  In carrying out its mandated responsibility, the ICC orders improvements at public highway-rail grade crossings and bridges that it determines to be in the interest of public safety.  The cost of these ordered improvements is shared by the State, the railroads, and local governments.  The majority of the cost of these improvements is funded through the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.

Money for the Grade Crossing Protection Fund (GCPF) comes from a portion of State motor fuel tax receipts.  Each month since Fiscal Year 2000, $2.25 million has been transferred from the Motor Fuel Tax Fund into the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.  This amount provides the Fund with $27 million annually to be used for safety improvements at highway-rail crossings on local roads and streets.  Prior to Fiscal Year 2000, $1.5 million was transferred monthly for a total of $18 million per year for projects.

Total expenditures for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects were $25 million in Fiscal Year 2001 and $34 million in Fiscal Year 2002.  These expenditures were typically used for warning device upgrades; grade separations including construction, reconstruction, or repair of bridges over or under railroad tracks; interconnects where crossing signals are connected to the adjacent traffic signals so that the two systems operate in a synchronized manner; road work including approaches and connecting roads; remote monitoring devices which immediately alert the railroad to any problems in warning device operations; or low cost improvements at crossings not equipped with automatic warning devices.

The Motor Fuel Tax Law has required the Illinois Commerce Commission to develop, each year since Fiscal Year 2000, a one and five year Project Plan for rail crossing capital improvements that will be paid for with monies from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.  However, because of the significant amount of time between the initiation of a project and the expenditure of funds on a project, most projects with expenditures in Fiscal Year 2002 were initiated prior to the 2002 Plan.  Only $3,854 of the $34 million in Fiscal Year 2002 expenditures were for projects from the Fiscal Year 2002 Project Plan.

Administration for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects is shared between the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation.  There is little written guidance available on which agency has responsibility for the various required functions related to managing Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  In addition, limited on-site construction management is currently done. 

The majority of project milestones for the projects we reviewed in detail were not achieved in a timely manner.  Railroads and local government agencies were not timely at supplying plans, submitting progress reports, and completing the project.  None of ten projects for which we did detailed testing completed all project milestones in a timely manner.

The Illinois Commerce Commission’s automated system does not capture certain date information that would allow for more effective analysis and management of Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  Not having these dates captured may be due to a lack of active on-site construction management and because ICC staff are not routinely involved in the completion of projects.

 

 

The ICC is responsible for administering a rail safety program and expenditures for the program are paid for from the Transportation Regulatory Fund.  Over the past years, the statutory transfer from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund to the Transportation Regulatory Fund to support the administration of rail safety at the ICC has increased.  From Fiscal Years 1993 to 1996, the annual transfer was $750,000; from Fiscal Years 1997 through 2000, the annual transfer was $1,500,000; and from Fiscal Years 2001 through 2004, the transfer was $2,250,000.

The Grade Crossing Protection Fund and the Transportation Regulatory Fund have both experienced high fund balances carried over from year to year.  The Grade Crossing Protection Fund has had an average year end balance of over $40 million over ten years and the Transportation Regulatory Fund averaged over $5 million.  These large fund balances have occurred during a time of increased transfers into the Funds to be used for grade crossing projects and rail safety administration.  The Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation should work to appropriately manage fund balances in the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.

Both the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation have some responsibilities for GCPF project expenditure review; however, neither agency adequately reviews actual expenditures to verify the validity of the materials, labor, or personnel expenses, as they relate to the scope of the project.  In addition, there are no clear standards on what documentation is to be included with billings for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects. 

Expenditure documentation submitted for payment varied from projects where significant documentation was submitted, including items which were unrelated to projects, to projects where little or no supporting documentation was submitted.  Without consistent documentation and thorough review of expenditures it is difficult to know whether expenditures were appropriate or if all required elements of projects were done.

We did not identify any instances where the Illinois Commerce Commission did not comply with statutes guiding the Grade Crossing Protection Fund process.  Most requirements related to the Fund are found in a section of the Motor Fuel Tax Law (35 ILCS 505/8(c)). 

The Illinois Commerce Commission conducts investigations of all accidents at rail crossings that involve a fatality but does not investigate all accidents.  The Commission staff should investigate rail accidents to help them in fulfilling their responsibility of assuring that adequate warning devices are in place at grade crossings.

BACKGROUND

On July 12, 2002, the Legislative Audit Commission adopted Resolution 123.  The Resolution directed the Auditor General to conduct a management audit of expenditures from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.  The Resolution asks us to include:

1.      The amount and purpose of expenditures and transfers from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund in Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002, including administrative versus construction-related costs; and

2.      Whether expenditures and transfers from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund made in Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002 appeared to be in conformity with applicable statutes.  (page 3)

 

 

 

 

grade crossing protection fund pROGRAM

Illinois has 8,568 public grade level crossings.

The Illinois Commerce Commission has the statutory responsibility to assure safety at all public highway-rail crossings in the State of Illinois.  In January of 2003, there were 8,568 public grade level crossings in Illinois, of which 7,390 or 86 percent were on local roads and streets.  Illinois also had 2,739 grade separated crossings (bridges), 276 pedestrian grade crossings, and 76 pedestrian grade separated crossings (bridges).  At a “grade level crossing” or “at-grade crossing” both the road and the rail are on the same level.  The Grade Crossing Protection Fund is used to help modify or upgrade crossings on local roads and streets.  Upgrades on State roads are paid for with State Road Fund monies.

 

Digest Exhibit 1

GRADE CROSSING PROTECTION FUND EXPENDITURES BY TYPE

Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002 combined

 

 

 TYPE

 

Total

% of Total

 

 Bridge

$29,636,687

50%

 

 Signals/Gates

$8,493,339

14%

 

 4-Quad Gates and Signals

$5,539,514

9%

 

 Interconnect Circuitry

$4,809,592

8%

 

 Signals/Gates/Roadwork

$4,172,542

7%

 

 Detection

$4,142,869

7%

 

 Bridge/Signals

$1,468,608

2%

 

 Signals

$584,263

1%

 

 Roadwork

$487,810

1%

 

 Gates

$124,030

0%

 

 Median

$78,158

0%

 

  Grand Total

$59,537,412

100%

 

Note:

Percentages do not add due to rounding.

 

Source:

ICC data analyzed by OAG.

State financial support for crossing safety improvement projects on local roads comes from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.  The Motor Fuel Tax Law provides that each month $2.25 million in State motor fuel tax receipts is transferred from the Motor Fuel Tax Fund to the Grade Crossing Protection Fund.  This amount provides $27 million annually to be used for local crossing safety improvements.  Digest Exhibit 1 shows expenditures by type from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund for Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002.  In Fiscal Year 2002 there were $34 million in expenditures from the Fund and the year end fund balance was $30 million.  Fiscal Year 2002 had the highest expenditures and lowest fund balance in ten years.

Money in the Grade Crossing Protection Fund is administered by the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) but appropriated to the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT).  The program was created by the General Assembly to assist local jurisdictions (counties, townships and municipalities) in paying for safety improvements at railroad crossings on local roads. (pages 3-4, 27-30)

 

Annually, $27 million is transferred from the Motor Fuel Tax Fund to the Grade Crossing Protection Fund for local crossing safety improvements.

 


 

coordination between agencies

There is little written guidance available on which agency has responsibility for the various required functions related to managing Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.

There is little written guidance available on which agency has responsibility for the various required functions related to managing Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  In addition, limited project management is currently done.  Administration for projects currently is shared between the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation.  There is no interagency agreement, nor are there administrative rules or statutes in place to describe which agency is responsible for managing what aspect of the process.  In addition, neither the ICC nor IDOT currently has written policies or procedures in place to direct and assist its employees with duties associated with Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.

While there was some coordination between IDOT and ICC, adoption of an Interagency Agreement would document which agency was responsible for areas such as review of cost estimates and plans, review of expenditures, project management, and close-out inspections.  Such an agreement would eliminate the possibility of duplication of efforts and oversight, as well as ensure that essential elements of project management were being achieved.  We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation develop written policies and procedures and adopt an Interagency Agreement that clarifies each agency’s management responsibilities relating to Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  (pages 16-17)

MANAGEMENT OF GCPF PROJECTS

Before the beginning of the fiscal year, ICC staff create a Project Plan which is made up of two components.  The first component lists projects expected to be undertaken in that given year and the second is a four-year outlook listing for future projects.  Because of the significant amount of time between the initiation of a project and the expenditure of funds on a project, most projects with expenditures in Fiscal Year 2002 were initiated prior to the 2002 Plan.  Only $3,854 of the $34 million of Fiscal Year 2002 expenditures were for projects from the Fiscal Year 2002 Project Plan.

Before an Order is issued, ICC staff are significantly involved in developing stipulated agreements and assuring that the work to be done will assure safety at the specified crossing or crossings.  This involvement is particularly important because assuring crossing safety is ICC’s statutory responsibility.  However, ICC staff indicated to us that their primary administrative responsibility ends after an Order is issued and the detailed engineering plans have been approved, unless the railroad or the local community asks for assistance or time to complete the project.

The ICC did not have adequate controls in place to track and monitor compliance with the requirements that it placed in Orders for GCPF projects.  ICC Orders contain several completion dates with which the railroads and local governments are required to adhere.  We found that detailed plans were missing from 1 of 10 projects sampled, and were submitted late for six of the other nine projects sampled where they were required by the ICC Order.  In addition, for the nine projects sampled where progress reports were required by the Order, all were either missing the required reports or the reports were not timely.  Late or missing plans and progress reports indicate that there is a lack of oversight or project management.

 

 

 

The ICC does not assure that prescribed work is done, work is done on schedule, or that expenditures for the project are appropriate.  In addition to not reviewing work in progress, ICC employees also generally do not review the work when it is complete to assure that it was done appropriately.  In some instances IDOT district engineers may do a post completion review but they do not have the same level of expertise about crossing safety device issues.

We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission assure that Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects are adequately managed.  To do this, the expertise of ICC Railroad Safety Specialists should be utilized through on-site construction management to assure that the needed safety work is performed, that Order requirements are met, and that project expenditures are proper. (pages 13-14, 17-19)

Timeliness of the Process

None of ten projects for which we did detailed testing completed all project milestones in a timely manner.

The majority of project milestones for the projects we reviewed in detail were not achieved in a timely manner.  Railroads and local government agencies were not timely at supplying plans, submitting progress reports, and completing the project.  None of ten projects for which we did detailed testing completed all project milestones in a timely manner.

The projects in our sample took an average of 3.8 years to complete from project initiation date to the completion date.  Of that time, 1.7 years was from the date of the Order to the completion date.  The project initiation date is the date of earliest documentation that identified the need for the project.

Seventy percent of projects from our sample (7 of 10) had pre-Order periods longer than the total project completion time from the Order date.  Some projects had pre-Order periods as high as four years or more.  Sample projects which were on time or slightly over had some of the longest pre-Order periods.

For the 84 projects that had expenditures in Fiscal Years 2001 or 2002 and were completed in that period, the average project completion time was 2.6 years from the year of the Order.  Because an exact end date is not captured by ICC’s existing computer system, the elapsed time was calculated by subtracting the fiscal year of the Order from the fiscal year that the project was closed out.

Incomplete Data

The Illinois Commerce Commission’s automated system does not capture certain date information that would allow for more effective analysis and management of Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  The ICC’s computer system does not capture project initiation date or the date when all work required by the Order is completed.  In addition to missing useful dates in its computer system, the inventory of rail crossings was incomplete, including not having data in all records that indicates whether or not a crossing was on a State road.

We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission assure that appropriate data is captured within computer systems to allow adequate management and timely completion of Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  (pages 19-24)

 

 

 

 

 

Transportation Regulatory Fund

The ICC is responsible for administering a rail safety program and expenditures for the program are paid from the Transportation Regulatory Fund (TRF).  Annually, $2.25 million is transferred from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund to the Transportation Regulatory Fund to pay the cost of administration of the Illinois Commerce Commission's railroad safety program as it relates to railroad crossings.  In recent years, the statutory transfer from the Grade Crossing Protection Fund to the Transportation Regulatory Fund to support the administration of rail safety at the ICC has increased.  From Fiscal Years 1993 to 1996, the annual transfer was $750,000; from Fiscal Years 1997 through 2000, the annual transfer was $1,500,000; and from Fiscal Years 2001 through 2004, the transfer was $2,250,000. 

ICC’s Rail Safety Section (RSS) is responsible for identifying and prioritizing crossing safety improvements on an annual and five-year cycle in addition to other rail safety responsibilities.  The RSS works with local government agencies and railroads to identify safety improvement projects for the Commission’s Crossing Safety Improvement Program.  The RSS is directly responsible for selecting projects authorized by the Commission to receive assistance from GCPF. 

ICC railroad administrative expenditures consist of various categories including payroll, travel, and equipment.  The total amount of Fiscal Year 2001 TRF expenditures was $9.1 million and the railroad portion of the expenditures was $4.9 million or 54 percent of the total TRF expenditures.  Fiscal Year 2002 TRF expenditures were $8.6 million and the railroad portion was $4.3 million or 50 percent. 

Direct expenditures for railroad are those that can be directly assigned either because of an employee’s position or because expenditures are directly for railroad.  We reviewed the direct expenditures and found that they appear to be rail crossing safety related.  The indirect expenses are allocated based on a required statutory system.  Allocations of expenses are made from areas such as executive director, legislative affairs, administrative services, and the office of general counsel.  Allocations are also made between rail and motor carrier. (pages 31-32, 42)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FUND MANAGEMENT

Digest Exhibit 2

TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY Fund AND GRADE CROSSING pROTECTION FUND Balances for Fiscal Years 1993 to 2002

Dollars in Millions

Fiscal     Year

TRF

Balance

GCPF   Balance

1993

$2.3

$38.4

1994

$1.7

$45.8

1995

$1.9

$48.5

1996

$4.4

$45.8

1997

$6.3

$45.0

1998

$7.4

$41.3

1999

$8.0

$39.6

2000

$6.8

$39.7

2001

$7.3

$39.2

2002

$6.5

$29.9

Source:

OAG financial/compliance audits, Comptroller, and Illinois CAFR data summarized by OAG.

Both the Grade Crossing Protection Fund and the Transportation Regulatory Fund have experienced high fund balances carried over from year to year.  The Grade Crossing Protection Fund has had an average year end balance of over $40 million over ten years and the Transportation Regulatory Fund averaged over $5 million.  These large fund balances have occurred during a time when the transfers into the Funds to be used for grade crossing projects and rail safety administration have increased.

The OAG financial and compliance audits of the Illinois Commerce Commission have included a finding that the ICC carried a fund balance in the Transportation Regulatory Fund that exceeds the fund balance permitted by law.  The finding has been repeated since 1997.  The fund balance should not exceed $2,898,185, the limit placed on the TRF in statute (625 ILCS 5/18c-1503).  Digest Exhibit 2 shows that the Fund has consistently exceeded this amount since 1996.  The exhibit shows fund balances for both the Transportation Regulatory and the Grade Crossing Protection Funds for ten years.

We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission continue to work to manage the fund balance in the Transportation Regulatory Fund to assure that it is maintained at a level that is in compliance with the statute (625 ILCS 5/18c-1503).  We also recommended that the Commerce Commission and the Department of Transportation work to appropriately manage fund balances in the Grade Crossing Protection Fund. (pages 33-34)

 

 

 

pROJECT Expenditure REVIEW

Neither ICC nor IDOT are conducting adequate expenditure reviews.

Both the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation have some responsibilities for GCPF project expenditure review; however, neither agency is conducting adequate expenditure reviews.  Given the lack of adequate expenditure reviews, the State may be overpaying for improvements to railroad crossings.

Illinois Commerce Commission

ICC staff said that their role is to review the plans and costs of a project prior to the Order.  They also intervene when a railroad or local government agency goes over either time or money as stated in the Order.  Finally, they can help if the railroad or local government runs into a problem during the construction phase of a project.  They said that they do not have the resources to check on all completed GCPF projects.  ICC

 

 

 staff noted that they maintain a “level of trust” with the railroad companies that crossing projects are completed as required by the Order.  In the same meeting, however, they noted some bills from railroads included additives and equipment rental that seemed unreasonably high.  ICC does not review expenditures to approve them either before or after bills are paid by IDOT.

ICC exercises some control over costs through the Order process.  Before an Order is entered, the ICC technical staff review preliminary plans and make a determination whether proposed costs are appropriate.  That cost is then used to establish the maximum amount which can be paid under an Order.  If there are cost overruns, a supplemental Order would be required to pay any additional expenses. 

The limits in the Order can only be effective if detailed cost estimates are provided and reviewed before the Order is established.  The ICC has no criteria established that could help them to set a cap on expenditures for certain types of projects.  For example, standard lights and gates installed at a single track crossing might have an established dollar cap and exceptions to that cap would require justification.  This could help to control costs among the various railroads and communities doing projects.

 

Department of Transportation

The Department of Transportation initially sets up an obligation for a project when the ICC provides an Order to them.  When bills are submitted for an Order, an IDOT employee verifies that an obligation has been set up and only allows expenditures up to that obligation amount.

IDOT does not review expenditures before payment.  IDOT may, however, do an audit after the project is closed.  During Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002, IDOT performed 65 audits for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects regardless of expenditure year.  Those audits included 11 with recoveries to the Fund that totaled $65,551.  This compares to total expenditures for the same time period of $59.5 million.  The audits with recoveries identified expenditures billed to the wrong project, over-billing for equipment, and billing for expenditures which were not allowable.  The equipment issues in particular are the type of issues we identified in our expenditure reviews.

As of August 2003, 8 audits had been done from the 84 GCPF projects which had expenditures and were completed in Fiscal Year 2001 or 2002.  IDOT officials noted that currently IDOT takes two or more years after project completion to conduct these audits.  They noted that because of personnel losses they could get to be as much as five years behind.

Although audits do provide a level of control, there are some limitations about these audits.  First, not all projects are audited.  Second, the reviews are done by auditors and not specialists like ICC engineers who are familiar with the projects and what should be included.  Third, some are done as desk audits.  Desk audits note on their face that they are not detailed, are not done on site, and in some cases source documents are available only on a very limited basis.

Questionable Expenditures

Expenditures for some projects that we reviewed seemed high based on documentation submitted.  Furthermore, some projects submitted little or no documentation to support the expenditures claimed. 

As an example of questionable expenditures, we reviewed two projects, both completed in Franklin County.  The railroad had not prorated the use of equipment that they rented for the projects.  These two projects were both relatively simple projects for standard lights and gates.  The railroad submitted bills for five months usage of one trencher.

 

 

We asked the agencies whether five months of rental for such projects seemed excessive.  The IDOT employee that reviews bills told us that he did not know exactly how long a trencher would be needed.  An ICC employee who had technical expertise on the projects estimated that the project with the trencher that was rented for two months would probably have taken a week, and the project with the trencher that was rented for three months could have taken a month. 

Neither ICC nor IDOT does any on-site construction monitoring.

In our testing, we identified questionable expenditures but did not identify any clearly documented overpayments.  ICC officials indicated that they believe that the State may sometimes be overcharged for projects by railroads.  However, as noted, neither ICC nor IDOT does any on-site construction monitoring or any additional expenditure reviews to address this issue.

Expenditure Documentation

ICC and IDOT have no clear standards on what documentation is to be included with billings for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.

ICC and IDOT have no clear standards on what documentation is to be included with billings for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  Expenditure documentation submitted for payment varied from projects where significant documentation was submitted, including items which were unrelated to the projects, to projects where bills were submitted with little or no supporting documentation.  Some items were difficult to trace back and sometimes could not be traced back to amounts paid. 

In our detailed review of various files for ten projects, we found five projects with some supporting documentation.  The remaining five projects had billings but did not include detail documentation.  Without consistent documentation and thorough review of expenditures it is difficult to know whether expenditures were appropriate or if all required elements of projects were done. 

We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission assure that all expenditures for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects are reviewed in a timely manner to assure that they are appropriate and adequately supported.  The Illinois Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation should work together to develop standards on what documentation is required for Grade Crossing Protection Fund projects.  (pages 18-19, 35-38)

Compliance with statutory provisions

Although we identified some issues related to the timeliness and management of projects, we did not identify any instances where the Illinois Commerce Commission did not comply with statutes guiding the Grade Crossing Protection Fund process.  Most requirements related to the Fund are found in a section of the Motor Fuel Tax Law (35 ILCS 505/8(c)). 

Investigations

The Illinois Vehicle Code gives the Illinois Commerce Commission responsibility for several types of investigations.  ICC staff could do more to assure investigations are done.  The Commission has general power to administer and enforce provisions included in the applicable chapter of the Vehicle Code.  Rail safety statutes require that rail carriers construct, maintain, and operate all of their equipment, track, and other property in Illinois in such a manner as to pose no undue risk to their employees or the person or property of any member of the public.  The Commission’s general authority includes inspections that Commission staff do related to such things as track safety and signal inspections (625 ILCS 5/18c-7401).

 

 

In addition, the ICC has the general authority to require installation of adequate equipment to safeguard the health and safety of the public based on its own information or based on a complaint, after proper investigation.  This general authority is also specified for crossings where investigations which might lead to requiring installation of interconnects.  They also have responsibility relating to hazardous materials and specific responsibility related to the investigation of accidents.

Investigation of Accidents

The Illinois Vehicle Code requires rail carriers to report promptly to the Commission any accident involving their equipment, track, or other property which resulted in loss of life to any person.  In addition, such carriers must file a written report with the Commission. 

Statutes allow but do not require the Commission to investigate all railroad accidents involving fatalities reported by railroads.  The Commission is also allowed to investigate other accidents about which it acquires knowledge independent of reports made by rail carriers (625 ILCS 5/18c-7402 (3)(b)).  Based on those investigations the Commission can enter temporary Orders to minimize the risk of future accidents.  The Commission staff generally investigate accidents involving fatalities but do not routinely investigate other accidents.

Signal Failures

The Commerce Commission staff are not notified when signal failures occur.  ICC staff told us that for 2002 Illinois ranked first in the nation in the number of railroad crossing signal failures reported to the Federal Railway Administration.  Because Illinois has more at-grade crossings than all but one other state, it may not be an appropriate comparison.  Currently the ICC does not get copies of these failure reports. 

We recommended that the Illinois Commerce Commission assure that they receive reports on failures, accidents, and complaints and then investigate them appropriately.  This should help them to fulfill their statutory responsibility of assuring that adequate warning devices are in place at grade crossings.  (pages 39-45)

Collision and Fatality Rates

In Fiscal Year 2002, there were a total of 183 collisions at public rail crossings in Illinois.  Total fatalities resulting from collisions at highway-rail crossings in Illinois decreased from 28 in 2001 to 24 in 2002.  According to ICC documents, however, fatality statistics are not a particularly good measure of safety threats or conditions.  Collision related fatalities are a function of random events, such as the number of occupants riding in a vehicle involved in a collision, or multiple fatalities involved in a single incident.  (page 46)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

The audit report contains seven recommendations, four were specifically related to the Illinois Commerce Commission, and three recommendations to both the Commerce Commission and the Illinois Department of Transportation.  The ICC and IDOT generally agreed with the recommendations.  Appendix H to the audit report contains the Commerce Commission’s and the Department of Transportation’s complete responses. 

 

__________________________________________ 

William G. Holland
Auditor General

 

WGH\EKW

November 2003